lol you are a moron are doctors in uk slaves for making £80 thousand starting wage i get all my health care for free all my prescriptions for free i have short waiting times oh and if i really want i can choose to buy private health care why can you americans not see that you could still choose between private and national
And for those who don't want to support that working class with your tax money, let's see how well you function when the bottom of your pyramid falls out and you suddenly have no cashiers, no tellers, no customer service representatives to help you fix YOUR stupid problems, no janitors to clean up your messes, no factory workers to build your pretty machines. You don't know what you've got till it's gone, people.
The taxes you pay, pay the doctors. They are PAID by the government who receives those taxes, to give you healthcare. Slaves are not paid. Slaves are forced to work without pay. He wants to talk about human rights: how about the rights of those being DENIED healthcare every day in the United States because they are poor, working class citizens who, when they break their legs, are forced to seek a lower standard of care or NONE AT ALL because they can't afford health insurance? Get free, America.
definitely took an extreme approach to get his point across using the word slavery. but understand that in a capitalist country you don't have a right to anything that belongs to another person weahter it be there goods or services. free healthcare is socialist saying that you have the right to my money to pay for your health care is completely unamerican. im sorry but i dont care if your in the hospital for any reason, if i dont want to give you money i dont have to
Wait...people agree with what Rand Paul said? You're kidding. That was probably the dumbest thing I've ever heard from a politician, and that's saying a lot. I have no problem with libertarians and constituionalists, but if you think that was a smart analysis of what it means to have a right to something you're a hack. Pure and simple.
@96QQB so your saying that you telling another american that they have to do something, and for free is a good thing. how is that not another way to say communism, and slavery.
What? I used to think that Cenk was smart. Oh boy.(shaking my head) Cenk doesnt know his ass from a hole in the ground on this.One suggestion for Cenk. Research your topic before you go criticizing others who know more than you do on a particular subject. Dr. Rand Paul is correct.This health mandate uses force to take the services of a doctor.If the Dr. doesn't go along with it, then he/she will be shut down.Idiot Cenk doesn't know that police have no duty to protect you. Basic criminal law 101.
It's amazing to see all the rationalizations that smart people make so that they can justify stealing money from another person. The Productive Class is being made slaves to the Non-Productive Classes through the magic of Legislation. It is theft. We live in a Kleptocracy and you all are so blind to it that there is no amount of theft that you will condemn. Shame on you all.
I agree with Rand Paul's premise, however, his argument in this case was pretty flawed and the comparing to slavery is pretty childish, Also the logic made no sense what so ever. Because free healthcare means your entitled to other peoples money to get healthcare, it DOES NOT mean you are entitled to other people's services.
@miyounova thank you for this discussion I always enjoy talking with people on this issue. Please check this out. Please read this page. I had to break up the link but it's worth a read. Thanks again for talking.
@chewbaccajoe (-__-) What an intelligent response, you must be educated. This guy has written books on how economies work, he predicted the economic collapse on live television several times before it occurred, and he's an investment broker. Contrary to popular belief, many believe that Keynesianism is what got us into this mess, and Austrian economics would provide more opportunity and prosperity for everyone. Corporations and government are one, and enact laws that fuck over everybody.
what a f'n moron. i can't believe that people this stupid and crazy can be elected to be dogcatcher, let alone a congressman. the right to ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE doesn't make ANYONE a slave, jackass. and what it is about, almost entirely, is how the care is paid for, not about forcing anyone to do anything. he is either the stupidest and craziest buffoon i can imagine, or he is deliberately being a deceitful douche of epic proportion, or perhaps both.
You have the right to free speech and the right NOT to speak. A right to practice a religion or NOT. A right to own a firearm or NOT. If gov't healthcare was a "right" you would also have the "right" NOT to exercise it. Under Obamacare if one refused to accept gov't healthcare, you can go to prison. It is the ONLY "right" you can go to jail or pay a fine for NOT exercising. ObamaCare is control mechanism and no more. Obama exercising this power makes him a tyrant and everyone a slave.
@newjerseybt LOL @ "if one refused to accept gov't healthcare, you can go to prison." i want you to substantiate that idiotic assertion. where is that written in ANY law? and how do you think it would manifest itself? would it be, "mr jones, you have to go have your hearing checked." NO! I DON'T WANT TO! "well then, you are under arrest." it is about everyone having guaranteed/automatic ACCESS to healthcare, crackpot.
@slyjokerg This so called "idiotic assertion" has been nationally known for at least two years and this law has been read by several constitutional lawyers on radio. No, actually the lawyers just made it up so you can personally have your day in the sun on youtube. No LAW has EVER been written that doesn't have teeth to keep the masses in compliance. Else why write it at all? Research and find those teeth yourself.
@newjerseybt LOL. your insane panic over black hellicopters coming to get you is both hilarious, and sad. no lawyer read shit about anyone being put in jail over the healthcare reform legislation. that is a TOTAL LIE. it isn't in it, and they didn't read any such thing. maniacal musings that are pulled out of their asses don't count. it is no different than the COMPLETELY FABRICATED "death panel" horseshit. utter propaganda intended to spread fear and evoke baseless reactions.
@slyjokerg You are a minority. Almost 80% of America is a "black helicopter crowd?" They understand what is really in this LAW. It has NOTHING at ALL to do with healthcare. It is nothing but a control mechanism like the climate crap is. Two chapters of the same book. Find some high school kid to shovel your BS on. My grandparents lived under Communism. They knew all about "messiahs". They all want to save the world as benevolent dictators, spread everyone's wealth except their own.
@newjerseybt LOL @ "80%". you need to change your tin foil hat. "control mechanism" LMAO. "climate crap." LOL. you are simply a conspiracy loon. and what "messiah"? get some help.
@slyjokerg All tyrants approach the masses as "messiahs" or saviors. This went over your head which means you are not well read. You need to do some serious reading on world history. Listen sonny, you seem just as smart as my nephew who knew everything at an early age then blew his brains out with his dad's .357 after becoming hooked on heroin. He learned the truth about drugs the hard way. Save your Alinsky ridicule tactics. I know all your tricks. You have been absorbed by Obama.
@newjerseybt obama didn't approach anyone as a messiah. that is a silly label that you and your ilk applied to him for the very purpose of being able to falsely attack him for it. i am VERY well read. you are talking out of your ass, and have NO basis to remotely assert that someone is not well read, simply because you don't like what they say. your brainwashed, predetermined bs is laughable. and btw, i am VERY critical of president obama. know wtf you are talking about, then speak.
In America we believe that our children have a right to education. So, teachers are slaves?
A slave is a person that you own like you would own a chair or bed, whom you do not pay, who does what you tell them to for the rest of his or her life (or yours, depending on who lives longer). Workers in the U.S. are, in fact, paid for thier jobs, and Drs are paid more than most. How dare you compare being a Dr. in America to being a slave? Cenk's right on this, no question.
@ShalomDove Essentially you cannot use the phrase "human rights" correctly in such a manner. If you say you have a right to someone's service, it implies you can force them to give you that service. Real human rights have to comply with the nonaggression principle. You can have a right to free speech, a right to own property, etc. without infringing on the rights of others. Realistically, rather than saying we have a "right" to education, you should be saying "we desire education for all."
@RKAddict101 You're right. Ihat is a more precise way to express that idea, both in regards to education and healthcare. "Right" is a loaded term, especially in the United States. I would still argue the Paul's slavery analogy takes things a little too far, though. "Slavery", like "right," is a loaded term with a very specific definition. No one that is being paid to do a job that they take on by choice is a slave.
@RKAddict101 you are speaking as inanely as paul. having the right to healthcare doesn't mean that anyone is a f'n slave. that is both moronic and offensive. formulating a method to PAY FOR everyone having health care is the crux of the issue. it doesn't force any healthcare professional to do anything that they aren't already obligated to do. you whackos need to get your f'n heads examined.
@RKAddict101 yes, it is a right in "the true sense of the term." like other paranoid, anti-government zealots, you are engaging in an equivocation/straw man combo plate in unilaterally deciding the meaning and the usage of the term "right" for someone else. it is semantic gamesmanship that aims to distract from the substance of the issue, which is getting everyone access to healthcare. selling baseless fear is total bullshit.
@slyjokerg Do you agree we all have a right to free speech? Good, we agree. A right to health care is not a true right. Sure, we want everyone to have health care, but it is not a right. Health care is a product. If we are going to talk about a right to products, it will be expanded until everyone has a right to a car, a right to a fireplace, a right to FrootLoops, whatever.
@RKA you don't get it. what do you think MAKES free speech a "true right"? it is part of our system of law. we can make anything we want a right. but again, you are substituting semantic notions for reality. the "right" in question is access to healthcare. conceptually, this is easily a "right." the barrier between those with access and those without it that is being addressed is MONEY, not forcing services from private citizens. the "right" is to not be denied access for lack of funds.
@slyjokerg A right is a right without being part of the system of law. It is a human right that all individuals can freely speak. Countries denying this basic human right does deny the fact that it is itself a basic human right. Meanwhile, health care is not similar in this aspect.
@RKA you are mistaken. an ideal is not the equivalent of a right. you calling the right to free speech a "basic human right" is an opinion. fact is, NOT all people have the freedom of speech, and the level to which you may exercise it is limited even in the places where it exists. and the right to healthcare is no less *A* right by virtue of it being (or being characterized as) lower on the totem poll than something like the freedom of speech, as you seem to see it. (that is not stipulated, btw)
@slyjokerg that is an interesting response and it begs the question where do rights come from and what is the definition of a right? For example does a doctor have the right to refuse to help someone or must he be compelled to help someone against his will? Healthcare is a service that a doctor provides, if you have a right to that service than how do you invoke or claim that right? How do you force a doctor to provide your right to health care? I don't understand the morality or the logic.
