These lies about how great healthcare was prior to the 1960s in the US are nauseating. Yrs ago the average person didn't see a doctor and unless something was noticeably wrong. So many people died of things that are now easily preventable. The reason Medicare was created wasn't just b/c many elderly couldn't afford insurance, but also many insurance co. wouldn't sell to them b/c they considered them a high risk group. If all was great & glorious there would've been no creation of such programs.
@TimwWarp66 Ha Ha. Well if you get your evidence from biased sources like these its hardly surprising that your opinion is warped! Costs probably puts the patient flow in the OTHER direction. Google "International Federation of Health Plans 2010 Comparative Price Report Medical and Hospital Fees by Country" for reasons why.
Its amazing how misinformed Americans are about the NHS. "Patient goes to hospital and comes home fully recovered" is not news. The NHS does not go filing lawsuits if newpapers publish negative stories as they would in the US. If a hospital is privately owned is has every reason to do all it can to prevent negative news leaking out. Newspapers / TV stations rely on medical expenditures. In the UK we have published medical stats and not up mood ads. RX meds cannot be advertised to consumers.
Its not WAIT time and only affects HOSPITALS. . Most people go to their doctor who treats them immediately. A referral to hospital is rare. 18 weeks is not DELAY. its a MAX for REFERAL to TREATMENT. Time for :- 1st hospital appointment, biopsy, doctor to check. any further tests, next appt to discuss treatment options, risks and benefit. Time for patient decide preferred option. Time to start treatment. Its not DEAD TIME and itt mostly happens in 1-9 weeks. Not 18 weeks.
The creator of this video is a Marxist idiot who has never taken a basic economics class.
In a free market, health insurance would cost barely more than a monthly cell phone bill and provide far better coverage than any monopolized socialist system.
30% of Canadians buy PRIVATE FOR PROFIT insurance which provides the services not provided by their socialist medical system. Capitalism beats socialism every time it has been tried.
@TimeWarp66 "The creator of this video is a Marxist idiot who has never taken a basic economics class."
Assumption 1: I'm a Marxist. Incorrect.
Assumption 2: The Austrian School of Economics is the only legitimate school of thought. Also Incorrect.
Just because I don't subscribe to the Mises school of Economics doesn't mean I don't get it. Sorry Randroid, you invalidate your own point when you make these assertions.
@TimeWarp66 "In a free market, health insurance would cost barely more than a monthly cell phone bill and provide far better coverage than any monopolized socialist system."
Wrong. The costs are going to be greater because the insurance companies AND the hospitals will have a profit motive. There's no such thing with a public option. And Public =/= Socialist. Get a clue.
That's an economic fallacy. Industries competing for profit drive prices down. Take iphones. Starting price was $500 at a $80 a month bill. Now? $99 at $40 a month. In order to make a profit you must satisfy your customers by lowering costs and improving quality.
And that was cognitive dissonance. Next time, specify what it is you're addressing.
"Take iphones. Starting price was $500 at a $80 a month bill. Now? $99 at $40 a month. "
1) Electronics are different from healthcare.
2) Did you get those prices from the same model of iPhone over 2 time periods, in other words, obsoleted technology? Moore's Law does NOT apply to medicine.
@TimeWarp66 as for the assertion that private healthcare will be better than public health... Tell that to Somalians. They've got some of the worst healthcare in the world and it's completely Free Market.
"30% of Canadians buy PRIVATE FOR PROFIT insurance which provides the services not provided by their socialist medical system."
Yes... AS A SUPPLEMENT, NOT as a replacement. Treatment excluded from their private policies is STILL available on their Publicly funded medical care, unlike the US.
@TimeWarp66 "Capitalism beats socialism every time it has been tried."
While I think capitalism is sometimes a good thing, that statement is completely untrue. See, this is something you Randroids don't get. Just because I'm not a hyper-capitalist doesn't make me a Marxist Communist Lazy Unproductive Whiny Hypocritical Physically-repugnant Grammatically-challenged mother-fucker who is desperate to kill your children and pets. I think for-profit capitalism has it's place... Not in Medicine.
Well then where in your view does for profit capitalism have its place? Computers, cars, clothes, food? Where is it proper for the government to take over an industry and when is it not? What makes healthcare any different than any other good or service in a free economy?
So things "extremely complex" should be left to bureaucrats?
The computer you're typing on is extremely complex. The car you drive, the refrigerator you store food in...etc. Complex things are what we should leave most to the free market.
If you're diagnosed with cancer you are far more likely to survive in a private hospital than in the NHS. The American people will never accept socialized medicine no matter how hard you try.
@TimeWarp66 "The computer you're typing on is extremely complex. The car you drive, the refrigerator you store food in...etc. Complex things are what we should leave most to the free market."
That is a specious analogy. I expected better, but like all other Randroids, you disappoint.
"If you're diagnosed with cancer you are far more likely to survive in a private hospital than in the NHS."
Cancer survival rates are all well and good... IF YOU CAN AFFORD THE TREATMENT. This is not an issue on the NHS, and cancer survival rates are not that much different in the NHS than they are in the private sector in the US.
@TimeWarp66 That would be because your "points" are nothing more than biased cherry-picking. I mean Daniel Hannon as a source? And you wonder why we don't take idiots like you seriously?
@TimeWarp66 Oh... And don't accuse me of ignoring your points when you've ignored practically every single comment other than the one you thought you could get away with sounding like you would get a win on. The dishonesty of you people is beyond a joke.
@TimeWarp66 An interesting claim. In the UK we have both private hospitals and NHS hospitals. And I am completely UNWARE of any statistic which compares private versus public cancer outcomes in UK. Where do you get this statistic from???
Daniel Hannan, the CATO institute, and the Heritage foundation. When Britons really need quality care and can afford it, they buy private. Many Brits come to the United States for treatments they have difficulty receiving in a lower quality socialist system.
Being salaried NHS, doctors prefer to get me treated quickly with fewer visits to minimize costs. Great!
A private doc gets paid only if I walk thru his door. Hence a private doc is unlikely to send me to a more appropriate clinician and keeps me coming back over many visits.
I think this is a big reason why UK annual health care costs ONE THIRD of what US health care costs and UK residents have better health outcomes.
@hauskalainen "Being salaried NHS, doctors prefer to get me treated quickly with fewer visits to minimize costs."
Indeed, this is a good thing. How much are you willing to bet though that Randroids and proponents for the corporatist and/or free markets will try to spin it so that it ends up being a bad thing?
The reason it is Americans and not Brits that criticize the NHS is very telling. It tells you that the corporations that control American heath care are sh*t scared that Americans might discover the truth. Brits have a choice to use the NHS or private health care and the majority choose the NHS. I had private insurance thru my company but I mostly preferred to use the NHS.
@hauskalainen It's fair to say that British people complain about the NHS a lot... But that's because it's easy to complain about a service that you haven't directly paid for at the point of entry nor put insurance premiums into. Everyone pays taxes when they earn enough money, including me. I have no complaints where it comes to my treatment except in the areas of mental health provision, but even those who do complain agree that it's better than any alternatives that have been offered.
@hauskalainen Also, a lot of people tend not to complain about the American insurance system in much the same way as many Apple fanboys and Windows cultists don't complain about their chosen platform of choice... Loyalty to a platform they invested cash into, as well as in some cases, buyer's remorse. Those who can look at it objectively recognise the flaws and acknowledge them. In any case, there's no buyer's remorse with the NHS as it's paid for by contributions from everyone's paycheque.
@FistOfChrist7 "Is the concept of integrity completely lost on you?"
When Libertarians and Randroids keep going over the same tired old ground and spout the same talking points despite having been refuted time and time again, I get tired of dealing with their horse shit. If you want to call that a lack of integrity, go right ahead.
@FistOfChrist7 " I mean, you can't even give an honest definition of "quote-mine"."
What, you mean the act of taking a quote out of it's original context such that no-one who doesn't have the sense to follow up on it knows that it was not correctly cited?
You've got a set of balls telling me I don't know what Quote Mining is.
@hugesinker "Are you willing to be the bigger man and admit your mistakes or continue to bleed from the anus? For your sake, I hope that anal bleeding can be treated in much less than 18 weeks."
And herein is your dishonesty shown for what it is. I have linked the stats that show the MAJORITY of treatments being treated within SINGLE FIGURE timeframes on average, with the MAJORITY of them STILL within 18 weeks, and you IGNORE it and make the same claim HE did. Go join his circle jerk.
@hugesinker "You've held up the NHS 'Bill of Rights' as some kind of gospel in an attempt to refute hard data which shows that these very 'rights' are being violated."
What, you mean the hard data that I presented in my video from the NHS itself, an organisation that is REQUIRED to publish ALL of it's data? Or the "hard data" that he presented from the Guardian NEWSPAPER? Which is it?
Face it. You two are cut from the same cloth, and are as dishonest as each other.
@hugesinker "You've falsely accused him of quote-mining without substantiation."
Quoting from the very same Guardian Newspaper article as though he is quoting the people referenced directly WITHOUT substantiating these quotes from their ORIGINAL sources IS quote mining. Sorry if you don't like that.
"You've said "citation needed" on points where the source for the remark is provided. "
This is an outright lie. He has NOT cited sources for the statements in question.
@darris321 I ask because that voice at the being of the video sounded so similar( i watch a lot of evolution/renewable/other science type youtuber and i can't remember the user's name).
@darris321 "he has responded to this video, and the argumentum ad hominems from this FSAthe1st guy"
You have now made an accusation that I have made ad hominem attacks. Please provide your evidence that I ONLY attacked his character and not his arguments.
@FSAthe1st argumentum ad hominem doesn't require that you attack only the character, it requires that you attack the character.
it means arguing at man. there's no mention of "only" in the phrase. shanedk uses argumentum ad hominem too.
to answer your other comment, i have not yet watched the video because school has been really busy, it isn't usually my practice to comment without seeing the video, but i didn't expect the video to contradict the title.
calm down, tiger. no one's attacking you. I already said I hadn't watched the video, I'll get to it, I promise.
I'm an unbiased observer, I'm not a killian lackey, I just listen to his podcast wherein he addressed attacks at the man (let me translate that into latin "argumentum ad hominem") which came from you.
@darris321 "calm down, tiger. no one's attacking you."
Who said anything about attacking me? I simply provided you with a definition for an Ad Hominem argument. Your attempt to twist the situation is noted.
"I already said I hadn't watched the video, I'll get to it, I promise."
I couldn't care less. You've demonstrated already that your opinion is meaningless to me.
