The Americans DO NOT have the best healthcare system in the world. DO NOT. Bill Clinton has said it as well as most of the world. It is not free market it's like a sort of hybrid which doesn't match the European style which is much better which covers everybody, nor is it purely free market as you guys spend 19% of revenue on healthcare, more then the UK which spends 9%, pick one, either is better then what you have now
Shikha is greedy business woman who wants to make money on our misery. The Japanese have the cheapest healthcare in the world, they are the healthiest and longest living people in the world, they see their doctors 12 times more than Americans. Too many FILTHY GREEDY RICH PEOPLE in America that are getting richer from our pain, AND ITS NOT RIGHT, give EVERYONE FREE medical and raise taxes for the FILTHY rich. We all know that's what it has to come down to, they've had a free ride far too long,
healthcare reform? they wont even legalize weed and you expect them to abolish the insurance companies that make massive profits off the sick and dying proletairiat? if theres going to be any REAL change in amerikka heres the majic word: revolution. stop asking for change and start demanding it.
I would have to agree with the big lady on the fact that the private insurance does control everything about the patient's needs. I've seen this happen several times, but most of the time it's whether the drug is in the formulary list or whether it's covering brand name drugs. However, I would like to see everyone have some type of national health care. Poor people in my area don't have money for anything let alone some expensive drugs.
I would like Ms. Dalmiya to relfect upon the issue of health care in the context of Democracy. If Democracy is a system where every person should get every opportunity to develop his/her unique abilities irrespective of race, religion and class; then how can a person strive to develop his abilities when he has no healthy body? Is it not similar to asking a paraplegic to compete in 100m sprint?
i must say there is good reason to be concerned about being forced to have medical insurance. what comes next? probably forced medications, forced operations, and more forced vaccinations
RealNews, questions for next time- for Shikha: how do government laws make healthcare more expensive, as is the typical libertarian view (specific examples would be nice) how was US healthcare system (in terms of affordability, etc) before medicare and many current programs-did poor people "just die"? to Donna: if healthcare is a right, then shouldn't I have the right to choose what I receive, what about choice? What if my version of healthcare includes things not "universally" covered?
@judd73 then you just pay for the things "not universally covered", just like you do now - you can simply purchase a voluntary private plan to cover the additional "things"... and these plans will be much cheaper than now, because the insurance companies would actually have to compete, while currently can simply scare people into buying
@sdomas My point is what if I can't afford those "additional things"- what if those that I can't afford and aren't covered by universal health insurance, are also very important to me? Healthcare is such a personal thing- You see if healthcare is a right, but I have no choice in what form that healthcare takes, then it's not really much of a right is it? Or perhaps it's only the "right" to catastrophic coverage....What am I missing?
@judd73 then you just pay for the things "not universally covered", just like you do now - you can simply purchase a voluntary private plan to cover the additional "things"... and these plans will be much cheaper than now, because the insurance companies would actually have to compete, while currently can simply scare/force people into buying
Like most libertarians she made sense for about 5 or 10 seconds. Only when you take the thought a little further down the road she exposes herself as the myopic, one track ideologue that they all are.
Also anyone who uses 'Obamacare' doesn't really deserve to be listened to. It makes them sound ignorant.
Free market health care doesn't work in an Oligarchy. End point. This Indian woman is a fucking corporate stool pidgeon talking about "ENDING EMPLOYER BASED HEALTH CARE" among other things.
I love that this nurse actually knows what she is talking about.
more libertarian drivel from Shikha Dalmia. Hey - if a private insurance system is so great- why is the US the ONLY developed country in the world to have one? Isnt the problem that most people cant afford insurance anymore because the companies have to make profits and have a return on capital and therefore most people cannot actually gain access to "shopping around" for healthcare - its a rubbish system that is cruel,unfeeling and vindictive.. get rid of it now
Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care... thats my argument. Free market works always!
It has been too obvious to me that Shikha and the libertarians had no idea what they are talking about. Really, I was never so clear. They had one tool to fix al problems and it doesnt work, they dont even look at reality.
Yikes! All we need to do is look at the systems of national healthcare in Australia and Taiwan. State of the art, everyone is covered, half the cost of the USA. The people and business love there love their healthcare systems. But we need to spend all our money on military until the county goes completely broke..
Man, I had hard a time listening to that lady after she said Obamacare. That's like saying, "Hey get ready I'm about to engage in ideological rhetoric."
We have Medicare in Australia and that is publicly funded and delivered by the public service which is apolitical.
I guess you could say its close to the Canadian model.
Everyone pays for Medicare through taxes. Not too much different then paying insurance premiums really except the profit motive is non-existent. The 'shareholders' are the public.
And I can guarantee NOBODY is complaining about the country 'going broke' from funding Medicare.
Why is our side so polite? Why doesn't Donna just speak the hard cold truth. Health care is a right and the opposition is just lying through their teeth to pacify their paymasters.
Also the comments about the "diamond-studded" libertarian here is interesting. If you saw her boss at Reason magazine, Nick Gillespie, he's one of most blue collar-looking dudes around. Search "How to Fix Health Care: Lasik Surgery For The Medical Debate"- you'll see. Also a good case for free market reforms is made in the article "What's Really Wrong with the Health Care Industry" by Vijay Boyapati. The Indian woman doesn't get to state the case here with the same kind of detail.
The libertarian debater gave misleading and even inaccurate information while repeatedly mischaracterizing the position of the other. What is the point of a debate in which one party utterly lacks sincerity? It is a waste of time, except perhaps to showcase the fact that the corporate apologists are simply allergic to the truth.
I thought it was a very nice talk. One believe the system can be fixed and made bigger while the other is advocating a fresh start and good competition. I understand the Liberal view I just do not think it will work.
In Finland we have both social heakthcare and private. Everybody pays dues through taxes and the doctor tells you what care you need, sending you to specialists. If you are in a rush, do not want to wait in line, you go to a private doctor and pay through the nose. In social care there are always lines to surgery, that have to be constantly modified as the more lifethreatening cases have to be operated on first.