@FreedomFighter1131 you are arguing from false premises. you are saying the same sort of nonsense that paul spews. no one can walk up to a doctor and make them perform services under healthcare reform any more than before. the stuff you are saying is utter bullshit. the issue is PAYING FOR healthcare, thus giving everyone equal access. the "right" to healthcare is not about rounding up medical professionals at gunpoint and making them perform services. you DON'T force a dr to do anything.
@slyjokerg Thank you, you are right they don't round up doctors and force them to work. However the principle is the same. If you have a right to health care how do you invoke that right? A right is a claim that someone has, so how do you stake a claim on a doctor's service to provide health care and still say he has a choice. By definition if the doctor has a choice whether to provide you with health care or not than health care can't be your right.
@FreedomFighter1131 the semantic, hyper-literal, very particular game you are playing about the word "right" is a ridiculous red herring. doctors are ALREADY obligated to treat people. if someone needs treatment, and a dr says "fuck you, i don't feel like treating you," and that person dies as a result, that dr's ass is grass, professionally. and ERs are required in almost every state, if not every state, to treat anyone that comes in. CONT...
@slyjokerg yea but my point is that this is not a good thing. Doctors should not be compelled by the force of law to help people. A doctor should be allowed to choose when, where, how, why and under what conditions he uses his own abilities. They are his abilities after all. People can place themselves under certain obligations through contracts and people can negotiate with one another but it is immoral to place an obligation on someone against their will
@FreedomFighter1131 no one has to become a dr. no one is a slave by ELECTING to become a medical professional. and in the vast majority, hell, almost every single instance, a dr DOES choose where, when, how, why and under what conditions he/she uses his/her own abilities. you don't have to be an ob/gyn, work in seattle, or anything like that. it isn't against their will. and any "obligation" is accepted by BEING a dr. you don't have to do it AT ALL. its a bs complaint.
@slyjokerg So having a medical license or having the ability to help people obligates you to help them whenever they should come to you regardless whether they can compensate you? Isn't that like saying anyone who can fix my car is obligated to fix my car whenever I go to an auto-body shop regardless of whether I can pay them? There's no difference and it's an odd form of principle. What power then does anyone have over their own abilities?
@Fight"So having a medical license or having the ability to help people obligates you to help them whenever they should come to you regardless whether they can compensate you?" that is already the case, in a broad sense, so that point has no validity in whining about "obamacare." and healthcare is not the ownership of a 60" flat screen. people deserve the common decency of having healthcare. and the dr would ALWAYS be paid if we had universal care, but you people fight against that.
@slyjokerg "having a medical license obligates you to help them" I know it's already the case, and it's wrong. It needs to be changed. I said that not to whine about universal health care but to point out that it's immoral. As far as the doctor always being paid under universal health care you're right doctors are paid by a collective pool collected from everyone. I contend that it's immoral to force someone to pay for someone else's want, need or desire against their will.
@FreedomFighter1131 every dr knows the requirements when they become drs. they don't need you to defend them. they all know exactly what they are doing. you simply don't have a mindset to care for others that don't have the means to do so. i'm sorry, but that makes you a heartless, greedy, compassionless, unreasonable, small minded monster, in my mind.
@slyjokerg I care for individuals deeply, i care for the value of their existence. If they receive the unearned by the threatening of those who did earn it then they are not valuing the existence of others. I can't help what others do, but valuing the right to live means valuing the right to live by your own effort not at the expense of someone else.
@FreedomFighter1131 your words are belied by your previous comments. your stance makes no bones about the fact that you do NOT care for others, w/e you say now. you are simply restating your "fuck 'em" platform.
@FreedomFighter1131 So, as slyjokerg, you are selfish. But anyway, let me tell you how it works. When you get paid for a job and there's a contract, the government take a certain percentage from your gross income, just like any other tax. It's proportionnal to your income obviously, since it's a percentage. It all goes to a specific governmental institution and it is used to pay PART of a doctor's bill, or CERTAIN drugs that are PRESCRIBED by a doctor etc. Some medical acts are not covered (...)
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) like breast implants or myopia (to a certain degree). Every employer also pays taxes for each of his employee. And then each individual is free to pay for an additional social security cover, if they want and if they find something they can afford. You choose a contract with any company you like, and that company will reimburse part of what you paid (sometimes all of it). Then when you get a serious illness, like cancer, you can be treated (...)
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) without having to directly pay for it so you don't have to have any debts or use your savings and you can still send your kids to school. And if you want special services, like TV in your hospital room, or a private room instead of a shared one, you pay yourself. When you give birth, you don't have to pay a dime. There's also a special healthcare system for people who have no money at all like homeless people, or undocumented immigrants.They go to special doctors' (...)
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) and they can get treated. It might not be as best as a world renowned specialist, but it's decent and effective.Everybody pays according to what they have,and trust me,it works just fine.Also, not having enough money to pay for a doctor in the US doesn't mean you're lazy and have no job,it can mean you have 2 crappy jobs because you couldn't afford to go to college,and you have a kid.You think kids should die because their parents have a crappy insurance,or any at all ?
@miyounova that was very long and detail, thank you for offering substance to the discussion. Now all that sounds wonderfully humanitarian but in a practical sense its not economically benefial. There are many things that america can do differently to get away from the corporate system which makes health care overly expensive. However Universal Health Care is immoral and economically harmful. Income tax is also immoral and economically harmful. There are other ways of doing things
@FreedomFighter1131 Oh I see you don't want to pay any taxes at all. So basically, you don't want to pay for schools or roads ? Cause that's what taxes are for, amongst other things. And actually, what I just described to you really do work. Look at some european countries, espacially France. It does work fine, and it works exactly like this.
@miyounova if there r 3 friends and one of them says i lost my job i need money. Lets say one decides to help him and give him money and the other friend doesn't. it would not be moral for the one that is helping to force the other to help. if the one threatened to put the other in a cage if he did not help would that be moral? if the one decided to take money from the other to help even against his will would that be moral? NO, because moral law states that human interaction must be voluntary
@miyounova you can try to make it sound utopian and all sunshine and daisies but it ignores reality. Also as far as the moral argument is it moral to threaten someone who doesn't want to be part of that collective pot? if I want to pay my own way and be left alone and leave others alone, do you let me? do you put me in a cage? do you shoot me? do you take my money against my will or do you just throw me out? what do you do with me?
@FreedomFighter1131 I don't live in America, we don't shoot people. But obviously if someone wants to go against a law then they pay a fine or go to prison. Just like you would pay a fine if you go walking around naked in public, or go to prison if you steal, if you kill someone etc. So it is not specific to the healthcare system. It's specific to any law established by the government. Kind of a mute point really.
@miyounova I understand but i'm making a point, just because it's a law doesn't mean its a good or moral law. if i want to pay my own way i get a fine, if i don't recognize the fine (since i want to keep my right to pay my way) armed men will come and try to put me in jail (throw me in a cage like an animal) and if defend myself i will be shot. All this because i wanted to pay my own way, is that moral? no it's not
@FreedomFighter1131 You really are american, aren't you ? It's not a movie, armed people don't just come to your house and shoot you. The police has other things to do. For the millionth time, you don't like taxes, I get it, the idea of helping each other (to a certain degree) is a good one. But you don't like taxes, you don't like schools, or roads, or public buildings. We got it, don't worry.
@miyounova if you don't pay taxes in your country and u don't pay the fine police will have to come to bring u to jail right, so then if defend yourself from the police you will get shot correct, so then i'm just saying that all that because someone wants to pay their own way is not right. also I like roads and while i don't like taxes i would be willing to live with excises, imposts, duties and tariffs because those are the proper forms of taxation. I know that i'm offering a better system,
@FreedomFighter1131 Taxes are the same as imposts.No you won't get shot,unless you're considered dangerous because you have a weapon,so they would bring theirs, and if you shoot them,they'll take you down.But it's not how it works,the police doesn't come with guns to see people who didn't pay their taxes,they won't even come.If the government finds out,you'll be in trouble with the judge that's it.You don't have a choice,it's taken directly from your salary.You can work illegally (...)
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) if you want. Roads exist thanks to the taxes the government takes. Anyway, as insightful as that debate might be, I can't believe that people who hate the notion of taxes that much exist in eastern countries. It's not like it's a new thing ! But I'm done trying to make you understand life and movies are not the same thing. Enjoy your weekend
@miyounova yea but u can make it sound utopian when u paint it in unrealistic terms because in reality people have to wait for treatment because there's not enough doctors or funding to help everyone at once. So some people die while having to wait for care because other people were seen as a higher priority. That's just reality. The american system isn't much better and i'm offering something different, something outside either system, something that uses economic law to create incentives.
@FreedomFighter1131 That's completely false. And trust me, I've seen major, intermediate and minor diseases, and noone has ever died because they had to wait. That's just plain absurd.
@miyounova Please take a look at this page, please read it. I think that you will understand what I'm talking about a lot better after u read it. Please read the whole thing, it's just one page. Please read it. I broke up the link cause youtube does not allow links. please read this page.
@FreedomFighter1131 Just read it. Well, Canada doesn't work like Europe does. Sorry to break it to you. Now, thanks for showing me something different but goodbye.