@FSAthe1st i wasn't offended by the idea that i'm wrong. i was just taken aback by the rudeness of just blaring 'WRONG' when someone says something you disagree with.
put yourself in the company of equals at a dinner and imagine everyone having a slightly heated discussion about politics and then ted in the corner just blurts "WROOONG! EERRNG! you're wrong!"
that's rude, whether or not he's calling it like he sees it.
@darris321 "that's not inventing a definition, that's translating a phrase."
The rest of your verbiage does nothing to change the fact that your made up definition of Ad Hominem is incorrect. An Ad Hominem consists of issuing an attack against a person making an argument INSTEAD OF addressing the argument itself. I'm sorry if you don't like that.
so stop responding... because these comments mean nothing
Your opinion doesn't mean nothing to me, i would like to learn your opinion, but so far you've only been putting me down and shrugging me off (and blurting wrong out like a child).
A couple of points... the critics of socialized medicine like to point to waiting lists as though they don't exist here in the US as well. At the hospital where I work, there are two full-time orthopedic surgeons. Both of them have waiting lists that are over 2 months.
@roentgen571 second, people are often confused about the elective nature of some surgeries. Yes, hip replacements can be elective. If you have arthritis, for example, you need surgery to improve quality of life, but if that surgery happens today or week after next isn't going to make a big difference. But they can also be emergency surgeries--like in the case of a fall and broken hip. These need to be attended to ASAP.
@roentgen571 In the British system or in Canada, you might have to wait a few months for your arthritic hip replacement (you may well here in the US, too), but if you fall and break your hip, you're not going to be laying there for months waiting for that surgery.
One quick thing I want to note; The guardian newspaper in this case is unsourced in it's claims against the NHS. However the other day TJ (The Amazing Atheist) also linked a guardian newspaper report showing how well the NHS is doing compared to other countries. However it directly linked to a study by a more reliable source (The royal society of health, I think). So if a newspaper article has a more reliable source it's basing on, then it is more acceptable of evidence.
@Nightmare060 "The guardian newspaper in this case is unsourced in it's claims against the NHS."
That was one of the primary reasons I noted the fact that it was used as a source.
"So if a newspaper article has a more reliable source it's basing on, then it is more acceptable of evidence."
That wouldn't be unreasonable, although to be purist about it I might prefer to link to the underlying study... Only feasible if there's only one source, which often isn't the case with Wikis, for example.
@FSAthe1st I've been putting it off because I've been experiencing some technical issues with my internet today. That and I know it will be swamped by Libertarian comments, so I needed a moment of relief from the stress. Although I will start putting the graphic on and upload it since I'm in a better state of mind to be arguing the points.
@Nightmare060 "I've been putting it off because I've been experiencing some technical issues with my internet today. That and I know it will be swamped by Libertarian comments, so I needed a moment of relief from the stress."
Know what you mean... I'm feeling burnt out by their nonsense lately myself.
I've updated the Standard Oil vid description with a link to a forum where they debated the issue. The conclusion (not accepted by the Libertarians of course) might cheer you up.
@FSAthe1st Although I do not agree with Mr.Killian on a free for all Health care system, the United States system and is discrepancies in this video are not elaborated. Do not take this as an attack on your credibility and I wish to keep this mature. You say 50 million are without health insurance, that figure is true but the context at which Universal health care proponent use it is misleading to say the least. Upon reading the United States Census Bureau's report on HC you'll come to find out
@FSAthe1st that ~10 million of those are illegal immigrants, in the US the census bureau is allowed to count them as a statisic. Another 10 million of those make over $250,000 a year and choose not to purchase insurance on the premise they can afford it without all the hassle of an insurance company's intervention. Another approx (7 million?) choose not to be covered over a period of 3 or so months and are able to be provided coverage at any given time.
@FSAthe1st Even though our Universal Health Care plan will not engage until 2014, our current system is no where near as bad as some make it out to be. For instance: My mother just had a newborn, my father dropped her from his insurance for personal reasons (possible divorcee) so, at the time of labor the hospital did NOT turn her down for her needs. She received a C-section, and generic grade pain killers on medicare but is still waiting awaiting surgery for her abscess.
@FSAthe1st Point being: Our doctors are very well trained, especially through our private practice system. Pharmaceutical drugs are relatively cheap, generic grade pain killers w/o insurance are able to be bought around $25 dollars for 2+ refills (dependent on the grade and strength of said drug.) No one is ever turned down, in this country illegals are given coverage absolutely free and the state pays for it. I'm staying with our private HC, that is if the company still exists.
@LunarPoetry473 There's no argument about doctors being well trained in the US. However, the rest is arguable. HappyCabbie is linked in the info bar. He is one of a large number of people who cannot (not choose not to... Cannot) get proper treatment.
@FSAthe1st Let's just admit that people in our system do in fact receive care, however on the opposite end, there are those waiting in line way too long for certain conditions. I had a friend up in Canada who had a spinal disorder and the problem only got worse with the waiting. So in 2005 Canada had to open itself up to privatization due to humanitarian laws because people were indeed suffering and some dying because of wait time. All I'm saying is, both systems have their problems.
@LunarPoetry473 "I had a friend up in Canada who had a spinal disorder and the problem only got worse with the waiting."
Anecdotal evidence doesn't wash with me. My video has already debunked the lies told by Mr Killian in this regard. Don't start the same tricks here.
"So in 2005 Canada had to open itself up to privatization due to humanitarian laws because people were indeed suffering and some dying because of wait time."
@FSAthe1st Lol, every time you put "citation needed" I kind of chuckled. A simple google search would appease you I'm sure. I don't recall saying how "long wait times and people got more ill or even possibly died as a result" is bastardizing your precious system. The whole point of our conversation was that people are not turned down for treatment, you keep asserting the claim he's thousands in debt. First, I gave you 4 options for pre-ex so you can't deny or debate those... they're real
@FSAthe1st He is grossly overweight (obviously) and a variety of his symptoms can only be treated (If you actually watched his videos, yes I sat through hours of his ER and doctor visits) by losing the weight and following a certain diet.. which in all has nothing to do his bills. Given he has decent credit, he'll pay them off eventually, but he NEEDS insurance. He should try to apply for the "High risk insurance pool" or w/e his state promotes.
@FSAthe1st HappyCabbie is diagnosed with a stage 4 liver disease known as cirrhosis. There is no cure because liver cells once damaged are damaged for good. He has hepiatic? cells I believe and all of this due to what I believe to attribute to his weight. If the liver is overloaded trying to filter out the body, it will damage itself and heal in the form of scar tissue, this is the cause of his illness. In his very own videos he's received treatment via the emergency room AND
@LunarPoetry473 "HappyCabbie is diagnosed with a stage 4 liver disease known as cirrhosis. There is no cure because liver cells once damaged are damaged for good. "
That's not the point. He can't even get treatment for the SYMPTOMS associated with it. In the UK while no treatment exists for cirrhosis, you CAN get treatment to manage the SYMPTOMS. He cannot. He's not covered.
@FSAthe1st You claim he cannot be "treatment" for his symptoms in the US, but can in the UK as a result of your HC system? First off, nations with socialized medicine are not nearly advanced as those with privatized medicine (more money = more pharmaceutical research and better medical machinery.) In the UK he would be told the same thing. The doctors are not going to have him pay for medicine that would not do anything at this stage of his liver damage, don't you see now? Only
@FSAthe1st can treat himself with exercise and a fixed diet. You made it out as if in the US people are left to die on the streets, that is wrong and happycabbie proves it. He has bills yeah, but who doesn't? If he tries to follow one of the four options available in all 50 states, he'll receive insurance lol.. period point blank. He probably qualifies for SSDI, but like I said I don't know exactly for sure.
@LunarPoetry473 "You made it out as if in the US people are left to die on the streets"
Sorry, I never said that, and it's dishonest of you to claim I did. I STATED very clearly, that 50 million people are uninsured, WHICH IS TRUE, and that as a consequence they have to weigh up whether to seek treatment and end up with huge debts or take their chances away from modern medicine.
Nothing you've said here changes that in any way, shape, or form.
@FSAthe1st a simple visit to the doctor where he receives his biopsy results. About the infection on this thighs, he received treatment as well. He was given morphine, a rectal exam, told what to do to quell the infection, and was administered perocet.. all while being uninsured? Yup, like I said.. in the US.. you are always given treatment. He does need insurance, since he is self-employed I do not know if he qualifies for SSDI or early medicare benefits. There are 4 other options given
@LunarPoetry473 "a simple visit to the doctor where he receives his biopsy results."
Which costs him 1000 dollars each time.
"all while being uninsured? Yup, like I said.. in the US.. you are always given treatment. "
And billed for it each and every time. And no, just because SOME people continue to receive treatment doesn't mean you get to claim EVERYONE received treatment. That's simply not true.
@FSAthe1st to him for pre-existing conditions and those who cannot be denied coverage. Not only does the HIIPA law protect him for being denied, he is given 4 other options dependent in the state to which he currently resides in. If he has a corporate tax ID, he is allowed to purchase a small group health insurance policy. 35 states in the US provide enrollment into what is called a "High risk insurance pool." and receive treatment for pre-existing conditions. If he resides in one of the
@LunarPoetry473 "he is given 4 other options dependent in the state to which he currently resides in."
And this by you is proper medical treatment, is it? To try to navigate a system that functions as a kludge to patch holes that exist in the Corporatist model currently in existence?
You talk about bastardisation by the media of Healthcare in the US while hypocritically making bastardization claims against Canadian and UK Healthcare. Really?
@FSAthe1st 10 states that sponsor an individual market guaranteed issue mandate, he is guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions from one of the several insurers in said state. 45 states issue guaranteed INDIVIDUAL (He claims he is single) coverage for pre-existing conditions. The other 5 sponsor a small group policy for coverage. As you see.. people with pre-ex are not just shit out of luck like people say.. our HC system is among the best in the world and is bastardized by the media.
@FSAthe1st You also tell me you don't wish for anecdotes but you'll use an anecdote alluding to happycabbie and send me there? The only difference between my story is that he doesn't happen to have a youtube channel with his hospital visits -.-. If I can't use anecdotes, then happycabbie is out of the question because you used the same thing.
@FSAthe1st Yes, in this country you actually need to pay for your health care -.- I know we're such terrible people. If all fails, apply for medicare/medicaid, hell we even have tricare for those in the armed forces. I guess it's easier to just rely on the government and other people's tax dollars to treat you. The wait times... the bureaucracies.. sounds like bliss.