Private Insurance corps making recovery rates & thus themselves look unjustifiably good, by not treating poor people, is, Shikha, what the conversation is about.
Patients do get a choice in systems like the UK's, private is still there as an option for those who want it.
Private patients in the UK get perks, nicer rooms, nose jobs etc., they saved up for it, etc, seems fine.. but they do not suck away resources from the the tax payer for bonuses or ads, hype & other 'innovations'.
My inner Robin Hood wants to snatch that necklace off Cruella D'Evil and give it to the homeless families living in old cars in my city. Many of them live like that because of medical bills.
Why was it necessary to bring on a "libertarian." Her ignorance of the fact that every other industrialized country has a form of universal healthcare should have disqualified her from this debate. "No free Lunches in the World?" Give me a break. With this logic, she would want to live in corporate tyranny. There's nothing "free" about the economic system she advocates, unless she means corporations are free to exploit us.
@woostopalypse Well, some free market proponent keep dissing TheRealNews as too liberaly bias. Get a libertarian on and show that reality has a liberals bias.
@moestietabarnak If free market advocates are dissing The Real News, you know you are on the right track to finding the truth. Like I said, free market advocates don't support free markets. They support an oligarchy that exploits the poor.
When one asks a "free market" advocate how do you stop the rich from exploiting the poor, they have no solution besides "that's the way it is." I'm sorry, but that's news worthy, nor is it being truth to power. It's being an apologist for power.
@woostopalypse actually I know I am also on the right track when I ask what if universal coverage doesn't cover what I want, and how can it provide for everything without rationing care, and I get no answer from the progressives here. And when government exploits the poor by stifling competition and driving costs up, or favoring certain corporations, ie. unleveling the playing field (distorting the market) and exploiting us all? This is when the big government advocate usually gets real mute.
@judd73 Your ignorance of single payer is obvious. First, the government does not interfere with private hospitals or private drugs. The government creates a pool where everyone has access to these hospitals and drugs for free or a small fee.
Second, The US has the highest health care costs per capita, more than any other single payer country.
Third, Single Payer does not have to be big government. Canada's health care isn't big government; it was enacted province by province.
@woostopalypse #1 no, but it favors drugs, by subsidizing the purchase of them. What if I couldn't give a shit about pharmaceutical drugs, and prefer a less "allopathic" treatment? (let's say, herbs, and certain therapies for hypertension, instead of a drug, just for example) will the government cover that? I doubt it. So what good it is it to me? #2 Shikha made the point, mostly ignored, that our current healthcare is not good. She also stated how SP countries' costs are rising. (cont'd)
(cont'd) Donna and Paul Jay contend that the *rate* of rising costs are less in SP countries than the US, but isn't it disingenuous to use the current US system as a strawman when it's not even what Shikha's advocating? #3 so you're saying a province could nullify it, as in reject single payer alltogether? As you can see in the news, many states aren't crazy about Obama's plan. Is it not still big government, though if every province or state is *required* to provide some form of healthcare?
@judd73 1) The subsidizing you speak of is the same as what we do to milk. It will keep costs of drugs affordable. Do private insurance companies cover herbs and alternative treatments? Hell, they can't even provide basic coverage. Are you sure you want to argue this?
2) Yes, our healthcare is not good because we have a large private sector that fails to help the sick. She did say that about increase costs. But Jay corrected her and said that costs are no where near the US, which is true.
@woostopalypse nice circular argument about favoring subsidization of drugs over alternatives. And I don't agree with subsidizing milk either, so no appeal there. There are endless advances in technology with flat tv's, cellphones, etc. with zero subsidies, yet the price always comes down thanks to the evil market- medicine in a free market will be affordable. #2 . it had to do with the rate of increase, in which case the SP countries are rising faster. Jay and the guest never disputed that.
@judd73 Flat screen TV's and cellphones do receive subsidies. In fact, Japan is well known for providing generous subsidies their electronic manufacturers. France has single payer and covers alternative medicines. There is no reason why we could not do the same.
That's a flawed argument. The US has double the spending per capita than Canada (8000 to 3000). Lets say Canada costs are increasing 5% every year and the US is increasing 1%. It would take Canada over 50 years to catch up to the US!
@woostopalypse that tax or subsidy is eaten by the Japanese and not by American citizens, and these products still compete in the marketplace with other countries and manufacturers. No one is forced to buy them. So in your opinion, why are healthcare costs rising at such a high rate in Canada and other SP countries? What happens 50 years from now? My concern is you'll have high unemployment and sovereign debt crises by covering everything, or you have shortages/rationing.
@woostopalypse also we're seeming to argue 2 separate arguments. You and others are comparing SP countries' healthcare to that of the US, as if to say there is support for the current US system- a strawman as said long ago. There is no free market in healthcare now, and one only need to look to the past as to how cheaper HC was to the average person. You've revived this debate after 4 months, and right now I don't wish to continue- maybe in another 4 months I'll return the favor :)
@judd73 Universal Healthcare also operates in a market place, the hospitals can remain private The coverage is covered by the government. There is already rationing of health care in the US. 50 million uninsured people. That's far worse rationing than having to wait in line longer (which studies have shown is the same or only slightly longer).
omg why is this still an issue? Of course the US government medical policy is abysmal and of course the western countries have the means to sustain extremely efficient medical systems for everyone. Of course the elite doesn't want that to happen. The only question is when are you gonna get down the streets to demonstrate and ask for it?
Unfortunately, I see a lot of people who've never been kicked while their down, putting largely worthless ideals in front of human beings. The major problem with extreme libertarian thought is that people and companies simply cannot be trusted to be moral actors w/o law. Many libertarians like to make believe they sprang fully formed and awesome via force of will. . . . bullshit. Libertarian philosophy is selfish and naive.
Geeze that Dalmia Woman not even two minutes in is pissing me off. And like furseiseki in the highest rated comments pointed out. WHAT THE F is with the necklace.
thank you RN for showing us a discussion on the issue unlike fake new that only give 2 minute arguments between uneducated but highly opinionated ppl on the issue! Everybody pls donate!!