@miyounova Out of ALL the countries that have universal health care France is the ONLY one where it is even working a little bit and even there it's not great. The reason is because it goes against natural economic laws. Look at the wait lists in those countries and fact that governments have to prioritize some patients over others. Patients die because the government decides that some people have a priority over others. In a practical sense universal health care ignores the nature of reality.
@FreedomFighter1131 I really don't see what you mean about the "wait lists". And anyway, most of the old european countries have that system actually, the variation is in the amount of money you give the government, your doctors and what you get back. I've never seen government interfere in a medical case. But it's a well known fact that people with no insurance in America don't get treated, and might die. Or they're ruined.
@miyounova it's about incentives. Universal health care ignores human action and motivation. If you want to have inexpensive health care in a real and practical way there are steps you can take which are very simple. 1st reform the tax code, get rid of the income tax and fund government with imposts, excises, duties and tariffs those are the proper forms of taxation. 2nd individual medical savings accounts 3rd replace the FDA with private certification, 4th privatize medicare and medicaid ...
@miyounova and 5th give a tax credit to doctors who get negative outcomes insurance. These 5 steps acknowledge human action and motivation and will drastically reduce medical care. It will boost economic growth and it will incentivize doctors to find ways of giving better quality care at lower prices and it will incentivize patients to find the doctors that give the best quality at the lowest price. You need to encourage economically beneficial solutions. Universal Health care is the opposite.
@FreedomFighter1131 Just one thing, you do know that imposts and taxes are basically the same ? I have no idea what the FDA or negative outcomes insurance mean. And privatising everything makes everything more expensive, unless nobody holds the monopoly over the market. Which is rare. There's always one giant company that controls 90% of the market. So privatising something as basic and essential as healthcare is a bad idea. But anyway, I understand you don't like taxes (...)
@miyounova there are monopolies because government grants privileges and regulations. regulations don't hurt the biggest companies because they can fund around the regulations. regulations prevent other companies from getting big enough to compete. negative outcomes insurance is like if a doctor preforms a surgery and there is a complication the insurance would help cover it. There would be a lot less law suits and doctors would not be so afraid of law suits and they could lower their premiums.
@FreedomFighter1131 Still dont know what those "wait lists" were but anyway. You don't like the very notion of taxes, so you can't like universal healthcare obviously, there's no point arguing. I'm just stating the facts I know. And I really don't know what premiums are, and in Europe we don't really sue the doctors because there's no need to. Unless there's a major screw up like removing the wrong organ or something. But then the guy can't prcatice anymore so, it doesn't matter.
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) so it doesn't matter what I say because the very idea that holds everything together is against your principles. It's all about the form, and we can't even reach the content in that case.
@Fight "Isn't that like saying anyone who can fix my car is obligated to fix my car whenever I go to an auto-body shop regardless of whether I can pay them?" no, it isn't at all. there is a HUGE difference. it is amazing how your kind pretends like there are no distinctions between things that are remotely similar, and that none should be made. owning a car and having it repaired is not a basic element of being alive. it is a ridiculous comparison and is not even close to being analogous.
@slyjokerg Having someone fix my body and having someone fix my car still requires someone else to use their abilities. I would need to compensate them at a rate which we both agreed on and negotiated. Now it would be wrong in either case to demand they fix my body or my car without payment and it would be worse still if i were to demand that they fix my body or car against their will even if I would pay them all the money in the world.
@FreedomFighter1131 having someone fix your body or your car ARE NOT THE SAME THING. that is precisely what i meant when i said you people are unable to see distinctions in anything, at least when it suits you. it isn't a basic human need to have your car fixed. it IS a basic need to have your body fixed. it is NOT the same to have access to healthcare BY FORCING OTHER PEOPLE TO PAY FOR IT.. RICH PEOPLE... as it is to make them fix a car. you don't need a car. you need healthcare.
@FreedomFighter1131 CONT... the issue is about no one being denied access to healthcare. that is primarily about PAYING FOR IT, not about forcing anyone to do anything. it is a preposterous, completely bogus "argument" to whine about what the word "right" means in this case. call it schlurbity moshonishperton. the substance is that many people are denied access to healthcare because they can't pay for it. the "right" is that all people deserve equal access, regardless of their funds.
@slyjokerg Okay people deserve access to medical care which is a service a doctor provides so people deserve access to a doctors help. A doctor deserves compensation for using his abilities. (Doctors need to eat too after all) Now if someone can't pay a doctor you suggest compelling other people to pay a doctor for him correct? Okay well it's the same principle how do you collect that claim and why is it okay for someone who can't pay to make someone pay for them?
@FreedomFighter1131 "why is it okay for someone who can't pay to make someone pay for them?" this is the crux of the entire issue. as a society, we are responsible for the basic necessities of life for our fellow people, to a reasonable degree. to think that a person doesn't deserve treatment for bronchitis simply because he/she doesn't have money is a cold, ugly, selfish, greedy, despicable notion. your stance in general is "fuck 'em" if someone can't afford a sandwich or a dr's care.
@slyjokerg My sentiment is that it is not justifiable to make someone pay for someone. People must maintain their choice. If someone chooses to not give money to someone who can't afford medical care then they ought to maintain the ability to say no. It can not be moral to say that you must under some penalty give of yourself for any reason. Giving of yourself must be a choice left up to the individual. Threatening someone into paying for someone else's doctor bill is immoral
@Fight you are simply reiterating the "fuck 'em" governmental platform. it is morally indefensible. you don't want to pay ANY taxes, i bet. well, we can't function as a society without a gov. you advocate de facto anarchy. it is an absurd stance, and one that people that have not needed help are usually making. if you were starving... if you had diabetes with no access to care... if your house was burning down, i bet you would want the gov to give you some food, healthcare, and a fire dept.
@slyjokerg I could want all the help in the world, but my want does not give me a right to anything. Want does not create claim and need does not create claim. Effort creates claim, value creates claim and when someone earns something then and only then do they have a right to that claim. When a claim is earned, that is when it's real
@FreedomFighter1131 "but my want does not give me a right to anything." first, we aren't talking about want, but NEED. you WANT the flat screen. you NEED healthcare. you are confusing the position. you don't have to earn a right to healthcare. that's the point.
@slyjokerg you said that if i were starving I would want the government to help me so I said that wanting help doesn't mean i deserve help, it doesn't mean I have a claim on someone's help. But we'll talk about need then, it's the same principle. If you need a prescription for an anti-biotic for an infection, your need does not create the claim. Need can never hold a claim on anything, need won't give you anything. People had to have the knowledge to create that anti-biotic (cont.)....
@FreedomFighter1131 again, you restated the same sentiment. you don't think a starving person deserves help. i get it. you think a person that needs an anti-biotic should just be screwed. i get it. you must have been reading some ayn rand shit. everything you say reeks of it. you have a very cro-magnon approach to the way you think things should be. i believe people deserve common decency. you don't. you wish for a very selfish, anarchist way of life.
@slyjokerg It's funny because I never said people should be "screwed" I just think that someone who needs an anti-biotic doesn't automatically get one just because they need it. It must be given to them by those who make it & prescribe it. That means those who make it possible must get fair value in return. That value should not come by taking it from others by force. That's all it's not complicated and I don't understand how you can't see the difference between the moral principle & selfishness
@FreedomFighter1131 "I just think that someone who needs an anti-biotic doesn't automatically get one just because they need it." and?? what i said clearly, accurately depicted your position... "fuck 'em." that's the de facto mantra of you and your ilk. you think that a free market and absolute capitalistic theory should determine who gets healthcare. that is a heartless, selfish, uncompassionate, greedy mindset. and it comes from people that have never been in the person-in-need's shoes.
@slyjokerg (cont.)... and the doctor had to have the knowledge that it was the proper thing to prescribe. It is they who hold the claim because they made it possible. They must be the ones to voluntarily relinquish the claim to you under conditions acceptable to them. Your need holds no claim. That is the moral reality of a the right to a claim
@FreedomFighter1131 and to answer the broader question... self-evidently, your rights come from the government system in place. a right might be the ability to do something, or might be the right to choose to not do something. and those rights are determined by the laws and the constitution, obviously. it seemed to be a rhetorical question in one hand, but didn't make a point as such, so i figured you must have actually wanted an answer.
@slyjokerg does your right to live come from the government? No. Governments can't give you rights. Rights are something you have as a human being simply because you exist. Never let anyone tell you that your worth is dependent on another's judgement. You have rights and are valuable because you exist because you are an individual being capable of rational thought. You have a right to the time you spend and anything you receive through spending that time. It's yours by RIGHT never forget that
@FreedomFighter1131 yes, your right to live comes from the government. ultimately, all rights are governmental. the government can decide to kill you. you right to live is not absolute. it is contingent. and i didn't say a word about "worth" being relevant. the gov can create or deny any "right," potentially.
@slyjokerg that's a really sad sentiment. I contend that I have a right to exist regardless of whether or not the government thinks they have a right to kill me. "I would fight, I would fight the whole of mankind if 1 second were all I could last before I were murdered, I would fight with the full confidence of the justice of my battle and of a living being's right to exist." You have a right to exist, a right which you can defend and uphold and invoke
@FreedomFighter1131 you can contend anything you like, but the fact remains... your rights ARE literally determined by the gov. you are confusing what you think should be the case for what reality is. do you have the right to eat pancakes? not if the gov says you don't. thankfully, in the usa we have a system where such arbitrary legislation is not permitted. CONT...