@LunarPoetry473 "The wait times... the bureaucracies.. sounds like bliss."
The lies, the dishonesty... So moral of you. I've already addressed this nonsense in THIS VIDEO. Clearly you haven't actually bothered to get your facts straight and are just interested in mouth-farting your talking points, so you can go do it elsewhere.
@LunarPoetry473 "If I can't use anecdotes, then happycabbie is out of the question because you used the same thing. "
You claim your own personal experience is representative of the standard of Healthcare over the entirety of the US. HappyCabbie's experience stands in direct contrast to this. I too have had to deal with the US Healthcare system and I would NEVER sacrifice the NHS for either that, OR the Free Market idea.
Uh, this video started out well, but it just nosedived at the end.
FSAthe1st, you don't really get the profit motive, do you?
If a healthcare company provides good services to its customers over its competition, and saves thousands of lives in the process, should it not get more money to expand its operation and therefore extend that same level of service to more people?
Non-profit businesses are great, but they cannot expand their services because they don't have the leftover profit for it.
@Dirge987 "If a healthcare company provides good services to its customers over its competition, and saves thousands of lives in the process, should it not get more money to expand its operation and therefore extend that same level of service to more people?"
You people continue to look at it from the perspective of Economics. I look at it from the POV of ETHICS. Please address MY arguments rather than presenting your own economic arguments...
@FSAthe1st "I look at it from the POV of ETHICS."
Ethics are fine, but you cannot simply dodge the question of economics when you bring up profit motive when profits are about economics. The real questions you should be asking are about voluntary charities or other charitable services that don't require the use of force as their funding. Namely you cannot make an argument of ethics when you advocate for an institution that takes it's money (taxes) by the use of force or threat of imprisonment.
@Dirge987 "Ethics are fine, but you cannot simply dodge the question of economics when you bring up profit motive when profits are about economics."
And as I've repeatedly said to you people... HEALTHCARE SHOULDN'T BE ABOUT PROFITS. Furthermore, MORE is spent per capita in the US system at the moment than is spent in the UK (despite the fact that care is comparable for those who CAN get coverage, and 50 million can't), which puts paid to the nonsense that Government "intervention" costs more.
@Dirge987 I have no issue with companies making profits, but I'd object to Police forces or Fire Departments making profits like a Business if they tried to do it, and I object to the Healthcare Industry in America doing the same thing. We used to do it here in the UK. That's why the NHS exists here now, because the Private Sector WASN'T WORKING.
@Dirge987 "Non-profit businesses are great, but they cannot expand their services because they don't have the leftover profit for it."
And this is irrelevant, because I'm not arguing FOR non-profit business. I'm arguing FOR Government-managed healthcare. There's a DIFFERENCE. The government puts ALL of the money that comes from its collection of National Insurance contributions that doesn't go to State Pensions and Non-Means-Tested Unemployment benefits INTO the NHS. None of it goes to profit.
@Dirge987 as a consequence, the Government can allocate additional resources when necessary into the NHS to expand its' services when, for example, hospitals need maintenance and/or a new hospital needs to be built. The profit run business model is not required to allow this kind of expansion.
But again, I'm not arguing from an Economics perspective. If I WERE, and I was ONLY concerned with the Economics of the situation, then I TOO might be arguing FOR Free Market HC, but I'm not.
@FSAthe1st If you want MY take on ethics, government healthcare is immoral, because like any immoral act the government forces people against their will into the service, or uses violence to take money to pay for the service. Intent does not justify the means. If it were such a moral venture to give everyone healthcare, then the government wouldn't need to force people into it, or to pay for it.
@Dirge987 "If you want MY take on ethics, government healthcare is immoral, because like any immoral act the government forces people against their will into the service, or uses violence to take money to pay for the service."
Sorry, but you've just lost me. Another nut who thinks that it's OK to use emotional appeals to suggest that the government is evil and bad and "Oh noes! They use FORCE!" and all that other frankly batshit fucking insanity.
15:00 is simply a blatant straw man. I currently accept the idea of the free market, and you're willing to disagree with me, but do so based on the ideas themselves, and not your preconceived notions.
A free market can and does have regulation. Look at the peer review process. Scientific peer review has such a wide influence, polices itself with acceptable efficiency, and requires no government oversight.
Private regulation, like peer review, can function in the healthcare industry.
@Dirge987 "A free market can and does have regulation."
And who enforces it? And what metric is used for determining which private regulatory body (of which any number of them can exist, ALL of which can have conflicting standard if they're unmonitored) actually has the correct methodology for determining the correct level of regulation? And in the end, THEY are ALSO looking to make money.
@FSAthe1st "And who enforces it?.... And in the end, THEY are ALSO looking to make money."
Every question and response you make here could be used to describe how the peer review process doesn't work, only that it does. No central body is needed because every private regulator has their reputation on the line, and there is no profit in peer review. A perfect example of this is the Underwriter's Labs. If you turn over your mouse you should see their logo. They're a private non-profit regulator.
@Dirge987 "Every question and response you make here could be used to describe how the peer review process doesn't work, only that it does."
Scientific Analysis is based off of research and development. Scientists are in their chosen field for the SCIENCE. Health Insurance companies are in it for PROFIT. There is NO comparison. Why are you people unable to see this crucial point?
@Dirge987 "A perfect example of this is the Underwriter's Labs. If you turn over your mouse you should see their logo."
Mine has the CE logo, a European standards body. And a mouse is a completely different proposition to someone getting HEALTHCARE. You people KEEP DELIBERATELY MISSING THE POINT.
@FSAthe1st "Get the government out of it. That's what I see. Government BAD!"
If that's the way you see it, then that's how you see it, but you miss the nuances of anarchistic thinkers and the reasons why government is seen the way it is. And to clarify, Shane is not an anarchist, he's a minarchist; I AM an anarchist. You used the term incorrectly as a buzz word to illicit a response from your viewers in the same way a creationist uses the word theory.
@Dirge987 "Shane is not an anarchist, he's a minarchist"
He's an asshole who calls everyone who disagrees with him a liar and a Creationist or a Moon Hoaxer. Anything else he might have a view on is irrelevant next to that point. He'd get more people to listen to him if he weren't such a jackass.
"You used the term incorrectly as a buzz word to illicit a response from your viewers in the same way a creationist uses the word theory."
@FSAthe1st "So you're saying that he HASN'T quote mined the literature?"
I have not seen evidence that he has, since instead of providing evidence, you provided only an assertion. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you haven't convinced me.
@Dirge987 "I have not seen evidence that he has, since instead of providing evidence, you provided only an assertion."
Wrong. The Guardian ARTICLE that HE LINKED in his OWN Podcast is all the evidence that is needed to demonstrate that he is quoting FROM said article, but he has NOT attributed his quotes TO the article, but ONLY to the people who are thus quoted within. This gives the impression he has sourced them DIRECTLY when he has done no such thing. THAT is also Quote Mining.
When my mother was diagnosed with luekaemia in 2008, she received the finest care imaginable. I was present at several of her consultations and was supremely impressed by the level of care. But of course they were British doctors and nurses, and they're the best.
I like Shane but he's libertarian, so that rather colours everything he says.
Those of us that have lived in societies with NHS systems are well aware that they are invaluable. Those of us that have lived in NHS systems and then experienced the American system know that the American system is a piece of shit poorly regulated, and the cost of insurance is obscene, assuming they'll even cover you in the first place.
@9:51 confuses me because... although in Canada we have government paid "health care", individual clinics are still set up with MRI's or PET scans, ect... They do in fact have waiting lists even for those although they are privately run and publicly funded.
I don't see the concern with volume production when it's very scientific. Basically all results are reported in the same manner. Each scan is done the same way depending on the need.
@TammyFlores19:51 basically rebuffs the argument by Free Market Evangelists that it's cheaper to provide higher levels of technology if you just stop the Government from regulating its' development. I point out that these machines are not going to be mass produced on such large scales because hospitals don't need to install so many physical units.
@FSAthe1st "Free Market" does not benefit the masses... agreed... There has to be a balance between government regulation and development. There is alot of improvement to be had on that front.
I so am not in this field, however, I dated a doctor whose field was Nuclear Medicine. There is way too much protectionism within respective fields that prevent progress/development as well. This is an important factor that is overlooked sometimes.
In Canada... we have large wait times as well, but we are supposed to be "fair" and can't "buy" our way out of it. Some would argue that's unacceptable and go else where and others want a fair playing field.
The time between moving out of my parents home to go to college, and until I was hired for a permanent position that provided access to health insurance was about 4 years. That meant I didn't see an optometrist or Dentist for four years, meaning I had about 6 cavities and a pair of glasses that gives me headaches because the prescription was out of date. I'll take a max wait of 18 weeks over 4 years...
It seems LordThawkeye has made a response to this video. I haven't watched it late because of the time, but it was entitled "Fail quote of August" and seems to be some red herring about the government willingly accepting bribes. I will have a stab at it tomorrow myself, but it just continues to prove the dogma of these people.
@FSAthe1st The whole video was basically picking at a straw-man based on a quote mine, since he still hasn't watched more than 1 minute of the video. My rebuttal shall be up soon!
Very well done, FSAthe1st! I still have some sympathy with Shane Kilian because of his tragic past experiences and his videos on other subjects. But as soon as a topic is in proximity of libertarian talking points (as federal reserve or health care), shanedk seems to switch to automatic (paraprasing BionicDance) and doesn't think for himself.
I've been thankful of German public health care repeatedly. It's imperfect, all right, but no one needs to die a preventable death.
Im a libertarian, but not so hardcore as some of them. I understand by talking to canadians and other europeans that their system works, so i might be ok with some kind of public option as long as people can opt out. You can't force people to pay for someone elses healthcare. But really I don't even care anymore both parties suck cock and I couldn't give a damn if America goes to hell.
@skeptictom818 Well in most countries with UHC, the government either provides health insurance as an option or has most of it payed through taxes. In the UK, you pay for your taxes and thus fund the NHS. So in the event of an emergency, you will be taken to the nearest hospital (usually an NHS one) and money will be no objective. So from my point of view "Forcing" people to pay taxes means they will never be out of pocket and thus is more ethical than a privatized system.
@skeptictom818 (cont) That being said, I do also agree with private health insurance being an option for those that can afford it. And I also understand that countries like Japan have mostly privatized but also strictly controlled systems. To the best of my knowledge, they will offer to cover a particular excess or give an option for the poorest people so everyone is fairly covered. If a system like that can be fair and work out, I don't have a huge problem with it. I just prefer NHS systems.