I think I'll distance myself from any common ground with the yuppie, diamond-encrusted conservative who has the gull to assert that capitalism somehow innately embodies the "laws of economics."
You guys are idiots. God help your girlfriends or wives or any other unfortunate woman in your life, if that necklace looks like diamonds to you. As I have already told that jerk fursickly, if you ever stepped out of your cosy little American hick town and travel to the East, you'll get these trinkets for peanuts from roadside shops. (It is silver, btw.)
Respond to this video...Also, it is "gall" not "gull." Latter is a bird, former means chutzpah or cheekiness. You don't know birds or words or jewelry, but we are supposed to take your sentiments about health care seriously. Shut the f....k up!
@TunakTunak1000 Oh, my bad. You're right, it is gall. I'll also take you on your word about the necklace being silver. I now happily redact and revise my previous comment below. Feel free to start taking me seriously.
I think I'll distance myself from any common ground with the yuppie, silver-laden conservative who has the gall to assert that capitalism somehow innately embodies the "laws of economics."
My girlfriend is a nurse, in mom-baby, and I would strongly suggest listening to people at the point of contact and live it instead of the videoscreen lady just talking it with theories and rhetoric.
Margaret Thatcher broke up UK's socialised dental care, That hiked up price, many regular people cannot afford a dentistry anymore. conservatives have also privatized hospital cleaning, cooking & geriatric care. with world famous disastrous results.
Costs are going up is Because corp ideology like Shikha Dalmia's is just sales hype and does not work.
Sure health will come under pressure from baby-boomers, but that will happen everywhere. Spend less on WMD & war.
Shikha is saying that if you socialize payment you have to socialize the consumption of medicare. I don't think that is necessarily how that works, and id like her to address why.
@sugarface88 It like the moronic John Stossel example of socialized food cost, he would get a steak everyday. when socialized medicine doesn't allow you to get as many medical intervention as you want. The Doctor decide if you need it, not you.
@sugarface88 it's how it work in Canada, and many other place. It's evident that you wouldn't put a pacemaker to everyone that ask! only those that need !
All comments made about France Health care system by Shikha Dalmia are basically wrong except that costs are increasing. All the rest is complete crap. Did she just studied it ?
I've have serious thoughts of moving back to Canada. I make less money in the States buying private health insurance than having a higher tax rate for a gov't run health care. Not "unAmerican" just doing what republicans advocate look out for your self mentality.
Or maybe the more Christian approach the preach, help your fellow man.
Love many aspects of America, but cost of health insurance is breaking me.
I don't want to join any of your stupid insurance pools. I plan on living with my kids when I get old and if my kids end up burn outs, I will shoot myself before I become too ill to take care of myself. Invest in your retirement funds and children and not social security and medicare
@uche007us kill yourself already so the rest can evolve into modernity and join the other country in caring for their population. instead of the social Darwinism you advocating.
How would we pay? And don't let them give some hypothetical - someone must have written a policy paper or budget for these respective plans (single payer / tax credit)
@bsimpson505 it's funny how you ignore your single-payer system that work really efficiently, medi-care is pretty efficient compared to the private insurer. about 2% of the collected money goes to administration (and profit), compared to nearly 15 % in private insurer. the rest pay directly for care. Oh no, that impossible! a government agency that are more efficient than the private sector! *head explode* !
And I didn't even count the cost of the paperwork for private insurer to the doctor.
Youngbuck 189 said "I find this repulsive. Immigrants should be patriots, and being a patriot in America means being a liberal......There should be immigration limits, but only on right wing ideologies. "
So if you're not liberal, you're being unpatriotic? Some of you need to listen to yourselves. This is sounding easily as bad as George Bush and the ridiculous "you're either with us or against us" mentality of those years- you're proving yourselves no better.
survival rates only count if all sick people can get to that care. Costs are lower in the non-USA counties they mentioned and EVERYBODY is covered, not just a privileged few. I hope that the reality of the 2012 end of the world predictions that the bottom rises up. Free health care and schooling for all. Not the current reality of the haves get, and the have not's get spun in their lies.
I'd like to ask that woman in studio, how can something be a "right" and cost money at the same time? In that view if I get sick and need surgery, I have the right to it, whether I can afford it or not- but that of course passes the buck to someone else- how is that superior? They should definitely debate again, as it started to get interesting in the last few minutes, when the Indian woman talked about market competition vs. the "free lunch" which will never cost too much or be rationed.
@moestietabarnak it's interesting you mention the police, who oftentimes inject themselves where many of us would say they are not needed, driven not by the motive of "protecting and serving" but to fine and penalize citizens in order to generate revenue. Besides, the police don't protect you from a murder, unless perhaps they witness the crime in progress...having universal health care is the equivalent to having a bodyguard by your side at all times- would that be a right, to a bodyguard?
@judd73 The police protect you from murder, by the simple facts that they exist.. go ahead, try to remove the police and see the anarchy (or the return of the wild west.. ok, that why you have gun's fetishism) or rent a body guard, let see if it would be economical then.
What those free-market and libertarian forget is that we had your ideology before, and history shown us what can go wrong with it. remember that law get enacted in reaction to abuse (normally when you don't have lobby and corp
A immigrant who sides with the establishment and clings to the ideologies of the elites?
I find this repulsive. Immigrants should be patriots, and being a patriot in America means being a liberal, hard working, freedom loving person They should not be a totalitarian fascist cutting throats to move up in the society.
Advocating right wing ideologies as an immigrant to the U.S. is really unacceptable. There should be immigration limits, but only on right wing ideologies.