@FreedomFighter1131 CONT...both systematic and substantive due process are built into the system. but there is nothing stopping the nation from passing and ratifying a "no pancake" amendment to the constitution.
@slyjokerg they can write anything into the constitution they want and they can write any law they want, they can shoot me down for disagreeing, they can do it, functionally and realistically they can do it, but they don't have the right to do it. They do not have the right to do it but if they do I certainly and unequivocally have the right to defend myself. I'm not ignorant of reality, I just know the value of my own existence.
@FreedomFighter1131 "but they don't have the right to do it." that is nothing but personal philosophizing. literally, they do have the right to do it. obviously, until jailed, killed, or otherwise subdued, you can literally "defend yourself". that is beyond the scope of the topic.
"then there is a duty to provide health-care" - Yes, a duty for the elected government to provide it. It speaks nothing of the implementation of those policies so he is not right at all. A doctor is as free as the next person to choose not to work as a doctor, he is also free to not want to treat people under those schemes, plenty of other doctors will if they want to. He is not right and only a fucking idiot would say he is, which i am guessing you are.
@TheSpankymonkey He is completely right, the phrase "human rights" should not be construed upon its true definition. If you say you have a right to healthcare, you imply you have the right to someone's service, and therefore servitude, and that you can force them to supply you with healthcare. Rand Paul's grope is with the use of the term "human rights." Rather than saying "healthcare is a human right," people should be saying "we desire the best quality healthcare for everyone possible."
@RKAddict101 "If you say you have a right to healthcare, you imply you have the right to someone's service, and therefore servitude" - What a crock of shit. I have the right to go about my business unhindered, does that mean that every person is servitude to me? Army, police? Social services? There is no servitude, there are plenty of people that would be happy to do that job for payment, knowing full well they will get paid if they choose to do the job. How is that servitude? Idiot.
@TheSpankymonkey That's not servitude, that's freedom of contract. I'm arguing against how you use the phrase human rights; it is being construed if you say that you have the right to someone else's service, assuming you have not entered into a contract with them.
@RKAddict101 - And no, i personally demand from my politicians that healthcare be added to the list of basic human rights. At the same time i also demand that my government enact policies to work towards that goal. Whether it be by taxation, lump sum investment, fostering private initiatives or whatever means possible. Where i live i have the basic right to food and water, that doesn't mean i am entitled to walk into any mcdonalds i wish to. That doesn't mean burger king are my slaves!
What's sad is seeing so many people think they are entitled to someone else's labor just because bureaucracy and government regulation have made health care so expensive. What we need is to get third parties out of health care so that the patient and doctor can negotiate without third party interference. Insurance should be a private matter that should only come into play in areas of risk. Insurance measures risk. Health care would be efficient and inexpensive.
Ok, my point to this is that in order for rights to exist they have to be secured by enforced methods of payment. If you want to keep your rights, will always have to pay someone in order to secure them. If you don't keep paying for them, you won't have them. However, this presents a problem because our governments run over our rights no matter how much we paid to secure them. Therefore our so called rights are just downright useless.
A right is a claim which is compensated by an outside agent through means of obligation. In other words if you have a to right something it must be fulfilled by rule of law, and the means of fulfillment for that right comes from payment of some kind. An example of payment would be taxation. Therefore your rights are secured by payments such as taxation, which are obligatory under the force of law. However these obligations are not obligatory if the enforcers are not doing their proper job.
A lawyer has the right to accept or deny anyone's case. If you allow universal access to healthcare that's basically forcing the Dr. to see the patient no matter what...
Again, in an emergency setting this is is obviously a different scenario. No one is denying you care at an ER facility. Rand went on to contrast the emergency setting vs the primary care setting, yet it was cut off from the clip.
No one wants to to take medicare because the re-imburse terribly and nickel and dime doctors.
then i guess our right to own guns we are making gun makers slaves to and oh yea right to free speech means the press is our slaves to...please tell me this was a parody
Rand Paul is correct in his logic. If there is a right to health-care, then there is a duty to provide health-care. Obliged work equals forced employment, albeit in this case it would be paid work. Also, Cenk's analogy with the right of self-defence is stupid. Health-care cannot exist without health-care-providers. Self-defence can exist without the police; that's what the right to bear arms is all about. 'Smugness'? That's rich coming from a guy who can't even pronounce 'Ayn Rand' properly.
This guy deserved exactly what Cenk said about him. Completely and utterly idiotic, fallacious logic. Smfh and THESE people are the ones who represent us? UGH
FAIL! i pay them docters to take care of me, to treat me, prescribe me, heal me and cure me. i pay them to save me. so FUCK YOU RAND PAUL! YOU AND YOUR REPUBLICANS DOG CAN GO DIE IN THE GUTTER AS MAGGOTS EAT YOUR FLESH AND SLOWLY ROT FROM THE INSIDE FROM INFECTION! DUMBASS
@postalmeter Islamic culture ? What is that supposed to mean ? I was raised Catholic but I dont know what the fuck is Christian or Catholic Culture ? He has a Turkish background, his culture is Turkish not Muslim, Turkish people and Arabs dont have the same culture do they ? Or the Iranians and all of those 3 countries are Muslim Countries, well except Turkey since Turkey is Secular, you are a moron and a typical Ron Paul supporter.
"I dont know what the fuck is Christian or Catholic Culture ?"
Looks like you proved YOU'RE the moron.
From Wikipedia:
"Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance", is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa)-- or the asserter is simply an ignorant dumbass who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and has his head in both like 777Atheist."
@2001Horatio I'm talking about the political version of American liberals. They are the most racist people i have come across. Look at what they did to Detroit.
@zombiefitnezz Bush believed in free markerks...okay you jsut proved you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. George Bush was one of the most leftist presidents we have ever had.
Seeing the things our govt. makes our police do to non violent offenders I would say they are slaves. Funny how you aren't intellectual enough to debate an opinion without hurling insults you party hack. BTW there was more than one case of slavery I hope you realize that.
@zombiefitnezz Gosh why aren't the states providing it while they provide a fire department? O maybe because the majority of people in the states want a fire department while the majority don't what public medicine. Or hers an idea maybe the states aren't stupid and know they can't afforded it just like our federal government cant.
@onepiecefan74 3.you are part of a group of slaves under this master and the master now distributes certain goods of his choosing amongst the slaves.
4. you now get work days. you only have to work 5 days a week.
5. the master lets you go and work at whatever location you want but you give the master 60% of you earnings. he can also call you back into service when needed
Founding documents? You mean those founding documents written by slave owners?
themanyouwanttobe 4 hours ago
lol you are a moron are doctors in uk slaves for making £80 thousand starting wage i get all my health care for free all my prescriptions for free i have short waiting times oh and if i really want i can choose to buy private health care why can you americans not see that you could still choose between private and national
thedirkman 11 hours ago
And for those who don't want to support that working class with your tax money, let's see how well you function when the bottom of your pyramid falls out and you suddenly have no cashiers, no tellers, no customer service representatives to help you fix YOUR stupid problems, no janitors to clean up your messes, no factory workers to build your pretty machines. You don't know what you've got till it's gone, people.
tigerberry14 4 days ago
The taxes you pay, pay the doctors. They are PAID by the government who receives those taxes, to give you healthcare. Slaves are not paid. Slaves are forced to work without pay. He wants to talk about human rights: how about the rights of those being DENIED healthcare every day in the United States because they are poor, working class citizens who, when they break their legs, are forced to seek a lower standard of care or NONE AT ALL because they can't afford health insurance? Get free, America.
tigerberry14 4 days ago
I agree with Senator Paul. You don't have the right to someone else's services.
Vyna80 1 week ago
definitely took an extreme approach to get his point across using the word slavery. but understand that in a capitalist country you don't have a right to anything that belongs to another person weahter it be there goods or services. free healthcare is socialist saying that you have the right to my money to pay for your health care is completely unamerican. im sorry but i dont care if your in the hospital for any reason, if i dont want to give you money i dont have to
buewave26 1 week ago
While I don't support a free healthcare system, that's my opinion, no need to argue with me on that.
And I in general like Rand Paul, I just have to say that his statement here is just beyond stupidity.
AliceinCalifornia 1 week ago
Wait...people agree with what Rand Paul said? You're kidding. That was probably the dumbest thing I've ever heard from a politician, and that's saying a lot. I have no problem with libertarians and constituionalists, but if you think that was a smart analysis of what it means to have a right to something you're a hack. Pure and simple.
96QQB 1 week ago 2
@96QQB so your saying that you telling another american that they have to do something, and for free is a good thing. how is that not another way to say communism, and slavery.
buewave26 1 week ago
What? I used to think that Cenk was smart. Oh boy.(shaking my head) Cenk doesnt know his ass from a hole in the ground on this.One suggestion for Cenk. Research your topic before you go criticizing others who know more than you do on a particular subject. Dr. Rand Paul is correct.This health mandate uses force to take the services of a doctor.If the Dr. doesn't go along with it, then he/she will be shut down.Idiot Cenk doesn't know that police have no duty to protect you. Basic criminal law 101.
iztheterrible 1 week ago
Sorry if Rand Paul and the Constitution doesn't make sense to you but it does to me.
Princeamor 2 weeks ago
It's amazing to see all the rationalizations that smart people make so that they can justify stealing money from another person. The Productive Class is being made slaves to the Non-Productive Classes through the magic of Legislation. It is theft. We live in a Kleptocracy and you all are so blind to it that there is no amount of theft that you will condemn. Shame on you all.