Free Market Healthcare works if cost is not an issue. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the rich would pay much more for a private doctor because he is the best in the country. But for those of us unlucky enough to not be rich we need affordable healthcare and that should be a common good.
I unsubbed to Shane after his stupid rant on this subject, and his stance against UHC as a whole. It was about the last thing I could take from that pompous muppet voiced git.
At times i get the suspicion that these people agitate against universal health care because they don't have it and are lashing out, out of misplaced jealousy. But I guess some of them actually believe what they are spreeing.
Regrettably, a lot of people who support universal health care seem to argue rather lazily (presumably because they see it as a self-evidently good thing that requires no defence). As a result, I've found myself not knowing how to respond to the criticisms presented by libertarians such as shanedk.
Thank you very much for addressing these. It's one of the best pro-UHC videos I've ever seen, and, regrettably, one of only a few good ones :( .
I'm actually a fan of shanedk. This is probably the only area where i disagree with him. It surprises me that he would misrepresent data, when he usually criticizes creationists for doing the same with evolution.
@Drgamedood I used to be subbed to ShaneDK for that very reason. He gave some fantastic videos on psudo-science, creationism and even the war on drugs which I started to think about. But after he went on and misrepresented the NHS as well as push his free market BS I just couldn't take it anymore. He doesn't seem to be interested in science or clear facts anymore; only his dogmatic political opinion.
I live in the UK and went to my GP because I thought my heartbeat felt a bit too thumpy for my liking. No thinking - is this going to cost me? I got seen within a couple of days, an ECG the following week, full blood tests, the works. Total cost to me. Zero.
Turns out everything was normal, but I can go back and have further tests if I still think something is wrong. If I had to worry about finances like people in the US, I'd probably wait till I had a heart attack first.
I fully agree with this video. Over here in the Czech Republic we have universal healthcare written in our constitution. Despite problems with state-run hospitals, the insurance system as such works pretty much flawlessly and we have for instance a record low infant mortality rate. Insurance companies put out ads and provide benefits concerning healthy lifestyles and money is almost never an issue when visiting the doctor. Don't know what they're missing over there.
(PS: plus we have very long GP waiting times in my country, I sometimes have to wait like 3 HOURS in the morning to get cough pills from my GP when the flu season comes round. If I don't take a book it's AGONIZING. JK of course there are waiting times for some treatment but the biggest problems are with waiting times on complex operations or where there is a limited number of specialists or for non-crucial treatment (dentists, opticians). Life-threatening illnesses get immediate attention.)
It makes me sick that the idiots who keep trying to put the NHS down, are almost always those ignorant bastards that have had no real first hand dealings with the NHS.
When I found out I have throat cancer, I had my biopsy in 4 days. 4 DAYS!
I have had 2 massive accidents and in both cases I was taken and given great service, sure I can find niggles, but Im not a cunt. The NHS are perhaps the best service in the world, only held back by low funding.
@FatRakoon Main problem is that they dismiss any first hand accounts as anecdotal evidence. Which it technically is, but often when they are making claims about how the NHS is run they tend to neglect how the VAST majority of patients are happy and know how the system runs after living in said country for 20+ years usually. Plus a 90% approval of the NHS should be indication that it's doing something right and that we should look further on how it's satisfying people.
Anarchism isn't a great ideology when you go into heavy details but to be honest you can always take something from the odd ideology like communism to facism there is some good in either
@childofreletivity This is one reason I classify my position as centre left. It's all to easy to be blinded by the positives of any extreme political ideology. With Libertarians, they tend to not understand how healthcare choice is not comparable with buying a loaf of bread!
@Nightmare060 I believe in snippits of all left ideologies but I put idea's of Communism and Imperialism it goes together in some aspects to be honest
The NHS probably saved my life 2 weeks ago. I was awake all night with growing stomach pains, finally throwing up at around 8 in the morning. I phoned my GP at 8.30 and told them that I was on erythromycin and had begun to be sick. By the time I got to the clinic I'd been sick at least 10 times in 3 hours. My GP moved other appointments to take me earlier and an ambulance take me to a hospital surgical ward. I was alone at the time. If I'd had to wait I might have been in trouble
USA #1 for health spending #36th for life expectancy #34th for infant mortality
even if you don't agree with social health schemes you can't deny that the US system isn't working, I've visited the US a number of times and the one thing that always surprises me is how little altruism them have for each other when it comes to health matters
As someone with a brain tumor I can honestly say with out the universal health care in Canada I'd quite literally be dead since I would not be able to afford my medical bills or work.
I still didn't see much on the topic of the history of British health care..you once claimed it was free market but didn't work out. Can you direct me to your sources for that claim? Thanks.
@rockandrock44 Well, it wasn't so much a free market, but you did have to pay and how you paid would be similar to how lawyers work today, the better or more respected a doctor the more you would pay. Same for hospitals. But bear in mind the NHS was started in 1948, so it was a long time ago now. The same reluctance you are seeing now in America is the same thing that happened here. Cries of socialism and such. Google 'NHS timeline' and 'before the NHS' for some good info.
Well that's 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back. First off, this is a state issue, not a federal issue. Even if it wasn't, theres no reason to believe some bureaucrat knows what is best for everyone better then they do or should have the right to make decisions for them. No one is arguing for an "unregulated" health care system, just that governemnt is far to incompetent to be the one to regulate it, let alone, take it over completely.
@Houshalter You can't seriously expect private companies to regulate themselves though. The government can regulate by placing laws in place and fallow through with routine inspections, to give the consumer the power to deal with companies that are dishonest. Simply throwing out weasel words doesn't make your argument any more valid. Besides, systems such as the NHS in the UK and Canada's healthcare system have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to work in favour of the customer.
These lies about how great healthcare was prior to the 1960s in the US are nauseating. Yrs ago the average person didn't see a doctor and unless something was noticeably wrong. So many people died of things that are now easily preventable. The reason Medicare was created wasn't just b/c many elderly couldn't afford insurance, but also many insurance co. wouldn't sell to them b/c they considered them a high risk group. If all was great & glorious there would've been no creation of such programs.
njanovic1980 2 days ago
@TimwWarp66 Ha Ha. Well if you get your evidence from biased sources like these its hardly surprising that your opinion is warped! Costs probably puts the patient flow in the OTHER direction. Google "International Federation of Health Plans 2010 Comparative Price Report Medical and Hospital Fees by Country" for reasons why.
hauskalainen 1 month ago
Its amazing how misinformed Americans are about the NHS. "Patient goes to hospital and comes home fully recovered" is not news. The NHS does not go filing lawsuits if newpapers publish negative stories as they would in the US. If a hospital is privately owned is has every reason to do all it can to prevent negative news leaking out. Newspapers / TV stations rely on medical expenditures. In the UK we have published medical stats and not up mood ads. RX meds cannot be advertised to consumers.
hauskalainen 3 months ago
Its not WAIT time and only affects HOSPITALS. . Most people go to their doctor who treats them immediately. A referral to hospital is rare. 18 weeks is not DELAY. its a MAX for REFERAL to TREATMENT. Time for :- 1st hospital appointment, biopsy, doctor to check. any further tests, next appt to discuss treatment options, risks and benefit. Time for patient decide preferred option. Time to start treatment. Its not DEAD TIME and itt mostly happens in 1-9 weeks. Not 18 weeks.
hauskalainen 3 months ago
The creator of this video is a Marxist idiot who has never taken a basic economics class.
In a free market, health insurance would cost barely more than a monthly cell phone bill and provide far better coverage than any monopolized socialist system.
30% of Canadians buy PRIVATE FOR PROFIT insurance which provides the services not provided by their socialist medical system. Capitalism beats socialism every time it has been tried.
TimeWarp66 4 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "The creator of this video is a Marxist idiot who has never taken a basic economics class."
Assumption 1: I'm a Marxist. Incorrect.
Assumption 2: The Austrian School of Economics is the only legitimate school of thought. Also Incorrect.
Just because I don't subscribe to the Mises school of Economics doesn't mean I don't get it. Sorry Randroid, you invalidate your own point when you make these assertions.
FSAthe1st 4 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "In a free market, health insurance would cost barely more than a monthly cell phone bill and provide far better coverage than any monopolized socialist system."
Wrong. The costs are going to be greater because the insurance companies AND the hospitals will have a profit motive. There's no such thing with a public option. And Public =/= Socialist. Get a clue.
FSAthe1st 4 months ago
@FSAthe1st
That's an economic fallacy. Industries competing for profit drive prices down. Take iphones. Starting price was $500 at a $80 a month bill. Now? $99 at $40 a month. In order to make a profit you must satisfy your customers by lowering costs and improving quality.
TimeWarp66 4 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "That's an economic fallacy."
And that was cognitive dissonance. Next time, specify what it is you're addressing.
"Take iphones. Starting price was $500 at a $80 a month bill. Now? $99 at $40 a month. "
1) Electronics are different from healthcare.
2) Did you get those prices from the same model of iPhone over 2 time periods, in other words, obsoleted technology? Moore's Law does NOT apply to medicine.
FSAthe1st 3 months ago
@TimeWarp66 as for the assertion that private healthcare will be better than public health... Tell that to Somalians. They've got some of the worst healthcare in the world and it's completely Free Market.
"30% of Canadians buy PRIVATE FOR PROFIT insurance which provides the services not provided by their socialist medical system."
Yes... AS A SUPPLEMENT, NOT as a replacement. Treatment excluded from their private policies is STILL available on their Publicly funded medical care, unlike the US.
FSAthe1st 4 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "Capitalism beats socialism every time it has been tried."
While I think capitalism is sometimes a good thing, that statement is completely untrue. See, this is something you Randroids don't get. Just because I'm not a hyper-capitalist doesn't make me a Marxist Communist Lazy Unproductive Whiny Hypocritical Physically-repugnant Grammatically-challenged mother-fucker who is desperate to kill your children and pets. I think for-profit capitalism has it's place... Not in Medicine.
FSAthe1st 4 months ago
@FSAthe1st
Well then where in your view does for profit capitalism have its place? Computers, cars, clothes, food? Where is it proper for the government to take over an industry and when is it not? What makes healthcare any different than any other good or service in a free economy?
TimeWarp66 4 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "Well then where in your view does for profit capitalism have its place?"
It's easier to define where it should keep out of.
"What makes healthcare any different than any other good or service in a free economy?"