@youngbuck189 that's funny you say she sides with the establishment, when clearly she doesn't like the idea of subsidizing health insurance companies (Obamacare) in this grand giveaway that forces everyone to pay into the current system. In the last couple of minutes she did finally express her ideal, which is removing the current government- imposed obstacles to competition that keep prices high. Lowering the cost of healthcare through competition is not inherently "right wing"
@judd73 the government imposed obstacle are for your safety most of the time. the rare unproductive restriction won't make the economy you need for affordable health-care. You rather have non-certified surgeon playing inside your body because he's cheaper? You really bought the right-wing free market talking point. Let go back the snake oil salesman.
@moestietabarnak sure, of course, it's always "for our safety", even the ones the big corporations favor, right? (talk about a talking point) I'll leave aside the licensing issue for now in favor of some different right wing, heartless & cruel talking points. These have to do with a lot of the current regulations that hamper competition, or encourage over-utilization of insurance. The woman here mentioned them briefly. Why is insurance tied to your employer and more costly to buy yourself?
(cont'd) basically the tax code makes health insurance more attractive for procedures that really shouldn't be covered by insurance- it's not a function of the 'free market', but a government mandate that has nothing to do with safety. You eliminate those, and you get the same phenomenon you see with lasik eye surgery, some plastic surgery, and other procedures where insurance won't cover: the cost of those have come down steadily, because competition in the market has brought it down.
@judd73 and because those are optional surgery.. you can fore go them without fear of death, it's the fear of death that distort the market in favor of the supplier, they will still charge you an arm and a leg when they know it's your life on the line.
@judd73 that another issue you have to work on. It isn't that expensive here, when using public institution. Why your is ?
I tend to think that your public system get sabotaged by the free-market proponent, as self-fulfilling prophecy that gov can't work, and then you believe it..
When you put people in charge that want it to work, they find solution to make it work, not "way to cut it a la starve the best" as reaganite love
@moestietabarnak "that another issue you have to work on. It isn't that expensive here, when using public institution. Why your is ?" - you know the issue you need to work on? Your English. No offense, but I'm not understanding some of these sentence fragments. Where are you? Did you know that our healthcare system was once very affordable and annual health insurance and care cost much less? We once had charity hospitals who voluntarily took care of the poor? When we had less government
@moestietabarnak also isn't food a life or death matter? I believe so. Why don't the evil farmers have us by the nuts, charging outrageous prices knowing that we HAVE to eat because if we don't we'll die?
@judd73 because ANYBODY can produce food, thus competition works. Want me to try to treat that cancer of your ? I heard we can burn the tumors. Let me get my torch..
@moestietabarnak not everyone can produce food, not true at all. You need access to land, labor, and capital, just like any business. Our food production has become increasingly more and more concentrated (government intervention? nah) And, the gov. actually makes it harder if you're a smaller farmer who wants to sell directly to the consumer, so no it is not as simple as you'd like to think. And sorry, you're going to have to do better job convincing me you're good at tumor removal :)
@judd73 because employer have a bigger negotiating power by polling, individually they can charge you more or plain deny you if you are deemed too big a risk.
@moestietabarnak I don't believe it has to do with a bigger pool. The government made all employer-provided insurance tax exempt. Thanks to that, it's more affordable to offer your worker the insurance rather than the wages. However, the insurance company is given a kind of monopoly of customers that they would've otherwise had to offer lower prices to in order to attract their business. Same with the government prohibition to sell insurance across state lines- just drives costs up.
@moestietabarnak in this case I think the government does have the explicit power to regulate interstate commerce as written in the constitution - which would trump any state law prohibiting selling outside state lines. There's nothing wrong by the way of people "pooling" together to get a discount, but they should be able to do it on THEIR terms and voluntarily. Not by force. What if I don't like the insurance plan? Oh, but you need me and my money so you can pool in for something YOU want.
@cheddyrod Who cares what diamonds really look like. They have absolutely no practical usage other than as an industrial tool. They are a symbol of the gulibility of the consumer class.
No jerk. It is a silver trinket you can get for less than $10 in India.....Hope you know more about health care than jewelry -- or stay home on election day!
This has been flagged as spam show
The Americans DO NOT have the best healthcare system in the world. DO NOT. Bill Clinton has said it as well as most of the world. It is not free market it's like a sort of hybrid which doesn't match the European style which is much better which covers everybody, nor is it purely free market as you guys spend 19% of revenue on healthcare, more then the UK which spends 9%, pick one, either is better then what you have now
toberses11 9 months ago
The Real News > ReasonTV
MsZeitgeist85 9 months ago
Shikha is greedy business woman who wants to make money on our misery. The Japanese have the cheapest healthcare in the world, they are the healthiest and longest living people in the world, they see their doctors 12 times more than Americans. Too many FILTHY GREEDY RICH PEOPLE in America that are getting richer from our pain, AND ITS NOT RIGHT, give EVERYONE FREE medical and raise taxes for the FILTHY rich. We all know that's what it has to come down to, they've had a free ride far too long,
dale3858 1 year ago
Donna Smith wins.
RedGaribaldi 1 year ago
healthcare reform? they wont even legalize weed and you expect them to abolish the insurance companies that make massive profits off the sick and dying proletairiat? if theres going to be any REAL change in amerikka heres the majic word: revolution. stop asking for change and start demanding it.
autonomia386 1 year ago
I would have to agree with the big lady on the fact that the private insurance does control everything about the patient's needs. I've seen this happen several times, but most of the time it's whether the drug is in the formulary list or whether it's covering brand name drugs. However, I would like to see everyone have some type of national health care. Poor people in my area don't have money for anything let alone some expensive drugs.
Apocalypse487 1 year ago
I would like Ms. Dalmiya to relfect upon the issue of health care in the context of Democracy. If Democracy is a system where every person should get every opportunity to develop his/her unique abilities irrespective of race, religion and class; then how can a person strive to develop his abilities when he has no healthy body? Is it not similar to asking a paraplegic to compete in 100m sprint?
abhi5677 1 year ago
Comment removed
abhi5677 1 year ago
REDUX love it.
kjones2345 1 year ago
i must say there is good reason to be concerned about being forced to have medical insurance. what comes next? probably forced medications, forced operations, and more forced vaccinations
marpoq 1 year ago
Let the poor people die! I suppose in India or Pakistan (wherever she's from) people can afford healthcare and all is well...
vetdino 1 year ago
RealNews, questions for next time- for Shikha: how do government laws make healthcare more expensive, as is the typical libertarian view (specific examples would be nice) how was US healthcare system (in terms of affordability, etc) before medicare and many current programs-did poor people "just die"? to Donna: if healthcare is a right, then shouldn't I have the right to choose what I receive, what about choice? What if my version of healthcare includes things not "universally" covered?