WakeTea 3 weeks ago
I agree with Rand Paul's premise, however, his argument in this case was pretty flawed and the comparing to slavery is pretty childish, Also the logic made no sense what so ever. Because free healthcare means your entitled to other peoples money to get healthcare, it DOES NOT mean you are entitled to other people's services.
johanexxxx 3 weeks ago in playlist May 12
cenk don't say what do you know about slavery as if you know annything about it yourself
TheDampkap 4 weeks ago
Cenk, Rand's not bought out.
muslimgiga 1 month ago
Comment removed
miyounova 1 month ago
Comment removed
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova thank you for this discussion I always enjoy talking with people on this issue. Please check this out. Please read this page. I had to break up the link but it's worth a read. Thanks again for talking.
isil(dot)org/resources/lit/we- can-have-afford-hc(dot)html
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
Comment removed
miyounova 1 month ago
Oh. My. God.
What a retard!
WolfieboyMachi 1 month ago
Policemen are not a private company, his example is horrible.
Lacoux 1 month ago
That would mean anybody who gets paid with my TAX dollars is my slave....what i fucking idiot.
d3tach3d 1 month ago
What a moron.Real crackerjack job of parenting Ron Paul
dadman1988 2 months ago 2
Cenk, this is actually an intelligent argument. Why bash him just because you have a different view? He is definitely not a moron.
415Dub 2 months ago
@415Dub he is a moron...you moron
chewbaccajoe 2 months ago
@chewbaccajoe (-__-) What an intelligent response, you must be educated. This guy has written books on how economies work, he predicted the economic collapse on live television several times before it occurred, and he's an investment broker. Contrary to popular belief, many believe that Keynesianism is what got us into this mess, and Austrian economics would provide more opportunity and prosperity for everyone. Corporations and government are one, and enact laws that fuck over everybody.
415Dub 2 months ago
what a f'n moron. i can't believe that people this stupid and crazy can be elected to be dogcatcher, let alone a congressman. the right to ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE doesn't make ANYONE a slave, jackass. and what it is about, almost entirely, is how the care is paid for, not about forcing anyone to do anything. he is either the stupidest and craziest buffoon i can imagine, or he is deliberately being a deceitful douche of epic proportion, or perhaps both.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
You have the right to free speech and the right NOT to speak. A right to practice a religion or NOT. A right to own a firearm or NOT. If gov't healthcare was a "right" you would also have the "right" NOT to exercise it. Under Obamacare if one refused to accept gov't healthcare, you can go to prison. It is the ONLY "right" you can go to jail or pay a fine for NOT exercising. ObamaCare is control mechanism and no more. Obama exercising this power makes him a tyrant and everyone a slave.
newjerseybt 3 months ago
@newjerseybt LOL @ "if one refused to accept gov't healthcare, you can go to prison." i want you to substantiate that idiotic assertion. where is that written in ANY law? and how do you think it would manifest itself? would it be, "mr jones, you have to go have your hearing checked." NO! I DON'T WANT TO! "well then, you are under arrest." it is about everyone having guaranteed/automatic ACCESS to healthcare, crackpot.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg This so called "idiotic assertion" has been nationally known for at least two years and this law has been read by several constitutional lawyers on radio. No, actually the lawyers just made it up so you can personally have your day in the sun on youtube. No LAW has EVER been written that doesn't have teeth to keep the masses in compliance. Else why write it at all? Research and find those teeth yourself.
newjerseybt 2 months ago
@newjerseybt LOL. your insane panic over black hellicopters coming to get you is both hilarious, and sad. no lawyer read shit about anyone being put in jail over the healthcare reform legislation. that is a TOTAL LIE. it isn't in it, and they didn't read any such thing. maniacal musings that are pulled out of their asses don't count. it is no different than the COMPLETELY FABRICATED "death panel" horseshit. utter propaganda intended to spread fear and evoke baseless reactions.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg You are a minority. Almost 80% of America is a "black helicopter crowd?" They understand what is really in this LAW. It has NOTHING at ALL to do with healthcare. It is nothing but a control mechanism like the climate crap is. Two chapters of the same book. Find some high school kid to shovel your BS on. My grandparents lived under Communism. They knew all about "messiahs". They all want to save the world as benevolent dictators, spread everyone's wealth except their own.
newjerseybt 2 months ago
@newjerseybt LOL @ "80%". you need to change your tin foil hat. "control mechanism" LMAO. "climate crap." LOL. you are simply a conspiracy loon. and what "messiah"? get some help.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg All tyrants approach the masses as "messiahs" or saviors. This went over your head which means you are not well read. You need to do some serious reading on world history. Listen sonny, you seem just as smart as my nephew who knew everything at an early age then blew his brains out with his dad's .357 after becoming hooked on heroin. He learned the truth about drugs the hard way. Save your Alinsky ridicule tactics. I know all your tricks. You have been absorbed by Obama.
newjerseybt 2 months ago
@newjerseybt obama didn't approach anyone as a messiah. that is a silly label that you and your ilk applied to him for the very purpose of being able to falsely attack him for it. i am VERY well read. you are talking out of your ass, and have NO basis to remotely assert that someone is not well read, simply because you don't like what they say. your brainwashed, predetermined bs is laughable. and btw, i am VERY critical of president obama. know wtf you are talking about, then speak.
slyjokerg 2 months ago 6
gimme a break. I can't believe this. Rand Paul probably got a fat check from a Health Insurance Company(or Companies) for his campaigns.
mrlopez2681 4 months ago
In America we believe that our children have a right to education. So, teachers are slaves?
A slave is a person that you own like you would own a chair or bed, whom you do not pay, who does what you tell them to for the rest of his or her life (or yours, depending on who lives longer). Workers in the U.S. are, in fact, paid for thier jobs, and Drs are paid more than most. How dare you compare being a Dr. in America to being a slave? Cenk's right on this, no question.
ShalomDove 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks 7
@ShalomDove Essentially you cannot use the phrase "human rights" correctly in such a manner. If you say you have a right to someone's service, it implies you can force them to give you that service. Real human rights have to comply with the nonaggression principle. You can have a right to free speech, a right to own property, etc. without infringing on the rights of others. Realistically, rather than saying we have a "right" to education, you should be saying "we desire education for all."
RKAddict101 4 months ago
@RKAddict101 You're right. Ihat is a more precise way to express that idea, both in regards to education and healthcare. "Right" is a loaded term, especially in the United States. I would still argue the Paul's slavery analogy takes things a little too far, though. "Slavery", like "right," is a loaded term with a very specific definition. No one that is being paid to do a job that they take on by choice is a slave.
ShalomDove 4 months ago
@ShalomDove Well, in arguing against the use of the term "right," he uses the term "slavery" validly, so I believe it's warranted.
RKAddict101 4 months ago
@RKAddict101 you are speaking as inanely as paul. having the right to healthcare doesn't mean that anyone is a f'n slave. that is both moronic and offensive. formulating a method to PAY FOR everyone having health care is the crux of the issue. it doesn't force any healthcare professional to do anything that they aren't already obligated to do. you whackos need to get your f'n heads examined.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg That's not a right in the true sense of the term and that's all I'm saying.
RKAddict101 2 months ago
@RKAddict101 yes, it is a right in "the true sense of the term." like other paranoid, anti-government zealots, you are engaging in an equivocation/straw man combo plate in unilaterally deciding the meaning and the usage of the term "right" for someone else. it is semantic gamesmanship that aims to distract from the substance of the issue, which is getting everyone access to healthcare. selling baseless fear is total bullshit.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg Do you agree we all have a right to free speech? Good, we agree. A right to health care is not a true right. Sure, we want everyone to have health care, but it is not a right. Health care is a product. If we are going to talk about a right to products, it will be expanded until everyone has a right to a car, a right to a fireplace, a right to FrootLoops, whatever.
RKAddict101 2 months ago
@RKA you don't get it. what do you think MAKES free speech a "true right"? it is part of our system of law. we can make anything we want a right. but again, you are substituting semantic notions for reality. the "right" in question is access to healthcare. conceptually, this is easily a "right." the barrier between those with access and those without it that is being addressed is MONEY, not forcing services from private citizens. the "right" is to not be denied access for lack of funds.
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg A right is a right without being part of the system of law. It is a human right that all individuals can freely speak. Countries denying this basic human right does deny the fact that it is itself a basic human right. Meanwhile, health care is not similar in this aspect.
RKAddict101 2 months ago
@RKA you are mistaken. an ideal is not the equivalent of a right. you calling the right to free speech a "basic human right" is an opinion. fact is, NOT all people have the freedom of speech, and the level to which you may exercise it is limited even in the places where it exists. and the right to healthcare is no less *A* right by virtue of it being (or being characterized as) lower on the totem poll than something like the freedom of speech, as you seem to see it. (that is not stipulated, btw)
slyjokerg 2 months ago
@slyjokerg that is an interesting response and it begs the question where do rights come from and what is the definition of a right? For example does a doctor have the right to refuse to help someone or must he be compelled to help someone against his will? Healthcare is a service that a doctor provides, if you have a right to that service than how do you invoke or claim that right? How do you force a doctor to provide your right to health care? I don't understand the morality or the logic.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 you are arguing from false premises. you are saying the same sort of nonsense that paul spews. no one can walk up to a doctor and make them perform services under healthcare reform any more than before. the stuff you are saying is utter bullshit. the issue is PAYING FOR healthcare, thus giving everyone equal access. the "right" to healthcare is not about rounding up medical professionals at gunpoint and making them perform services. you DON'T force a dr to do anything.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg Thank you, you are right they don't round up doctors and force them to work. However the principle is the same. If you have a right to health care how do you invoke that right? A right is a claim that someone has, so how do you stake a claim on a doctor's service to provide health care and still say he has a choice. By definition if the doctor has a choice whether to provide you with health care or not than health care can't be your right.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 first, to borrow from george carlin... crime fighters fight crime, and fire fighters fight fire. what do freedom fighters fight?