Medicine is an extremely complex field on which people's lives depend... Nothing else comes close.
FSAthe1st 3 months ago
@FSAthe1st
So things "extremely complex" should be left to bureaucrats?
The computer you're typing on is extremely complex. The car you drive, the refrigerator you store food in...etc. Complex things are what we should leave most to the free market.
If you're diagnosed with cancer you are far more likely to survive in a private hospital than in the NHS. The American people will never accept socialized medicine no matter how hard you try.
TimeWarp66 3 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "The computer you're typing on is extremely complex. The car you drive, the refrigerator you store food in...etc. Complex things are what we should leave most to the free market."
That is a specious analogy. I expected better, but like all other Randroids, you disappoint.
"If you're diagnosed with cancer you are far more likely to survive in a private hospital than in the NHS."
Better back that one up.
FSAthe1st 3 months ago
Cancer survival rates are all well and good... IF YOU CAN AFFORD THE TREATMENT. This is not an issue on the NHS, and cancer survival rates are not that much different in the NHS than they are in the private sector in the US.
FSAthe1st 3 months ago
@TimeWarp66 "The American people will never accept socialized medicine no matter how hard you try."
No... YOU will never accept universal Healthcare but you have NO right to speak for anyone else.
FSAthe1st 3 months ago
@FSAthe1st
Uuuhhhh, look at the history.
Marxist twats like yourself have been trying to socialize medicine in the US since Teddy Roosevelt! And it hasn't worked yet. It never will.
Funny how you only responded to my last point and not my prior main points.
TimeWarp66 3 months ago
@TimeWarp66 That would be because your "points" are nothing more than biased cherry-picking. I mean Daniel Hannon as a source? And you wonder why we don't take idiots like you seriously?
FSAthe1st 1 month ago
@TimeWarp66 Oh... And don't accuse me of ignoring your points when you've ignored practically every single comment other than the one you thought you could get away with sounding like you would get a win on. The dishonesty of you people is beyond a joke.
FSAthe1st 1 month ago
@TimeWarp66 An interesting claim. In the UK we have both private hospitals and NHS hospitals. And I am completely UNWARE of any statistic which compares private versus public cancer outcomes in UK. Where do you get this statistic from???
hauskalainen 3 months ago
@hauskalainen
Daniel Hannan, the CATO institute, and the Heritage foundation. When Britons really need quality care and can afford it, they buy private. Many Brits come to the United States for treatments they have difficulty receiving in a lower quality socialist system.
TimeWarp66 3 months ago
Here are my observation of private and public.
Being salaried NHS, doctors prefer to get me treated quickly with fewer visits to minimize costs. Great!
A private doc gets paid only if I walk thru his door. Hence a private doc is unlikely to send me to a more appropriate clinician and keeps me coming back over many visits.
I think this is a big reason why UK annual health care costs ONE THIRD of what US health care costs and UK residents have better health outcomes.
hauskalainen 5 months ago
@hauskalainen "Being salaried NHS, doctors prefer to get me treated quickly with fewer visits to minimize costs."
Indeed, this is a good thing. How much are you willing to bet though that Randroids and proponents for the corporatist and/or free markets will try to spin it so that it ends up being a bad thing?
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
The reason it is Americans and not Brits that criticize the NHS is very telling. It tells you that the corporations that control American heath care are sh*t scared that Americans might discover the truth. Brits have a choice to use the NHS or private health care and the majority choose the NHS. I had private insurance thru my company but I mostly preferred to use the NHS.
hauskalainen 5 months ago
@hauskalainen It's fair to say that British people complain about the NHS a lot... But that's because it's easy to complain about a service that you haven't directly paid for at the point of entry nor put insurance premiums into. Everyone pays taxes when they earn enough money, including me. I have no complaints where it comes to my treatment except in the areas of mental health provision, but even those who do complain agree that it's better than any alternatives that have been offered.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@hauskalainen Also, a lot of people tend not to complain about the American insurance system in much the same way as many Apple fanboys and Windows cultists don't complain about their chosen platform of choice... Loyalty to a platform they invested cash into, as well as in some cases, buyer's remorse. Those who can look at it objectively recognise the flaws and acknowledge them. In any case, there's no buyer's remorse with the NHS as it's paid for by contributions from everyone's paycheque.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@giponygirl This is the 3rd sock account of yours I've removed. This is also the last time I'm going to respond to you.
And I find it a bit rich you make your assertions given you had no response to my comments even AFTER you used a sock account.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FistOfChrist7 "Is the concept of integrity completely lost on you?"
When Libertarians and Randroids keep going over the same tired old ground and spout the same talking points despite having been refuted time and time again, I get tired of dealing with their horse shit. If you want to call that a lack of integrity, go right ahead.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FistOfChrist7 " I mean, you can't even give an honest definition of "quote-mine"."
What, you mean the act of taking a quote out of it's original context such that no-one who doesn't have the sense to follow up on it knows that it was not correctly cited?
You've got a set of balls telling me I don't know what Quote Mining is.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FistOfChrist7 " Is this what you do every time someone disagrees or admonishes you?"
Obviously not. Looking at all the comments on other videos will provide you with this answer.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FistOfChrist7 I get sick of seeing the same nonsense paraded time and time again from you people. Don't like it? That's fine.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@hugesinker "Are you willing to be the bigger man and admit your mistakes or continue to bleed from the anus? For your sake, I hope that anal bleeding can be treated in much less than 18 weeks."
And herein is your dishonesty shown for what it is. I have linked the stats that show the MAJORITY of treatments being treated within SINGLE FIGURE timeframes on average, with the MAJORITY of them STILL within 18 weeks, and you IGNORE it and make the same claim HE did. Go join his circle jerk.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@hugesinker "You've held up the NHS 'Bill of Rights' as some kind of gospel in an attempt to refute hard data which shows that these very 'rights' are being violated."
What, you mean the hard data that I presented in my video from the NHS itself, an organisation that is REQUIRED to publish ALL of it's data? Or the "hard data" that he presented from the Guardian NEWSPAPER? Which is it?
Face it. You two are cut from the same cloth, and are as dishonest as each other.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@hugesinker "You've falsely accused him of quote-mining without substantiation."
Quoting from the very same Guardian Newspaper article as though he is quoting the people referenced directly WITHOUT substantiating these quotes from their ORIGINAL sources IS quote mining. Sorry if you don't like that.
"You've said "citation needed" on points where the source for the remark is provided. "
This is an outright lie. He has NOT cited sources for the statements in question.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@hugesinker "So I just watched this video and Shane's rather thorough refutation of it on his podcast."
So thorough refutation means coming up with more massaged statistics like he did the first time he made his attack against the NHS, does it?
"However, you've misrepresented his positions in the most uncharitable and egregious ways possible here."
No I haven't. I've called him out on his dishonesty. Sorry if you don't like it.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
we don't have free market healthcare in the United States. We haven't ever had it.
modern medicine came about during the progressive era.
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 "we don't have free market healthcare in the United States. We haven't ever had it."
Not sure if you actually watched the video.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
Can anyone tell me who Mr Killian is? A user on youtube? thank you.
Theimmortalwhitewolf 6 months ago
@Theimmortalwhitewolf mr. killian is a libertarian. he has a youtube account called shanedk
he also has a podcast at bogosity(dot)podbean(dot)com/
he has responded to this video, and the argumentum ad hominems from this FSAthe1st guy
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 I ask because that voice at the being of the video sounded so similar( i watch a lot of evolution/renewable/other science type youtuber and i can't remember the user's name).
Theimmortalwhitewolf 6 months ago
@darris321 "he has responded to this video, and the argumentum ad hominems from this FSAthe1st guy"
You have now made an accusation that I have made ad hominem attacks. Please provide your evidence that I ONLY attacked his character and not his arguments.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st argumentum ad hominem doesn't require that you attack only the character, it requires that you attack the character.
it means arguing at man. there's no mention of "only" in the phrase. shanedk uses argumentum ad hominem too.
to answer your other comment, i have not yet watched the video because school has been really busy, it isn't usually my practice to comment without seeing the video, but i didn't expect the video to contradict the title.
i'll try to watch it tomorrow morning.
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 "argumentum ad hominem doesn't require that you attack only the character, it requires that you attack the character."
Wrong. An Ad Hominem argument consists of issuing an attack against a person making an argument INSTEAD OF addressing the argument itself.
"it isn't usually my practice to comment without seeing the video, but i didn't expect the video to contradict the title."
It doesn't. Had you watched, you'd know.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st
calm down, tiger. no one's attacking you. I already said I hadn't watched the video, I'll get to it, I promise.
I'm an unbiased observer, I'm not a killian lackey, I just listen to his podcast wherein he addressed attacks at the man (let me translate that into latin "argumentum ad hominem") which came from you.
I like how you just straight up tell me "Wrong."
do you do that in person? christ, that's rude.
darris321 6 months ago
@darris321 "calm down, tiger. no one's attacking you."
Who said anything about attacking me? I simply provided you with a definition for an Ad Hominem argument. Your attempt to twist the situation is noted.
"I already said I hadn't watched the video, I'll get to it, I promise."
I couldn't care less. You've demonstrated already that your opinion is meaningless to me.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@darris321 "I like how you just straight up tell me "Wrong."
do you do that in person? christ, that's rude."
I tell it like it is. You're wrong. If that offends you, I suggest you grow a thicker skin. End of story.
"I'm an unbiased observer, I'm not a killian lackey-"
I'll be the judge of that. Your conduct so far suggests otherwise.
"he addressed attacks at the man (let me translate that into latin "argumentum ad hominem") which came from you."
So now he's making up his own definition?
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FSAthe1st i wasn't offended by the idea that i'm wrong. i was just taken aback by the rudeness of just blaring 'WRONG' when someone says something you disagree with.
put yourself in the company of equals at a dinner and imagine everyone having a slightly heated discussion about politics and then ted in the corner just blurts "WROOONG! EERRNG! you're wrong!"
that's rude, whether or not he's calling it like he sees it.
darris321 5 months ago
@FSAthe1st my conduct suggests i'm a killian lackey? you've got some impressive mind reading skills, sir.
is there a reason you're referring to me in the third person?
that's not inventing a definition, that's translating a phrase.
if the majority decided that "sacerdote" in spanish means "whore, but only a whore who whores on saturdays"
that would not change the fact that "sacerdote" translates as "priest" and if I use it as such, it would be a perfectly valid usage.
darris321 5 months ago
@darris321 "my conduct suggests i'm a killian lackey? you've got some impressive mind reading skills, sir."