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 then you just pay for the things "not universally covered", just like you do now - you can simply purchase a voluntary private plan to cover the additional "things"... and these plans will be much cheaper than now, because the insurance companies would actually have to compete, while currently can simply scare people into buying
sdomas 1 year ago
@sdomas My point is what if I can't afford those "additional things"- what if those that I can't afford and aren't covered by universal health insurance, are also very important to me? Healthcare is such a personal thing- You see if healthcare is a right, but I have no choice in what form that healthcare takes, then it's not really much of a right is it? Or perhaps it's only the "right" to catastrophic coverage....What am I missing?
judd73 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@judd73 then you just pay for the things "not universally covered", just like you do now - you can simply purchase a voluntary private plan to cover the additional "things"... and these plans will be much cheaper than now, because the insurance companies would actually have to compete, while currently can simply scare/force people into buying
sdomas 1 year ago
Comment removed
judd73 1 year ago
Like most libertarians she made sense for about 5 or 10 seconds. Only when you take the thought a little further down the road she exposes herself as the myopic, one track ideologue that they all are.
Also anyone who uses 'Obamacare' doesn't really deserve to be listened to. It makes them sound ignorant.
kingsdun 1 year ago
Free market health care doesn't work in an Oligarchy. End point. This Indian woman is a fucking corporate stool pidgeon talking about "ENDING EMPLOYER BASED HEALTH CARE" among other things.
I love that this nurse actually knows what she is talking about.
ShortOrderLectrician 1 year ago
more libertarian drivel from Shikha Dalmia. Hey - if a private insurance system is so great- why is the US the ONLY developed country in the world to have one? Isnt the problem that most people cant afford insurance anymore because the companies have to make profits and have a return on capital and therefore most people cannot actually gain access to "shopping around" for healthcare - its a rubbish system that is cruel,unfeeling and vindictive.. get rid of it now
haasxaar 1 year ago
Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care, Obama care... thats my argument. Free market works always!
Suerte!
recabarrennahuel 1 year ago
It has been too obvious to me that Shikha and the libertarians had no idea what they are talking about. Really, I was never so clear. They had one tool to fix al problems and it doesnt work, they dont even look at reality.
Good debate.
Suerte!
recabarrennahuel 1 year ago
Yikes! All we need to do is look at the systems of national healthcare in Australia and Taiwan. State of the art, everyone is covered, half the cost of the USA. The people and business love there love their healthcare systems. But we need to spend all our money on military until the county goes completely broke..
radogwinemaker 1 year ago
Man, I had hard a time listening to that lady after she said Obamacare. That's like saying, "Hey get ready I'm about to engage in ideological rhetoric."
Shisho2k 1 year ago
Such a strange debate.
ekirent 1 year ago
Also.
Nurses are an important part of the front-line for the delivery health care and see what goes on in hospitals and clinics everyday.
So I will take the word of Donna Smith over a detached, inhumane academic anyday. But that's just me.
MMicro99 1 year ago
We have Medicare in Australia and that is publicly funded and delivered by the public service which is apolitical.
I guess you could say its close to the Canadian model.
Everyone pays for Medicare through taxes. Not too much different then paying insurance premiums really except the profit motive is non-existent. The 'shareholders' are the public.
And I can guarantee NOBODY is complaining about the country 'going broke' from funding Medicare.
MMicro99 1 year ago
If they force me to pay, I'll pay, but their doctors will never get near me.
950horsepower 1 year ago
Why is our side so polite? Why doesn't Donna just speak the hard cold truth. Health care is a right and the opposition is just lying through their teeth to pacify their paymasters.
SandCmpbll 1 year ago
Just look at the Libertarian chick. She is absolutely soulless. I can feel her lack of humanity coming through the screen.
SandCmpbll 1 year ago
This Libertarian chick would fair better as model for selling bling bling like the one on her neck.
kazearaki 1 year ago
I do not know which side I am on.
KyleThomasShultz 1 year ago
Also the comments about the "diamond-studded" libertarian here is interesting. If you saw her boss at Reason magazine, Nick Gillespie, he's one of most blue collar-looking dudes around. Search "How to Fix Health Care: Lasik Surgery For The Medical Debate"- you'll see. Also a good case for free market reforms is made in the article "What's Really Wrong with the Health Care Industry" by Vijay Boyapati. The Indian woman doesn't get to state the case here with the same kind of detail.
judd73 1 year ago
What is that fucking retarded bitch's name again? Shit-ha?
saumacus 1 year ago
I'd take a health care system designed by nurses in hospitals over one designed by economists in think tanks any day of the week.
livinginlux 1 year ago 2
@livinginlux nicely said
SnoutDonuts 1 year ago
The libertarian debater gave misleading and even inaccurate information while repeatedly mischaracterizing the position of the other. What is the point of a debate in which one party utterly lacks sincerity? It is a waste of time, except perhaps to showcase the fact that the corporate apologists are simply allergic to the truth.
livinginlux 1 year ago
I thought it was a very nice talk. One believe the system can be fixed and made bigger while the other is advocating a fresh start and good competition. I understand the Liberal view I just do not think it will work.
tangeuray 1 year ago
Man, Shikha Dalmia's dismissive attitude pisses me off.
LordelX 1 year ago
In Finland we have both social heakthcare and private. Everybody pays dues through taxes and the doctor tells you what care you need, sending you to specialists. If you are in a rush, do not want to wait in line, you go to a private doctor and pay through the nose. In social care there are always lines to surgery, that have to be constantly modified as the more lifethreatening cases have to be operated on first.
foreverpiano 1 year ago
Private Insurance corps making recovery rates & thus themselves look unjustifiably good, by not treating poor people, is, Shikha, what the conversation is about.