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg lol okay not bad =D
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 the semantic, hyper-literal, very particular game you are playing about the word "right" is a ridiculous red herring. doctors are ALREADY obligated to treat people. if someone needs treatment, and a dr says "fuck you, i don't feel like treating you," and that person dies as a result, that dr's ass is grass, professionally. and ERs are required in almost every state, if not every state, to treat anyone that comes in. CONT...
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg yea but my point is that this is not a good thing. Doctors should not be compelled by the force of law to help people. A doctor should be allowed to choose when, where, how, why and under what conditions he uses his own abilities. They are his abilities after all. People can place themselves under certain obligations through contracts and people can negotiate with one another but it is immoral to place an obligation on someone against their will
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 no one has to become a dr. no one is a slave by ELECTING to become a medical professional. and in the vast majority, hell, almost every single instance, a dr DOES choose where, when, how, why and under what conditions he/she uses his/her own abilities. you don't have to be an ob/gyn, work in seattle, or anything like that. it isn't against their will. and any "obligation" is accepted by BEING a dr. you don't have to do it AT ALL. its a bs complaint.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg So having a medical license or having the ability to help people obligates you to help them whenever they should come to you regardless whether they can compensate you? Isn't that like saying anyone who can fix my car is obligated to fix my car whenever I go to an auto-body shop regardless of whether I can pay them? There's no difference and it's an odd form of principle. What power then does anyone have over their own abilities?
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@Fight"So having a medical license or having the ability to help people obligates you to help them whenever they should come to you regardless whether they can compensate you?" that is already the case, in a broad sense, so that point has no validity in whining about "obamacare." and healthcare is not the ownership of a 60" flat screen. people deserve the common decency of having healthcare. and the dr would ALWAYS be paid if we had universal care, but you people fight against that.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg "having a medical license obligates you to help them" I know it's already the case, and it's wrong. It needs to be changed. I said that not to whine about universal health care but to point out that it's immoral. As far as the doctor always being paid under universal health care you're right doctors are paid by a collective pool collected from everyone. I contend that it's immoral to force someone to pay for someone else's want, need or desire against their will.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 every dr knows the requirements when they become drs. they don't need you to defend them. they all know exactly what they are doing. you simply don't have a mindset to care for others that don't have the means to do so. i'm sorry, but that makes you a heartless, greedy, compassionless, unreasonable, small minded monster, in my mind.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg I care for individuals deeply, i care for the value of their existence. If they receive the unearned by the threatening of those who did earn it then they are not valuing the existence of others. I can't help what others do, but valuing the right to live means valuing the right to live by your own effort not at the expense of someone else.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 your words are belied by your previous comments. your stance makes no bones about the fact that you do NOT care for others, w/e you say now. you are simply restating your "fuck 'em" platform.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 So, as slyjokerg, you are selfish. But anyway, let me tell you how it works. When you get paid for a job and there's a contract, the government take a certain percentage from your gross income, just like any other tax. It's proportionnal to your income obviously, since it's a percentage. It all goes to a specific governmental institution and it is used to pay PART of a doctor's bill, or CERTAIN drugs that are PRESCRIBED by a doctor etc. Some medical acts are not covered (...)
miyounova 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) like breast implants or myopia (to a certain degree). Every employer also pays taxes for each of his employee. And then each individual is free to pay for an additional social security cover, if they want and if they find something they can afford. You choose a contract with any company you like, and that company will reimburse part of what you paid (sometimes all of it). Then when you get a serious illness, like cancer, you can be treated (...)
miyounova 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) without having to directly pay for it so you don't have to have any debts or use your savings and you can still send your kids to school. And if you want special services, like TV in your hospital room, or a private room instead of a shared one, you pay yourself. When you give birth, you don't have to pay a dime. There's also a special healthcare system for people who have no money at all like homeless people, or undocumented immigrants.They go to special doctors' (...)
miyounova 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) and they can get treated. It might not be as best as a world renowned specialist, but it's decent and effective.Everybody pays according to what they have,and trust me,it works just fine.Also, not having enough money to pay for a doctor in the US doesn't mean you're lazy and have no job,it can mean you have 2 crappy jobs because you couldn't afford to go to college,and you have a kid.You think kids should die because their parents have a crappy insurance,or any at all ?
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova that was very long and detail, thank you for offering substance to the discussion. Now all that sounds wonderfully humanitarian but in a practical sense its not economically benefial. There are many things that america can do differently to get away from the corporate system which makes health care overly expensive. However Universal Health Care is immoral and economically harmful. Income tax is also immoral and economically harmful. There are other ways of doing things
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 Oh I see you don't want to pay any taxes at all. So basically, you don't want to pay for schools or roads ? Cause that's what taxes are for, amongst other things. And actually, what I just described to you really do work. Look at some european countries, espacially France. It does work fine, and it works exactly like this.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova *really does work, sorry !
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova if there r 3 friends and one of them says i lost my job i need money. Lets say one decides to help him and give him money and the other friend doesn't. it would not be moral for the one that is helping to force the other to help. if the one threatened to put the other in a cage if he did not help would that be moral? if the one decided to take money from the other to help even against his will would that be moral? NO, because moral law states that human interaction must be voluntary
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
Comment removed
miyounova 1 month ago
Comment removed
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova you can try to make it sound utopian and all sunshine and daisies but it ignores reality. Also as far as the moral argument is it moral to threaten someone who doesn't want to be part of that collective pot? if I want to pay my own way and be left alone and leave others alone, do you let me? do you put me in a cage? do you shoot me? do you take my money against my will or do you just throw me out? what do you do with me?
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 I don't live in America, we don't shoot people. But obviously if someone wants to go against a law then they pay a fine or go to prison. Just like you would pay a fine if you go walking around naked in public, or go to prison if you steal, if you kill someone etc. So it is not specific to the healthcare system. It's specific to any law established by the government. Kind of a mute point really.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova I understand but i'm making a point, just because it's a law doesn't mean its a good or moral law. if i want to pay my own way i get a fine, if i don't recognize the fine (since i want to keep my right to pay my way) armed men will come and try to put me in jail (throw me in a cage like an animal) and if defend myself i will be shot. All this because i wanted to pay my own way, is that moral? no it's not
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 You really are american, aren't you ? It's not a movie, armed people don't just come to your house and shoot you. The police has other things to do. For the millionth time, you don't like taxes, I get it, the idea of helping each other (to a certain degree) is a good one. But you don't like taxes, you don't like schools, or roads, or public buildings. We got it, don't worry.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova if you don't pay taxes in your country and u don't pay the fine police will have to come to bring u to jail right, so then if defend yourself from the police you will get shot correct, so then i'm just saying that all that because someone wants to pay their own way is not right. also I like roads and while i don't like taxes i would be willing to live with excises, imposts, duties and tariffs because those are the proper forms of taxation. I know that i'm offering a better system,
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FreedomFighter1131 Taxes are the same as imposts.No you won't get shot,unless you're considered dangerous because you have a weapon,so they would bring theirs, and if you shoot them,they'll take you down.But it's not how it works,the police doesn't come with guns to see people who didn't pay their taxes,they won't even come.If the government finds out,you'll be in trouble with the judge that's it.You don't have a choice,it's taken directly from your salary.You can work illegally (...)
miyounova 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) if you want. Roads exist thanks to the taxes the government takes. Anyway, as insightful as that debate might be, I can't believe that people who hate the notion of taxes that much exist in eastern countries. It's not like it's a new thing ! But I'm done trying to make you understand life and movies are not the same thing. Enjoy your weekend
miyounova 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 And again, it's not utopian, it's used in some countries.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova yea but u can make it sound utopian when u paint it in unrealistic terms because in reality people have to wait for treatment because there's not enough doctors or funding to help everyone at once. So some people die while having to wait for care because other people were seen as a higher priority. That's just reality. The american system isn't much better and i'm offering something different, something outside either system, something that uses economic law to create incentives.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 That's completely false. And trust me, I've seen major, intermediate and minor diseases, and noone has ever died because they had to wait. That's just plain absurd.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova Please take a look at this page, please read it. I think that you will understand what I'm talking about a lot better after u read it. Please read the whole thing, it's just one page. Please read it. I broke up the link cause youtube does not allow links. please read this page.
isil(dot)org/resources/lit/we-can-have-afford-hc(dot)html
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FreedomFighter1131 Just read it. Well, Canada doesn't work like Europe does. Sorry to break it to you. Now, thanks for showing me something different but goodbye.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova Out of ALL the countries that have universal health care France is the ONLY one where it is even working a little bit and even there it's not great. The reason is because it goes against natural economic laws. Look at the wait lists in those countries and fact that governments have to prioritize some patients over others. Patients die because the government decides that some people have a priority over others. In a practical sense universal health care ignores the nature of reality.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 I really don't see what you mean about the "wait lists". And anyway, most of the old european countries have that system actually, the variation is in the amount of money you give the government, your doctors and what you get back. I've never seen government interfere in a medical case. But it's a well known fact that people with no insurance in America don't get treated, and might die. Or they're ruined.