Mind reading skills? Hmm... It doesn't take mind reading skills to point out something so obvious as your conduct.
Oh... And FYI... Mind Reading is also pseudo-science.
Thank you for playing.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@darris321 "that's not inventing a definition, that's translating a phrase."
The rest of your verbiage does nothing to change the fact that your made up definition of Ad Hominem is incorrect. An Ad Hominem consists of issuing an attack against a person making an argument INSTEAD OF addressing the argument itself. I'm sorry if you don't like that.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FSAthe1st
you: "not sure you actually watched the video" "had you'd watched, you'd know"
me: "I already said I hadn't watched the video, I'll get to it, I promise."
you: "I couldn't care less..."
lol right, well forgive me for assuming you cared from your subtle pleas for me to watch it.
darris321 5 months ago
@darris321 "lol right, well forgive me for assuming you cared from your subtle pleas for me to watch it."
No. I will not.
Your egregious dishonesty is plain for all to see. This is why your opinion does not mean a damn to me.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
@FSAthe1st also
you: your opinion is meaningless to me
so stop responding... because these comments mean nothing
Your opinion doesn't mean nothing to me, i would like to learn your opinion, but so far you've only been putting me down and shrugging me off (and blurting wrong out like a child).
darris321 5 months ago
@darris321 "so stop responding... because these comments mean nothing"
You've got a set of balls telling me how to run my own channel.
FSAthe1st 5 months ago
A couple of points... the critics of socialized medicine like to point to waiting lists as though they don't exist here in the US as well. At the hospital where I work, there are two full-time orthopedic surgeons. Both of them have waiting lists that are over 2 months.
roentgen571 6 months ago
@roentgen571 second, people are often confused about the elective nature of some surgeries. Yes, hip replacements can be elective. If you have arthritis, for example, you need surgery to improve quality of life, but if that surgery happens today or week after next isn't going to make a big difference. But they can also be emergency surgeries--like in the case of a fall and broken hip. These need to be attended to ASAP.
roentgen571 6 months ago
@roentgen571 In the British system or in Canada, you might have to wait a few months for your arthritic hip replacement (you may well here in the US, too), but if you fall and break your hip, you're not going to be laying there for months waiting for that surgery.
roentgen571 6 months ago
@roentgen571 You've made some good points. I hope you don't mind that I've added them to the video description so that they don't get lost.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
One quick thing I want to note; The guardian newspaper in this case is unsourced in it's claims against the NHS. However the other day TJ (The Amazing Atheist) also linked a guardian newspaper report showing how well the NHS is doing compared to other countries. However it directly linked to a study by a more reliable source (The royal society of health, I think). So if a newspaper article has a more reliable source it's basing on, then it is more acceptable of evidence.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@Nightmare060 "The guardian newspaper in this case is unsourced in it's claims against the NHS."
That was one of the primary reasons I noted the fact that it was used as a source.
"So if a newspaper article has a more reliable source it's basing on, then it is more acceptable of evidence."
That wouldn't be unreasonable, although to be purist about it I might prefer to link to the underlying study... Only feasible if there's only one source, which often isn't the case with Wikis, for example.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Nightmare060 By the way, is your video up yet?
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st I've been putting it off because I've been experiencing some technical issues with my internet today. That and I know it will be swamped by Libertarian comments, so I needed a moment of relief from the stress. Although I will start putting the graphic on and upload it since I'm in a better state of mind to be arguing the points.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@Nightmare060 "I've been putting it off because I've been experiencing some technical issues with my internet today. That and I know it will be swamped by Libertarian comments, so I needed a moment of relief from the stress."
Know what you mean... I'm feeling burnt out by their nonsense lately myself.
I've updated the Standard Oil vid description with a link to a forum where they debated the issue. The conclusion (not accepted by the Libertarians of course) might cheer you up.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st I'll check it out, thanks :).
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st Although I do not agree with Mr.Killian on a free for all Health care system, the United States system and is discrepancies in this video are not elaborated. Do not take this as an attack on your credibility and I wish to keep this mature. You say 50 million are without health insurance, that figure is true but the context at which Universal health care proponent use it is misleading to say the least. Upon reading the United States Census Bureau's report on HC you'll come to find out
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st that ~10 million of those are illegal immigrants, in the US the census bureau is allowed to count them as a statisic. Another 10 million of those make over $250,000 a year and choose not to purchase insurance on the premise they can afford it without all the hassle of an insurance company's intervention. Another approx (7 million?) choose not to be covered over a period of 3 or so months and are able to be provided coverage at any given time.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st Even though our Universal Health Care plan will not engage until 2014, our current system is no where near as bad as some make it out to be. For instance: My mother just had a newborn, my father dropped her from his insurance for personal reasons (possible divorcee) so, at the time of labor the hospital did NOT turn her down for her needs. She received a C-section, and generic grade pain killers on medicare but is still waiting awaiting surgery for her abscess.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st Point being: Our doctors are very well trained, especially through our private practice system. Pharmaceutical drugs are relatively cheap, generic grade pain killers w/o insurance are able to be bought around $25 dollars for 2+ refills (dependent on the grade and strength of said drug.) No one is ever turned down, in this country illegals are given coverage absolutely free and the state pays for it. I'm staying with our private HC, that is if the company still exists.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 There's no argument about doctors being well trained in the US. However, the rest is arguable. HappyCabbie is linked in the info bar. He is one of a large number of people who cannot (not choose not to... Cannot) get proper treatment.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st Let's just admit that people in our system do in fact receive care, however on the opposite end, there are those waiting in line way too long for certain conditions. I had a friend up in Canada who had a spinal disorder and the problem only got worse with the waiting. So in 2005 Canada had to open itself up to privatization due to humanitarian laws because people were indeed suffering and some dying because of wait time. All I'm saying is, both systems have their problems.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "I had a friend up in Canada who had a spinal disorder and the problem only got worse with the waiting."
Anecdotal evidence doesn't wash with me. My video has already debunked the lies told by Mr Killian in this regard. Don't start the same tricks here.
"So in 2005 Canada had to open itself up to privatization due to humanitarian laws because people were indeed suffering and some dying because of wait time."
[Citation needed]
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st Lol, every time you put "citation needed" I kind of chuckled. A simple google search would appease you I'm sure. I don't recall saying how "long wait times and people got more ill or even possibly died as a result" is bastardizing your precious system. The whole point of our conversation was that people are not turned down for treatment, you keep asserting the claim he's thousands in debt. First, I gave you 4 options for pre-ex so you can't deny or debate those... they're real
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st He is grossly overweight (obviously) and a variety of his symptoms can only be treated (If you actually watched his videos, yes I sat through hours of his ER and doctor visits) by losing the weight and following a certain diet.. which in all has nothing to do his bills. Given he has decent credit, he'll pay them off eventually, but he NEEDS insurance. He should try to apply for the "High risk insurance pool" or w/e his state promotes.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st There are those whom do not receive treatment or coverage in our current system* is what I meant to say.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st HappyCabbie is diagnosed with a stage 4 liver disease known as cirrhosis. There is no cure because liver cells once damaged are damaged for good. He has hepiatic? cells I believe and all of this due to what I believe to attribute to his weight. If the liver is overloaded trying to filter out the body, it will damage itself and heal in the form of scar tissue, this is the cause of his illness. In his very own videos he's received treatment via the emergency room AND
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "HappyCabbie is diagnosed with a stage 4 liver disease known as cirrhosis. There is no cure because liver cells once damaged are damaged for good. "
That's not the point. He can't even get treatment for the SYMPTOMS associated with it. In the UK while no treatment exists for cirrhosis, you CAN get treatment to manage the SYMPTOMS. He cannot. He's not covered.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st You claim he cannot be "treatment" for his symptoms in the US, but can in the UK as a result of your HC system? First off, nations with socialized medicine are not nearly advanced as those with privatized medicine (more money = more pharmaceutical research and better medical machinery.) In the UK he would be told the same thing. The doctors are not going to have him pay for medicine that would not do anything at this stage of his liver damage, don't you see now? Only
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st can treat himself with exercise and a fixed diet. You made it out as if in the US people are left to die on the streets, that is wrong and happycabbie proves it. He has bills yeah, but who doesn't? If he tries to follow one of the four options available in all 50 states, he'll receive insurance lol.. period point blank. He probably qualifies for SSDI, but like I said I don't know exactly for sure.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "You made it out as if in the US people are left to die on the streets"
Sorry, I never said that, and it's dishonest of you to claim I did. I STATED very clearly, that 50 million people are uninsured, WHICH IS TRUE, and that as a consequence they have to weigh up whether to seek treatment and end up with huge debts or take their chances away from modern medicine.
Nothing you've said here changes that in any way, shape, or form.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "In his very own videos he's received treatment via the emergency room-"
And subsequently has thousands of dollars in medical debt as a consequence.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st a simple visit to the doctor where he receives his biopsy results. About the infection on this thighs, he received treatment as well. He was given morphine, a rectal exam, told what to do to quell the infection, and was administered perocet.. all while being uninsured? Yup, like I said.. in the US.. you are always given treatment. He does need insurance, since he is self-employed I do not know if he qualifies for SSDI or early medicare benefits. There are 4 other options given
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "a simple visit to the doctor where he receives his biopsy results."
Which costs him 1000 dollars each time.
"all while being uninsured? Yup, like I said.. in the US.. you are always given treatment. "
And billed for it each and every time. And no, just because SOME people continue to receive treatment doesn't mean you get to claim EVERYONE received treatment. That's simply not true.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st to him for pre-existing conditions and those who cannot be denied coverage. Not only does the HIIPA law protect him for being denied, he is given 4 other options dependent in the state to which he currently resides in. If he has a corporate tax ID, he is allowed to purchase a small group health insurance policy. 35 states in the US provide enrollment into what is called a "High risk insurance pool." and receive treatment for pre-existing conditions. If he resides in one of the
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "he is given 4 other options dependent in the state to which he currently resides in."
And this by you is proper medical treatment, is it? To try to navigate a system that functions as a kludge to patch holes that exist in the Corporatist model currently in existence?
You talk about bastardisation by the media of Healthcare in the US while hypocritically making bastardization claims against Canadian and UK Healthcare. Really?
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st 10 states that sponsor an individual market guaranteed issue mandate, he is guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions from one of the several insurers in said state. 45 states issue guaranteed INDIVIDUAL (He claims he is single) coverage for pre-existing conditions. The other 5 sponsor a small group policy for coverage. As you see.. people with pre-ex are not just shit out of luck like people say.. our HC system is among the best in the world and is bastardized by the media.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "As you see.. people with pre-ex are not just shit out of luck like people say."