Patients do get a choice in systems like the UK's, private is still there as an option for those who want it.
Private patients in the UK get perks, nicer rooms, nose jobs etc., they saved up for it, etc, seems fine.. but they do not suck away resources from the the tax payer for bonuses or ads, hype & other 'innovations'.
marsCubed 1 year ago 2
My inner Robin Hood wants to snatch that necklace off Cruella D'Evil and give it to the homeless families living in old cars in my city. Many of them live like that because of medical bills.
DrStrangelove666 1 year ago
Why was it necessary to bring on a "libertarian." Her ignorance of the fact that every other industrialized country has a form of universal healthcare should have disqualified her from this debate. "No free Lunches in the World?" Give me a break. With this logic, she would want to live in corporate tyranny. There's nothing "free" about the economic system she advocates, unless she means corporations are free to exploit us.
woostopalypse 1 year ago 6
@woostopalypse Well, some free market proponent keep dissing TheRealNews as too liberaly bias. Get a libertarian on and show that reality has a liberals bias.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak If free market advocates are dissing The Real News, you know you are on the right track to finding the truth. Like I said, free market advocates don't support free markets. They support an oligarchy that exploits the poor.
When one asks a "free market" advocate how do you stop the rich from exploiting the poor, they have no solution besides "that's the way it is." I'm sorry, but that's news worthy, nor is it being truth to power. It's being an apologist for power.
woostopalypse 1 year ago
@woostopalypse actually I know I am also on the right track when I ask what if universal coverage doesn't cover what I want, and how can it provide for everything without rationing care, and I get no answer from the progressives here. And when government exploits the poor by stifling competition and driving costs up, or favoring certain corporations, ie. unleveling the playing field (distorting the market) and exploiting us all? This is when the big government advocate usually gets real mute.
judd73 1 year ago
Comment removed
woostopalypse 1 year ago
Comment removed
woostopalypse 1 year ago
@judd73 Your ignorance of single payer is obvious. First, the government does not interfere with private hospitals or private drugs. The government creates a pool where everyone has access to these hospitals and drugs for free or a small fee.
Second, The US has the highest health care costs per capita, more than any other single payer country.
Third, Single Payer does not have to be big government. Canada's health care isn't big government; it was enacted province by province.
woostopalypse 1 year ago
@woostopalypse #1 no, but it favors drugs, by subsidizing the purchase of them. What if I couldn't give a shit about pharmaceutical drugs, and prefer a less "allopathic" treatment? (let's say, herbs, and certain therapies for hypertension, instead of a drug, just for example) will the government cover that? I doubt it. So what good it is it to me? #2 Shikha made the point, mostly ignored, that our current healthcare is not good. She also stated how SP countries' costs are rising. (cont'd)
judd73 1 year ago
(cont'd) Donna and Paul Jay contend that the *rate* of rising costs are less in SP countries than the US, but isn't it disingenuous to use the current US system as a strawman when it's not even what Shikha's advocating? #3 so you're saying a province could nullify it, as in reject single payer alltogether? As you can see in the news, many states aren't crazy about Obama's plan. Is it not still big government, though if every province or state is *required* to provide some form of healthcare?
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 1) The subsidizing you speak of is the same as what we do to milk. It will keep costs of drugs affordable. Do private insurance companies cover herbs and alternative treatments? Hell, they can't even provide basic coverage. Are you sure you want to argue this?
2) Yes, our healthcare is not good because we have a large private sector that fails to help the sick. She did say that about increase costs. But Jay corrected her and said that costs are no where near the US, which is true.
woostopalypse 8 months ago
@woostopalypse nice circular argument about favoring subsidization of drugs over alternatives. And I don't agree with subsidizing milk either, so no appeal there. There are endless advances in technology with flat tv's, cellphones, etc. with zero subsidies, yet the price always comes down thanks to the evil market- medicine in a free market will be affordable. #2 . it had to do with the rate of increase, in which case the SP countries are rising faster. Jay and the guest never disputed that.
judd73 8 months ago
@judd73 Flat screen TV's and cellphones do receive subsidies. In fact, Japan is well known for providing generous subsidies their electronic manufacturers. France has single payer and covers alternative medicines. There is no reason why we could not do the same.
That's a flawed argument. The US has double the spending per capita than Canada (8000 to 3000). Lets say Canada costs are increasing 5% every year and the US is increasing 1%. It would take Canada over 50 years to catch up to the US!
woostopalypse 8 months ago
@woostopalypse that tax or subsidy is eaten by the Japanese and not by American citizens, and these products still compete in the marketplace with other countries and manufacturers. No one is forced to buy them. So in your opinion, why are healthcare costs rising at such a high rate in Canada and other SP countries? What happens 50 years from now? My concern is you'll have high unemployment and sovereign debt crises by covering everything, or you have shortages/rationing.
judd73 8 months ago
@woostopalypse also we're seeming to argue 2 separate arguments. You and others are comparing SP countries' healthcare to that of the US, as if to say there is support for the current US system- a strawman as said long ago. There is no free market in healthcare now, and one only need to look to the past as to how cheaper HC was to the average person. You've revived this debate after 4 months, and right now I don't wish to continue- maybe in another 4 months I'll return the favor :)
judd73 8 months ago
@judd73 Universal Healthcare also operates in a market place, the hospitals can remain private The coverage is covered by the government. There is already rationing of health care in the US. 50 million uninsured people. That's far worse rationing than having to wait in line longer (which studies have shown is the same or only slightly longer).
woostopalypse 6 months ago
omg why is this still an issue? Of course the US government medical policy is abysmal and of course the western countries have the means to sustain extremely efficient medical systems for everyone. Of course the elite doesn't want that to happen. The only question is when are you gonna get down the streets to demonstrate and ask for it?
sinekonata 1 year ago 9
@sinekonata We should demand it, not ask.