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova it's about incentives. Universal health care ignores human action and motivation. If you want to have inexpensive health care in a real and practical way there are steps you can take which are very simple. 1st reform the tax code, get rid of the income tax and fund government with imposts, excises, duties and tariffs those are the proper forms of taxation. 2nd individual medical savings accounts 3rd replace the FDA with private certification, 4th privatize medicare and medicaid ...
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@miyounova and 5th give a tax credit to doctors who get negative outcomes insurance. These 5 steps acknowledge human action and motivation and will drastically reduce medical care. It will boost economic growth and it will incentivize doctors to find ways of giving better quality care at lower prices and it will incentivize patients to find the doctors that give the best quality at the lowest price. You need to encourage economically beneficial solutions. Universal Health care is the opposite.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 Just one thing, you do know that imposts and taxes are basically the same ? I have no idea what the FDA or negative outcomes insurance mean. And privatising everything makes everything more expensive, unless nobody holds the monopoly over the market. Which is rare. There's always one giant company that controls 90% of the market. So privatising something as basic and essential as healthcare is a bad idea. But anyway, I understand you don't like taxes (...)
miyounova 1 month ago
@miyounova there are monopolies because government grants privileges and regulations. regulations don't hurt the biggest companies because they can fund around the regulations. regulations prevent other companies from getting big enough to compete. negative outcomes insurance is like if a doctor preforms a surgery and there is a complication the insurance would help cover it. There would be a lot less law suits and doctors would not be so afraid of law suits and they could lower their premiums.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 Still dont know what those "wait lists" were but anyway. You don't like the very notion of taxes, so you can't like universal healthcare obviously, there's no point arguing. I'm just stating the facts I know. And I really don't know what premiums are, and in Europe we don't really sue the doctors because there's no need to. Unless there's a major screw up like removing the wrong organ or something. But then the guy can't prcatice anymore so, it doesn't matter.
miyounova 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 (...) so it doesn't matter what I say because the very idea that holds everything together is against your principles. It's all about the form, and we can't even reach the content in that case.
miyounova 1 month ago
@Fight "Isn't that like saying anyone who can fix my car is obligated to fix my car whenever I go to an auto-body shop regardless of whether I can pay them?" no, it isn't at all. there is a HUGE difference. it is amazing how your kind pretends like there are no distinctions between things that are remotely similar, and that none should be made. owning a car and having it repaired is not a basic element of being alive. it is a ridiculous comparison and is not even close to being analogous.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg Having someone fix my body and having someone fix my car still requires someone else to use their abilities. I would need to compensate them at a rate which we both agreed on and negotiated. Now it would be wrong in either case to demand they fix my body or my car without payment and it would be worse still if i were to demand that they fix my body or car against their will even if I would pay them all the money in the world.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 having someone fix your body or your car ARE NOT THE SAME THING. that is precisely what i meant when i said you people are unable to see distinctions in anything, at least when it suits you. it isn't a basic human need to have your car fixed. it IS a basic need to have your body fixed. it is NOT the same to have access to healthcare BY FORCING OTHER PEOPLE TO PAY FOR IT.. RICH PEOPLE... as it is to make them fix a car. you don't need a car. you need healthcare.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 CONT... the issue is about no one being denied access to healthcare. that is primarily about PAYING FOR IT, not about forcing anyone to do anything. it is a preposterous, completely bogus "argument" to whine about what the word "right" means in this case. call it schlurbity moshonishperton. the substance is that many people are denied access to healthcare because they can't pay for it. the "right" is that all people deserve equal access, regardless of their funds.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg Okay people deserve access to medical care which is a service a doctor provides so people deserve access to a doctors help. A doctor deserves compensation for using his abilities. (Doctors need to eat too after all) Now if someone can't pay a doctor you suggest compelling other people to pay a doctor for him correct? Okay well it's the same principle how do you collect that claim and why is it okay for someone who can't pay to make someone pay for them?
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 "why is it okay for someone who can't pay to make someone pay for them?" this is the crux of the entire issue. as a society, we are responsible for the basic necessities of life for our fellow people, to a reasonable degree. to think that a person doesn't deserve treatment for bronchitis simply because he/she doesn't have money is a cold, ugly, selfish, greedy, despicable notion. your stance in general is "fuck 'em" if someone can't afford a sandwich or a dr's care.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg My sentiment is that it is not justifiable to make someone pay for someone. People must maintain their choice. If someone chooses to not give money to someone who can't afford medical care then they ought to maintain the ability to say no. It can not be moral to say that you must under some penalty give of yourself for any reason. Giving of yourself must be a choice left up to the individual. Threatening someone into paying for someone else's doctor bill is immoral
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@Fight you are simply reiterating the "fuck 'em" governmental platform. it is morally indefensible. you don't want to pay ANY taxes, i bet. well, we can't function as a society without a gov. you advocate de facto anarchy. it is an absurd stance, and one that people that have not needed help are usually making. if you were starving... if you had diabetes with no access to care... if your house was burning down, i bet you would want the gov to give you some food, healthcare, and a fire dept.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg I could want all the help in the world, but my want does not give me a right to anything. Want does not create claim and need does not create claim. Effort creates claim, value creates claim and when someone earns something then and only then do they have a right to that claim. When a claim is earned, that is when it's real
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 "but my want does not give me a right to anything." first, we aren't talking about want, but NEED. you WANT the flat screen. you NEED healthcare. you are confusing the position. you don't have to earn a right to healthcare. that's the point.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg you said that if i were starving I would want the government to help me so I said that wanting help doesn't mean i deserve help, it doesn't mean I have a claim on someone's help. But we'll talk about need then, it's the same principle. If you need a prescription for an anti-biotic for an infection, your need does not create the claim. Need can never hold a claim on anything, need won't give you anything. People had to have the knowledge to create that anti-biotic (cont.)....
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 again, you restated the same sentiment. you don't think a starving person deserves help. i get it. you think a person that needs an anti-biotic should just be screwed. i get it. you must have been reading some ayn rand shit. everything you say reeks of it. you have a very cro-magnon approach to the way you think things should be. i believe people deserve common decency. you don't. you wish for a very selfish, anarchist way of life.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg It's funny because I never said people should be "screwed" I just think that someone who needs an anti-biotic doesn't automatically get one just because they need it. It must be given to them by those who make it & prescribe it. That means those who make it possible must get fair value in return. That value should not come by taking it from others by force. That's all it's not complicated and I don't understand how you can't see the difference between the moral principle & selfishness
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FreedomFighter1131 "I just think that someone who needs an anti-biotic doesn't automatically get one just because they need it." and?? what i said clearly, accurately depicted your position... "fuck 'em." that's the de facto mantra of you and your ilk. you think that a free market and absolute capitalistic theory should determine who gets healthcare. that is a heartless, selfish, uncompassionate, greedy mindset. and it comes from people that have never been in the person-in-need's shoes.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg (cont.)... and the doctor had to have the knowledge that it was the proper thing to prescribe. It is they who hold the claim because they made it possible. They must be the ones to voluntarily relinquish the claim to you under conditions acceptable to them. Your need holds no claim. That is the moral reality of a the right to a claim
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 and to answer the broader question... self-evidently, your rights come from the government system in place. a right might be the ability to do something, or might be the right to choose to not do something. and those rights are determined by the laws and the constitution, obviously. it seemed to be a rhetorical question in one hand, but didn't make a point as such, so i figured you must have actually wanted an answer.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg does your right to live come from the government? No. Governments can't give you rights. Rights are something you have as a human being simply because you exist. Never let anyone tell you that your worth is dependent on another's judgement. You have rights and are valuable because you exist because you are an individual being capable of rational thought. You have a right to the time you spend and anything you receive through spending that time. It's yours by RIGHT never forget that
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 yes, your right to live comes from the government. ultimately, all rights are governmental. the government can decide to kill you. you right to live is not absolute. it is contingent. and i didn't say a word about "worth" being relevant. the gov can create or deny any "right," potentially.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg that's a really sad sentiment. I contend that I have a right to exist regardless of whether or not the government thinks they have a right to kill me. "I would fight, I would fight the whole of mankind if 1 second were all I could last before I were murdered, I would fight with the full confidence of the justice of my battle and of a living being's right to exist." You have a right to exist, a right which you can defend and uphold and invoke
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 you can contend anything you like, but the fact remains... your rights ARE literally determined by the gov. you are confusing what you think should be the case for what reality is. do you have the right to eat pancakes? not if the gov says you don't. thankfully, in the usa we have a system where such arbitrary legislation is not permitted. CONT...
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 CONT...both systematic and substantive due process are built into the system. but there is nothing stopping the nation from passing and ratifying a "no pancake" amendment to the constitution.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg they can write anything into the constitution they want and they can write any law they want, they can shoot me down for disagreeing, they can do it, functionally and realistically they can do it, but they don't have the right to do it. They do not have the right to do it but if they do I certainly and unequivocally have the right to defend myself. I'm not ignorant of reality, I just know the value of my own existence.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@FreedomFighter1131 "but they don't have the right to do it." that is nothing but personal philosophizing. literally, they do have the right to do it. obviously, until jailed, killed, or otherwise subdued, you can literally "defend yourself". that is beyond the scope of the topic.
slyjokerg 1 month ago
@slyjokerg okay, that's merely semantics then. You can have that one if you wish.