[Citation needed]
"our HC system is among the best in the world and is bastardized by the media."
Simply not true.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st You also tell me you don't wish for anecdotes but you'll use an anecdote alluding to happycabbie and send me there? The only difference between my story is that he doesn't happen to have a youtube channel with his hospital visits -.-. If I can't use anecdotes, then happycabbie is out of the question because you used the same thing.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "You also tell me you don't wish for anecdotes but you'll use an anecdote alluding to happycabbie and send me there?"
He has experience in dealing with the US Healthcare system, which brings me to...
"The only difference between my story is that he doesn't happen to have a youtube channel with his hospital visits "
Try looking harder. ALL of his hospital visits and everything he has been through with the US healthcare system is documented ON HIS CHANNEL.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st Yes, in this country you actually need to pay for your health care -.- I know we're such terrible people. If all fails, apply for medicare/medicaid, hell we even have tricare for those in the armed forces. I guess it's easier to just rely on the government and other people's tax dollars to treat you. The wait times... the bureaucracies.. sounds like bliss.
LunarPoetry473 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "Yes, in this country you actually need to pay for your health care -.- I know we're such terrible people."
Yes that IS a terrible thing, and I stand by that. Sorry if you think it's something of a joke.
"If all fails, apply for medicare/medicaid, hell we even have tricare for those in the armed forces."
Or you could have one system that covers EVERYONE.
That's a hell of a novel idea, isn't it?
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "The wait times... the bureaucracies.. sounds like bliss."
The lies, the dishonesty... So moral of you. I've already addressed this nonsense in THIS VIDEO. Clearly you haven't actually bothered to get your facts straight and are just interested in mouth-farting your talking points, so you can go do it elsewhere.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@LunarPoetry473 "If I can't use anecdotes, then happycabbie is out of the question because you used the same thing. "
You claim your own personal experience is representative of the standard of Healthcare over the entirety of the US. HappyCabbie's experience stands in direct contrast to this. I too have had to deal with the US Healthcare system and I would NEVER sacrifice the NHS for either that, OR the Free Market idea.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
Uh, this video started out well, but it just nosedived at the end.
FSAthe1st, you don't really get the profit motive, do you?
If a healthcare company provides good services to its customers over its competition, and saves thousands of lives in the process, should it not get more money to expand its operation and therefore extend that same level of service to more people?
Non-profit businesses are great, but they cannot expand their services because they don't have the leftover profit for it.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "If a healthcare company provides good services to its customers over its competition, and saves thousands of lives in the process, should it not get more money to expand its operation and therefore extend that same level of service to more people?"
You people continue to look at it from the perspective of Economics. I look at it from the POV of ETHICS. Please address MY arguments rather than presenting your own economic arguments...
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st "I look at it from the POV of ETHICS."
Ethics are fine, but you cannot simply dodge the question of economics when you bring up profit motive when profits are about economics. The real questions you should be asking are about voluntary charities or other charitable services that don't require the use of force as their funding. Namely you cannot make an argument of ethics when you advocate for an institution that takes it's money (taxes) by the use of force or threat of imprisonment.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "Ethics are fine, but you cannot simply dodge the question of economics when you bring up profit motive when profits are about economics."
And as I've repeatedly said to you people... HEALTHCARE SHOULDN'T BE ABOUT PROFITS. Furthermore, MORE is spent per capita in the US system at the moment than is spent in the UK (despite the fact that care is comparable for those who CAN get coverage, and 50 million can't), which puts paid to the nonsense that Government "intervention" costs more.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Dirge987 I have no issue with companies making profits, but I'd object to Police forces or Fire Departments making profits like a Business if they tried to do it, and I object to the Healthcare Industry in America doing the same thing. We used to do it here in the UK. That's why the NHS exists here now, because the Private Sector WASN'T WORKING.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "Non-profit businesses are great, but they cannot expand their services because they don't have the leftover profit for it."
And this is irrelevant, because I'm not arguing FOR non-profit business. I'm arguing FOR Government-managed healthcare. There's a DIFFERENCE. The government puts ALL of the money that comes from its collection of National Insurance contributions that doesn't go to State Pensions and Non-Means-Tested Unemployment benefits INTO the NHS. None of it goes to profit.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Dirge987 as a consequence, the Government can allocate additional resources when necessary into the NHS to expand its' services when, for example, hospitals need maintenance and/or a new hospital needs to be built. The profit run business model is not required to allow this kind of expansion.
But again, I'm not arguing from an Economics perspective. If I WERE, and I was ONLY concerned with the Economics of the situation, then I TOO might be arguing FOR Free Market HC, but I'm not.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st If you want MY take on ethics, government healthcare is immoral, because like any immoral act the government forces people against their will into the service, or uses violence to take money to pay for the service. Intent does not justify the means. If it were such a moral venture to give everyone healthcare, then the government wouldn't need to force people into it, or to pay for it.
But that's just my take on it.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "If you want MY take on ethics, government healthcare is immoral, because like any immoral act the government forces people against their will into the service, or uses violence to take money to pay for the service."
Sorry, but you've just lost me. Another nut who thinks that it's OK to use emotional appeals to suggest that the government is evil and bad and "Oh noes! They use FORCE!" and all that other frankly batshit fucking insanity.
Take your nonsense elsewhere you psycho.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@4:25
Anarchist, really? I am an anarchist and I don't think you know what that word entails.
@7:15
If you're going to say someone's quote mining, actually show it with evidence please, i.e. show the original context, not just imply one.
@8:36
Free market does not mean free-for-all. Private regulation can and does happen. See scientific peer review as a functioning example.
@9:50
You do not mention that low demand lowers prices.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987
15:00 is simply a blatant straw man. I currently accept the idea of the free market, and you're willing to disagree with me, but do so based on the ideas themselves, and not your preconceived notions.
A free market can and does have regulation. Look at the peer review process. Scientific peer review has such a wide influence, polices itself with acceptable efficiency, and requires no government oversight.
Private regulation, like peer review, can function in the healthcare industry.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "A free market can and does have regulation."
And who enforces it? And what metric is used for determining which private regulatory body (of which any number of them can exist, ALL of which can have conflicting standard if they're unmonitored) actually has the correct methodology for determining the correct level of regulation? And in the end, THEY are ALSO looking to make money.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st "And who enforces it?.... And in the end, THEY are ALSO looking to make money."
Every question and response you make here could be used to describe how the peer review process doesn't work, only that it does. No central body is needed because every private regulator has their reputation on the line, and there is no profit in peer review. A perfect example of this is the Underwriter's Labs. If you turn over your mouse you should see their logo. They're a private non-profit regulator.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "Every question and response you make here could be used to describe how the peer review process doesn't work, only that it does."
Scientific Analysis is based off of research and development. Scientists are in their chosen field for the SCIENCE. Health Insurance companies are in it for PROFIT. There is NO comparison. Why are you people unable to see this crucial point?
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "A perfect example of this is the Underwriter's Labs. If you turn over your mouse you should see their logo."
Mine has the CE logo, a European standards body. And a mouse is a completely different proposition to someone getting HEALTHCARE. You people KEEP DELIBERATELY MISSING THE POINT.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "Anarchist, really? I am an anarchist and I don't think you know what that word entails."
Get the government out of it. That's what I see. Government BAD!
Fuck sakes.
"If you're going to say someone's quote mining, actually show it with evidence please, i.e. show the original context, not just imply one."
So you're saying that he HASN'T quote mined the literature?
"Free market does not mean free-for-all. Private regulation can and does happen."
But it's not enforcable.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st "Get the government out of it. That's what I see. Government BAD!"
If that's the way you see it, then that's how you see it, but you miss the nuances of anarchistic thinkers and the reasons why government is seen the way it is. And to clarify, Shane is not an anarchist, he's a minarchist; I AM an anarchist. You used the term incorrectly as a buzz word to illicit a response from your viewers in the same way a creationist uses the word theory.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "Shane is not an anarchist, he's a minarchist"
He's an asshole who calls everyone who disagrees with him a liar and a Creationist or a Moon Hoaxer. Anything else he might have a view on is irrelevant next to that point. He'd get more people to listen to him if he weren't such a jackass.
"You used the term incorrectly as a buzz word to illicit a response from your viewers in the same way a creationist uses the word theory."
Strike 1 for telling me how I think.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st "So you're saying that he HASN'T quote mined the literature?"
I have not seen evidence that he has, since instead of providing evidence, you provided only an assertion. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you haven't convinced me.
Dirge987 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "I have not seen evidence that he has, since instead of providing evidence, you provided only an assertion."
Wrong. The Guardian ARTICLE that HE LINKED in his OWN Podcast is all the evidence that is needed to demonstrate that he is quoting FROM said article, but he has NOT attributed his quotes TO the article, but ONLY to the people who are thus quoted within. This gives the impression he has sourced them DIRECTLY when he has done no such thing. THAT is also Quote Mining.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@Dirge987 "You do not mention that low demand lowers prices."
Run that one by me again? I just want to make sure you're actually saying this.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
When my mother was diagnosed with luekaemia in 2008, she received the finest care imaginable. I was present at several of her consultations and was supremely impressed by the level of care. But of course they were British doctors and nurses, and they're the best.
geffel 6 months ago
I like Shane but he's libertarian, so that rather colours everything he says.
Those of us that have lived in societies with NHS systems are well aware that they are invaluable. Those of us that have lived in NHS systems and then experienced the American system know that the American system is a piece of shit poorly regulated, and the cost of insurance is obscene, assuming they'll even cover you in the first place.
geffel 6 months ago
@9:51 confuses me because... although in Canada we have government paid "health care", individual clinics are still set up with MRI's or PET scans, ect... They do in fact have waiting lists even for those although they are privately run and publicly funded.
I don't see the concern with volume production when it's very scientific. Basically all results are reported in the same manner. Each scan is done the same way depending on the need.
TammyFlores1 6 months ago
@TammyFlores1 9:51 basically rebuffs the argument by Free Market Evangelists that it's cheaper to provide higher levels of technology if you just stop the Government from regulating its' development. I point out that these machines are not going to be mass produced on such large scales because hospitals don't need to install so many physical units.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st "Free Market" does not benefit the masses... agreed... There has to be a balance between government regulation and development. There is alot of improvement to be had on that front.