Apocalypse487 1 year ago
Unfortunately, I see a lot of people who've never been kicked while their down, putting largely worthless ideals in front of human beings. The major problem with extreme libertarian thought is that people and companies simply cannot be trusted to be moral actors w/o law. Many libertarians like to make believe they sprang fully formed and awesome via force of will. . . . bullshit. Libertarian philosophy is selfish and naive.
Bunnicula71 1 year ago 10
@Bunnicula71 Indeed. Selfish, naive and uneducated. I have serious doubts the Libertarian lady took the time to even read the Health Care Bill.
MarquisdeBarrabas 1 year ago
Geeze that Dalmia Woman not even two minutes in is pissing me off. And like furseiseki in the highest rated comments pointed out. WHAT THE F is with the necklace.
Shadoweye12 1 year ago
thank you RN for showing us a discussion on the issue unlike fake new that only give 2 minute arguments between uneducated but highly opinionated ppl on the issue! Everybody pls donate!!
roullettechick 1 year ago
I think I'll distance myself from any common ground with the yuppie, diamond-encrusted conservative who has the gull to assert that capitalism somehow innately embodies the "laws of economics."
egolayer13 1 year ago 2
@egolayer13
You guys are idiots. God help your girlfriends or wives or any other unfortunate woman in your life, if that necklace looks like diamonds to you. As I have already told that jerk fursickly, if you ever stepped out of your cosy little American hick town and travel to the East, you'll get these trinkets for peanuts from roadside shops. (It is silver, btw.)
TunakTunak1000 1 year ago
Respond to this video...Also, it is "gall" not "gull." Latter is a bird, former means chutzpah or cheekiness. You don't know birds or words or jewelry, but we are supposed to take your sentiments about health care seriously. Shut the f....k up!
TunakTunak1000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TunakTunak1000 Oh, my bad. You're right, it is gall. I'll also take you on your word about the necklace being silver. I now happily redact and revise my previous comment below. Feel free to start taking me seriously.
I think I'll distance myself from any common ground with the yuppie, silver-laden conservative who has the gall to assert that capitalism somehow innately embodies the "laws of economics."
egolayer13 1 year ago
I think that over all both lady's are saying that they are unhappy with Obama care.
hodalis 1 year ago
My girlfriend is a nurse, in mom-baby, and I would strongly suggest listening to people at the point of contact and live it instead of the videoscreen lady just talking it with theories and rhetoric.
uwmbigb 1 year ago
Comment removed
uwmbigb 1 year ago
Question: Whats wrong with having a healthcare system that runs at a lost if it makes people live longer, healthier etc etc
2 - What are your opinions on the profit motive when it comes to human survival?
restlys 1 year ago
Shikha Dalmia is wrong.
Margaret Thatcher broke up UK's socialised dental care, That hiked up price, many regular people cannot afford a dentistry anymore. conservatives have also privatized hospital cleaning, cooking & geriatric care. with world famous disastrous results.
Costs are going up is Because corp ideology like Shikha Dalmia's is just sales hype and does not work.
Sure health will come under pressure from baby-boomers, but that will happen everywhere. Spend less on WMD & war.
marsCubed 1 year ago
the fuckin conservatives havent realized that calling it obamacare makes them lose all credibility right off the bat.
restlys 1 year ago
@restlys Nope not yet, but they are stupid so I think they will still continue to call it that.
thesparitan 1 year ago
Shikha is saying that if you socialize payment you have to socialize the consumption of medicare. I don't think that is necessarily how that works, and id like her to address why.
sugarface88 1 year ago
@sugarface88 It like the moronic John Stossel example of socialized food cost, he would get a steak everyday. when socialized medicine doesn't allow you to get as many medical intervention as you want. The Doctor decide if you need it, not you.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak that is not how socialized medicine necessarily works.
sugarface88 1 year ago
@sugarface88 it's how it work in Canada, and many other place. It's evident that you wouldn't put a pacemaker to everyone that ask! only those that need !
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
Such a right wing point of view is somewhat repulsive and questionnable here, but still it's interesting to see that type of debate.
korg502006 1 year ago
All comments made about France Health care system by Shikha Dalmia are basically wrong except that costs are increasing. All the rest is complete crap. Did she just studied it ?
huughr 1 year ago
I've have serious thoughts of moving back to Canada. I make less money in the States buying private health insurance than having a higher tax rate for a gov't run health care. Not "unAmerican" just doing what republicans advocate look out for your self mentality.
Or maybe the more Christian approach the preach, help your fellow man.
Love many aspects of America, but cost of health insurance is breaking me.
Bismarck3000 1 year ago 2
There are no 'laws of economics', it is not a hard science.
GorgonLuvs8008135 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
guddaysunshine 1 year ago
I don't want to join any of your stupid insurance pools. I plan on living with my kids when I get old and if my kids end up burn outs, I will shoot myself before I become too ill to take care of myself. Invest in your retirement funds and children and not social security and medicare
uche007us 1 year ago
@uche007us kill yourself already so the rest can evolve into modernity and join the other country in caring for their population. instead of the social Darwinism you advocating.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
Boy, whatta mess! Can Obama DO anything right?
Oh wait, he's too busy sucking corporate arse. [Forget the question.]
yo1dude1man 1 year ago
ha ha, that 'free market' woman was hilarious with her bias.
verstwo2 1 year ago
How would we pay? And don't let them give some hypothetical - someone must have written a policy paper or budget for these respective plans (single payer / tax credit)
bsimpson505 1 year ago
@bsimpson505 it's funny how you ignore your single-payer system that work really efficiently, medi-care is pretty efficient compared to the private insurer. about 2% of the collected money goes to administration (and profit), compared to nearly 15 % in private insurer. the rest pay directly for care. Oh no, that impossible! a government agency that are more efficient than the private sector! *head explode* !