FreedomFighter1131 1 month ago
@ShalomDove A right to education means that you do not decide what your kids learn, They are taught by bureaucrats.
tehatemachine 1 month ago
all western nations apart from the US are enslaved?
sprPee 4 months ago
Comment removed
sprPee 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
rand paul is write on this. chenk is the moron
HectorElCapitan 5 months ago
"then there is a duty to provide health-care" - Yes, a duty for the elected government to provide it. It speaks nothing of the implementation of those policies so he is not right at all. A doctor is as free as the next person to choose not to work as a doctor, he is also free to not want to treat people under those schemes, plenty of other doctors will if they want to. He is not right and only a fucking idiot would say he is, which i am guessing you are.
TheSpankymonkey 5 months ago
@TheSpankymonkey He is completely right, the phrase "human rights" should not be construed upon its true definition. If you say you have a right to healthcare, you imply you have the right to someone's service, and therefore servitude, and that you can force them to supply you with healthcare. Rand Paul's grope is with the use of the term "human rights." Rather than saying "healthcare is a human right," people should be saying "we desire the best quality healthcare for everyone possible."
RKAddict101 4 months ago
@RKAddict101 "If you say you have a right to healthcare, you imply you have the right to someone's service, and therefore servitude" - What a crock of shit. I have the right to go about my business unhindered, does that mean that every person is servitude to me? Army, police? Social services? There is no servitude, there are plenty of people that would be happy to do that job for payment, knowing full well they will get paid if they choose to do the job. How is that servitude? Idiot.
TheSpankymonkey 4 months ago
@TheSpankymonkey That's not servitude, that's freedom of contract. I'm arguing against how you use the phrase human rights; it is being construed if you say that you have the right to someone else's service, assuming you have not entered into a contract with them.
RKAddict101 4 months ago
@RKAddict101 - And no, i personally demand from my politicians that healthcare be added to the list of basic human rights. At the same time i also demand that my government enact policies to work towards that goal. Whether it be by taxation, lump sum investment, fostering private initiatives or whatever means possible. Where i live i have the basic right to food and water, that doesn't mean i am entitled to walk into any mcdonalds i wish to. That doesn't mean burger king are my slaves!
TheSpankymonkey 4 months ago
What's sad is seeing so many people think they are entitled to someone else's labor just because bureaucracy and government regulation have made health care so expensive. What we need is to get third parties out of health care so that the patient and doctor can negotiate without third party interference. Insurance should be a private matter that should only come into play in areas of risk. Insurance measures risk. Health care would be efficient and inexpensive.
FreedomFighter1131 5 months ago
Legalize Free Heathcare
MarijuanaCommunity 6 months ago
I ain't never gonna buy a Ford now ...
memama2 6 months ago
They had free healthcare in pokemon, nurse joy didnt ask me about my insurence plan, she jsut poped my pokemon int he machine and we were done.
but apprent nurse joy was my slave
powereater 6 months ago 3
Ok, my point to this is that in order for rights to exist they have to be secured by enforced methods of payment. If you want to keep your rights, will always have to pay someone in order to secure them. If you don't keep paying for them, you won't have them. However, this presents a problem because our governments run over our rights no matter how much we paid to secure them. Therefore our so called rights are just downright useless.
Raphael431 6 months ago
A right is a claim which is compensated by an outside agent through means of obligation. In other words if you have a to right something it must be fulfilled by rule of law, and the means of fulfillment for that right comes from payment of some kind. An example of payment would be taxation. Therefore your rights are secured by payments such as taxation, which are obligatory under the force of law. However these obligations are not obligatory if the enforcers are not doing their proper job.
Raphael431 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A lawyer has the right to accept or deny anyone's case. If you allow universal access to healthcare that's basically forcing the Dr. to see the patient no matter what...
Again, in an emergency setting this is is obviously a different scenario. No one is denying you care at an ER facility. Rand went on to contrast the emergency setting vs the primary care setting, yet it was cut off from the clip.
No one wants to to take medicare because the re-imburse terribly and nickel and dime doctors.
dynamicwellness33 6 months ago
Comment removed
dynamicwellness33 6 months ago
then i guess our right to own guns we are making gun makers slaves to and oh yea right to free speech means the press is our slaves to...please tell me this was a parody
johndebbra 6 months ago
Rand Paul is correct in his logic. If there is a right to health-care, then there is a duty to provide health-care. Obliged work equals forced employment, albeit in this case it would be paid work. Also, Cenk's analogy with the right of self-defence is stupid. Health-care cannot exist without health-care-providers. Self-defence can exist without the police; that's what the right to bear arms is all about. 'Smugness'? That's rich coming from a guy who can't even pronounce 'Ayn Rand' properly.
SkullOfYorick 6 months ago
This guy deserved exactly what Cenk said about him. Completely and utterly idiotic, fallacious logic. Smfh and THESE people are the ones who represent us? UGH
HowToGetFreebies 7 months ago
FAIL! i pay them docters to take care of me, to treat me, prescribe me, heal me and cure me. i pay them to save me. so FUCK YOU RAND PAUL! YOU AND YOUR REPUBLICANS DOG CAN GO DIE IN THE GUTTER AS MAGGOTS EAT YOUR FLESH AND SLOWLY ROT FROM THE INSIDE FROM INFECTION! DUMBASS
NOVAGIRL666 7 months ago
the guys still getting paid isn't he, dumbass
Bayzz2 7 months ago
Principle 3 from the Cenk school of broadcasting: ad hominem attacks elevate the debate.
mdranias 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Lol boy TYT are so irrational and retarded.
BrettDunbar 7 months ago
talking about smugness? please, fatass.
franzpolak 8 months ago
Ayn rand. Is not pronounced ann. You sound as foolish as sarah palin. I agree though the metaphor was idiotic.
blindside70 8 months ago
@blindside70 You fail.
DerrenBrown100 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
cenk doesnt know jack shit about politics, why does he keep talking about it
bobbycatacutan 8 months ago
@postalmeter He's not a Muslim, he's an Agnostic you dumbass.
777Atheist 8 months ago
@777Atheist
Yeah that would fall under the "New Jersey Education" part; "we don't need no God, we's from Joisey!"
He was BORN into an Islamic culture you fuctard. Next you'll say he doesn't speak English since he's an American citizen.
Fucking dunce.
postalmeter 8 months ago
@postalmeter Islamic culture ? What is that supposed to mean ? I was raised Catholic but I dont know what the fuck is Christian or Catholic Culture ? He has a Turkish background, his culture is Turkish not Muslim, Turkish people and Arabs dont have the same culture do they ? Or the Iranians and all of those 3 countries are Muslim Countries, well except Turkey since Turkey is Secular, you are a moron and a typical Ron Paul supporter.
777Atheist 8 months ago
@777Atheist
"I dont know what the fuck is Christian or Catholic Culture ?"
Looks like you proved YOU'RE the moron.
From Wikipedia:
"Argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam or "appeal to ignorance", is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa)-- or the asserter is simply an ignorant dumbass who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, and has his head in both like 777Atheist."
postalmeter 8 months ago
@2001Horatio I'm talking about the political version of American liberals. They are the most racist people i have come across. Look at what they did to Detroit.
99Darnell 8 months ago
@99Darnell Oooookay! So there are different meanings of the word "liberal"... didn't know that... thanks. Bye
2001Horatio 8 months ago
@Newenlightenmentnow i hatem 2
fasulia67 9 months ago
@zombiefitnezz Bush believed in free markerks...okay you jsut proved you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. George Bush was one of the most leftist presidents we have ever had.
taxidriver2929 9 months ago
@taxidriver2929 Leftism=justicism, so no, George Bush was not leftist.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago
Seeing the things our govt. makes our police do to non violent offenders I would say they are slaves. Funny how you aren't intellectual enough to debate an opinion without hurling insults you party hack. BTW there was more than one case of slavery I hope you realize that.
taxidriver2929 9 months ago
@zombiefitnezz Gosh why aren't the states providing it while they provide a fire department? O maybe because the majority of people in the states want a fire department while the majority don't what public medicine. Or hers an idea maybe the states aren't stupid and know they can't afforded it just like our federal government cant.
onepiecefan74 9 months ago
@zombiefitnezz let me tell you a story about "The Tale of the slave." You are a slave who works for a master and here are the 7 stages of the slave.
1. your master forces you to work for him and beats you whenever he wants.
2. now the master lightens up and only beats you for breaking the rules and gives you some time off from work.
onepiecefan74 9 months ago
@zombiefitnezz "i've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system."-George W Bush.
Dumb Ass =)
onepiecefan74 9 months ago
@onepiecefan74 3.you are part of a group of slaves under this master and the master now distributes certain goods of his choosing amongst the slaves.
4. you now get work days. you only have to work 5 days a week.
5. the master lets you go and work at whatever location you want but you give the master 60% of you earnings. he can also call you back into service when needed
onepiecefan74 9 months ago
@onepiecefan74 6. all the slaves except you are allowed to vote on issues concerning the slaves like what percentage of income you own the master.
7. finale now you are granted the right to vote.
Question when did you stop being a slave?
onepiecefan74 9 months ago
@onepiecefan74 This analogy was made by Robert Nozick one of Harvard's great philosophers in rebuttal to the income tax.
onepiecefan74 9 months ago
@onepiecefan74 There hasn't been a free market system in the US since fraud was outlawed.
A true free market also allows cartels which destroy competition. Banned in 1890.
Yes, what you'd call the "GOVERNMENT" has been responsible for market competition since 1890.
Besides preventing slavery and robbery.
All of these highlight how insane libertarianism is.
A true free market allows fraud AND cartels.
A true free SYSTEM allows slavery and extortion for purely private gain.
TheNavigateur 9 months ago 3