I so am not in this field, however, I dated a doctor whose field was Nuclear Medicine. There is way too much protectionism within respective fields that prevent progress/development as well. This is an important factor that is overlooked sometimes.
TammyFlores1 6 months ago
In Canada... we have large wait times as well, but we are supposed to be "fair" and can't "buy" our way out of it. Some would argue that's unacceptable and go else where and others want a fair playing field.
TammyFlores1 6 months ago
The time between moving out of my parents home to go to college, and until I was hired for a permanent position that provided access to health insurance was about 4 years. That meant I didn't see an optometrist or Dentist for four years, meaning I had about 6 cavities and a pair of glasses that gives me headaches because the prescription was out of date. I'll take a max wait of 18 weeks over 4 years...
loveofphysics 6 months ago
It seems LordThawkeye has made a response to this video. I haven't watched it late because of the time, but it was entitled "Fail quote of August" and seems to be some red herring about the government willingly accepting bribes. I will have a stab at it tomorrow myself, but it just continues to prove the dogma of these people.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@Nightmare060 "I will have a stab at it tomorrow myself, but it just continues to prove the dogma of these people."
If you feel up to it, great. I want to take a break from the subject for a while myself, but if you make a response, let me know so I can watch it.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@FSAthe1st The whole video was basically picking at a straw-man based on a quote mine, since he still hasn't watched more than 1 minute of the video. My rebuttal shall be up soon!
Nightmare060 6 months ago
I haven't been able to afford a doctor's visit in 12 years. I'll take a broken system with an 18 week wait over what I've got now.
spazfox 6 months ago
Very well done, FSAthe1st! I still have some sympathy with Shane Kilian because of his tragic past experiences and his videos on other subjects. But as soon as a topic is in proximity of libertarian talking points (as federal reserve or health care), shanedk seems to switch to automatic (paraprasing BionicDance) and doesn't think for himself.
I've been thankful of German public health care repeatedly. It's imperfect, all right, but no one needs to die a preventable death.
virumoz 6 months ago
Im a libertarian, but not so hardcore as some of them. I understand by talking to canadians and other europeans that their system works, so i might be ok with some kind of public option as long as people can opt out. You can't force people to pay for someone elses healthcare. But really I don't even care anymore both parties suck cock and I couldn't give a damn if America goes to hell.
skeptictom818 6 months ago
@skeptictom818 Well in most countries with UHC, the government either provides health insurance as an option or has most of it payed through taxes. In the UK, you pay for your taxes and thus fund the NHS. So in the event of an emergency, you will be taken to the nearest hospital (usually an NHS one) and money will be no objective. So from my point of view "Forcing" people to pay taxes means they will never be out of pocket and thus is more ethical than a privatized system.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@skeptictom818 (cont) That being said, I do also agree with private health insurance being an option for those that can afford it. And I also understand that countries like Japan have mostly privatized but also strictly controlled systems. To the best of my knowledge, they will offer to cover a particular excess or give an option for the poorest people so everyone is fairly covered. If a system like that can be fair and work out, I don't have a huge problem with it. I just prefer NHS systems.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
Free Market Healthcare works if cost is not an issue. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the rich would pay much more for a private doctor because he is the best in the country. But for those of us unlucky enough to not be rich we need affordable healthcare and that should be a common good.
MacabreManifesto 6 months ago
I unsubbed to Shane after his stupid rant on this subject, and his stance against UHC as a whole. It was about the last thing I could take from that pompous muppet voiced git.
ScottishAtheist 6 months ago
Comment removed
ScottishAtheist 6 months ago
At times i get the suspicion that these people agitate against universal health care because they don't have it and are lashing out, out of misplaced jealousy. But I guess some of them actually believe what they are spreeing.
1stCainite 6 months ago
FINALLY!
Regrettably, a lot of people who support universal health care seem to argue rather lazily (presumably because they see it as a self-evidently good thing that requires no defence). As a result, I've found myself not knowing how to respond to the criticisms presented by libertarians such as shanedk.
Thank you very much for addressing these. It's one of the best pro-UHC videos I've ever seen, and, regrettably, one of only a few good ones :( .
KingsIndianCR 6 months ago
Oh, and I've subbed. About time someone on youtube defended Universal healthcare. :)
Drgamedood 6 months ago
I'm actually a fan of shanedk. This is probably the only area where i disagree with him. It surprises me that he would misrepresent data, when he usually criticizes creationists for doing the same with evolution.
Drgamedood 6 months ago
@Drgamedood I used to be subbed to ShaneDK for that very reason. He gave some fantastic videos on psudo-science, creationism and even the war on drugs which I started to think about. But after he went on and misrepresented the NHS as well as push his free market BS I just couldn't take it anymore. He doesn't seem to be interested in science or clear facts anymore; only his dogmatic political opinion.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@Nightmare060 Meh, I wouldn't unsubb him. He might still make evolution or other science videos. :)
Drgamedood 6 months ago
@Drgamedood I've honestly seen him make maybe 1 science video in the past few months. If that.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
I live in the UK and went to my GP because I thought my heartbeat felt a bit too thumpy for my liking. No thinking - is this going to cost me? I got seen within a couple of days, an ECG the following week, full blood tests, the works. Total cost to me. Zero.
Turns out everything was normal, but I can go back and have further tests if I still think something is wrong. If I had to worry about finances like people in the US, I'd probably wait till I had a heart attack first.
ralph17p 6 months ago 2
I fully agree with this video. Over here in the Czech Republic we have universal healthcare written in our constitution. Despite problems with state-run hospitals, the insurance system as such works pretty much flawlessly and we have for instance a record low infant mortality rate. Insurance companies put out ads and provide benefits concerning healthy lifestyles and money is almost never an issue when visiting the doctor. Don't know what they're missing over there.
8DX 6 months ago
(PS: plus we have very long GP waiting times in my country, I sometimes have to wait like 3 HOURS in the morning to get cough pills from my GP when the flu season comes round. If I don't take a book it's AGONIZING. JK of course there are waiting times for some treatment but the biggest problems are with waiting times on complex operations or where there is a limited number of specialists or for non-crucial treatment (dentists, opticians). Life-threatening illnesses get immediate attention.)
8DX 6 months ago
Mr Killian Is sick, shame he does not have the NHS to help him.
SCL0PS 6 months ago
It makes me sick that the idiots who keep trying to put the NHS down, are almost always those ignorant bastards that have had no real first hand dealings with the NHS.
When I found out I have throat cancer, I had my biopsy in 4 days. 4 DAYS!
I have had 2 massive accidents and in both cases I was taken and given great service, sure I can find niggles, but Im not a cunt. The NHS are perhaps the best service in the world, only held back by low funding.
FatRakoon 6 months ago
@FatRakoon Main problem is that they dismiss any first hand accounts as anecdotal evidence. Which it technically is, but often when they are making claims about how the NHS is run they tend to neglect how the VAST majority of patients are happy and know how the system runs after living in said country for 20+ years usually. Plus a 90% approval of the NHS should be indication that it's doing something right and that we should look further on how it's satisfying people.
Nightmare060 6 months ago
Anarchism isn't a great ideology when you go into heavy details but to be honest you can always take something from the odd ideology like communism to facism there is some good in either
childofreletivity 6 months ago
@childofreletivity This is one reason I classify my position as centre left. It's all to easy to be blinded by the positives of any extreme political ideology. With Libertarians, they tend to not understand how healthcare choice is not comparable with buying a loaf of bread!
Nightmare060 6 months ago
@Nightmare060 I believe in snippits of all left ideologies but I put idea's of Communism and Imperialism it goes together in some aspects to be honest
childofreletivity 6 months ago
well done. PWND mr. Killian as the lying sack of dishonest shite he is
Vogter616 6 months ago
The NHS probably saved my life 2 weeks ago. I was awake all night with growing stomach pains, finally throwing up at around 8 in the morning. I phoned my GP at 8.30 and told them that I was on erythromycin and had begun to be sick. By the time I got to the clinic I'd been sick at least 10 times in 3 hours. My GP moved other appointments to take me earlier and an ambulance take me to a hospital surgical ward. I was alone at the time. If I'd had to wait I might have been in trouble
tammyscotland 6 months ago
USA #1 for health spending #36th for life expectancy #34th for infant mortality
even if you don't agree with social health schemes you can't deny that the US system isn't working, I've visited the US a number of times and the one thing that always surprises me is how little altruism them have for each other when it comes to health matters
Redshift21 6 months ago
As someone with a brain tumor I can honestly say with out the universal health care in Canada I'd quite literally be dead since I would not be able to afford my medical bills or work.
stellybellyboo 6 months ago
I still didn't see much on the topic of the history of British health care..you once claimed it was free market but didn't work out. Can you direct me to your sources for that claim? Thanks.
rockandrock44 6 months ago
@rockandrock44 I've just added a source in the info bar. Thanks for reminding me.
It's arguable whether it was truly a free market system, but it certainly wasn't one run by large corporations and/or government.
FSAthe1st 6 months ago
@rockandrock44 Well, it wasn't so much a free market, but you did have to pay and how you paid would be similar to how lawyers work today, the better or more respected a doctor the more you would pay. Same for hospitals. But bear in mind the NHS was started in 1948, so it was a long time ago now. The same reluctance you are seeing now in America is the same thing that happened here. Cries of socialism and such. Google 'NHS timeline' and 'before the NHS' for some good info.
biggingeryeti 6 months ago
I liked his creationist videos but the first time I saw a video from him on another subject I really noticed "He talks big but understands nothing"
On another note: I am from a country with universal healthcare
Is it costing a lot? Yes
Does it have flaws? Yes
Does it need fixing? Sure
Do I want to get rid of it? HELL NO
It's complicated and doesn't make profit but it's necessary and it's worth making it work EVEN at high costs
RazielKain 6 months ago
Well that's 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back. First off, this is a state issue, not a federal issue. Even if it wasn't, theres no reason to believe some bureaucrat knows what is best for everyone better then they do or should have the right to make decisions for them. No one is arguing for an "unregulated" health care system, just that governemnt is far to incompetent to be the one to regulate it, let alone, take it over completely.
Houshalter 6 months ago
@Houshalter You can't seriously expect private companies to regulate themselves though. The government can regulate by placing laws in place and fallow through with routine inspections, to give the consumer the power to deal with companies that are dishonest. Simply throwing out weasel words doesn't make your argument any more valid. Besides, systems such as the NHS in the UK and Canada's healthcare system have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to work in favour of the customer.
Nightmare060 6 months ago