And I didn't even count the cost of the paperwork for private insurer to the doctor.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak Ummm... Well I support a single payer system. I just like it when people support there ideas with data.
bsimpson505 1 year ago
Youngbuck 189 said "I find this repulsive. Immigrants should be patriots, and being a patriot in America means being a liberal......There should be immigration limits, but only on right wing ideologies. "
So if you're not liberal, you're being unpatriotic? Some of you need to listen to yourselves. This is sounding easily as bad as George Bush and the ridiculous "you're either with us or against us" mentality of those years- you're proving yourselves no better.
judd73 1 year ago
survival rates only count if all sick people can get to that care. Costs are lower in the non-USA counties they mentioned and EVERYBODY is covered, not just a privileged few. I hope that the reality of the 2012 end of the world predictions that the bottom rises up. Free health care and schooling for all. Not the current reality of the haves get, and the have not's get spun in their lies.
amygow23 1 year ago 3
I'd like to ask that woman in studio, how can something be a "right" and cost money at the same time? In that view if I get sick and need surgery, I have the right to it, whether I can afford it or not- but that of course passes the buck to someone else- how is that superior? They should definitely debate again, as it started to get interesting in the last few minutes, when the Indian woman talked about market competition vs. the "free lunch" which will never cost too much or be rationed.
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 In the same way that Police protect you from murder even if you don't have the mean to pay them.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak it's interesting you mention the police, who oftentimes inject themselves where many of us would say they are not needed, driven not by the motive of "protecting and serving" but to fine and penalize citizens in order to generate revenue. Besides, the police don't protect you from a murder, unless perhaps they witness the crime in progress...having universal health care is the equivalent to having a bodyguard by your side at all times- would that be a right, to a bodyguard?
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 The police protect you from murder, by the simple facts that they exist.. go ahead, try to remove the police and see the anarchy (or the return of the wild west.. ok, that why you have gun's fetishism) or rent a body guard, let see if it would be economical then.
What those free-market and libertarian forget is that we had your ideology before, and history shown us what can go wrong with it. remember that law get enacted in reaction to abuse (normally when you don't have lobby and corp
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
A immigrant who sides with the establishment and clings to the ideologies of the elites?
I find this repulsive. Immigrants should be patriots, and being a patriot in America means being a liberal, hard working, freedom loving person They should not be a totalitarian fascist cutting throats to move up in the society.
Advocating right wing ideologies as an immigrant to the U.S. is really unacceptable. There should be immigration limits, but only on right wing ideologies.
youngbuck189 1 year ago
@youngbuck189 that's funny you say she sides with the establishment, when clearly she doesn't like the idea of subsidizing health insurance companies (Obamacare) in this grand giveaway that forces everyone to pay into the current system. In the last couple of minutes she did finally express her ideal, which is removing the current government- imposed obstacles to competition that keep prices high. Lowering the cost of healthcare through competition is not inherently "right wing"
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 the government imposed obstacle are for your safety most of the time. the rare unproductive restriction won't make the economy you need for affordable health-care. You rather have non-certified surgeon playing inside your body because he's cheaper? You really bought the right-wing free market talking point. Let go back the snake oil salesman.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak sure, of course, it's always "for our safety", even the ones the big corporations favor, right? (talk about a talking point) I'll leave aside the licensing issue for now in favor of some different right wing, heartless & cruel talking points. These have to do with a lot of the current regulations that hamper competition, or encourage over-utilization of insurance. The woman here mentioned them briefly. Why is insurance tied to your employer and more costly to buy yourself?
judd73 1 year ago
(cont'd) basically the tax code makes health insurance more attractive for procedures that really shouldn't be covered by insurance- it's not a function of the 'free market', but a government mandate that has nothing to do with safety. You eliminate those, and you get the same phenomenon you see with lasik eye surgery, some plastic surgery, and other procedures where insurance won't cover: the cost of those have come down steadily, because competition in the market has brought it down.
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 and because those are optional surgery.. you can fore go them without fear of death, it's the fear of death that distort the market in favor of the supplier, they will still charge you an arm and a leg when they know it's your life on the line.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak then why is education so expensive? It has nothing to do with life or death.
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 that another issue you have to work on. It isn't that expensive here, when using public institution. Why your is ?
I tend to think that your public system get sabotaged by the free-market proponent, as self-fulfilling prophecy that gov can't work, and then you believe it..
When you put people in charge that want it to work, they find solution to make it work, not "way to cut it a la starve the best" as reaganite love
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak "that another issue you have to work on. It isn't that expensive here, when using public institution. Why your is ?" - you know the issue you need to work on? Your English. No offense, but I'm not understanding some of these sentence fragments. Where are you? Did you know that our healthcare system was once very affordable and annual health insurance and care cost much less? We once had charity hospitals who voluntarily took care of the poor? When we had less government
judd73 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak also isn't food a life or death matter? I believe so. Why don't the evil farmers have us by the nuts, charging outrageous prices knowing that we HAVE to eat because if we don't we'll die?
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 because ANYBODY can produce food, thus competition works. Want me to try to treat that cancer of your ? I heard we can burn the tumors. Let me get my torch..
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak not everyone can produce food, not true at all. You need access to land, labor, and capital, just like any business. Our food production has become increasingly more and more concentrated (government intervention? nah) And, the gov. actually makes it harder if you're a smaller farmer who wants to sell directly to the consumer, so no it is not as simple as you'd like to think. And sorry, you're going to have to do better job convincing me you're good at tumor removal :)
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 your issue is with corporatism and lobbying, you can solve that by reforming party financing, not by abolishing the government altogether.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@judd73 because employer have a bigger negotiating power by polling, individually they can charge you more or plain deny you if you are deemed too big a risk.
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak I don't believe it has to do with a bigger pool. The government made all employer-provided insurance tax exempt. Thanks to that, it's more affordable to offer your worker the insurance rather than the wages. However, the insurance company is given a kind of monopoly of customers that they would've otherwise had to offer lower prices to in order to attract their business. Same with the government prohibition to sell insurance across state lines- just drives costs up.
judd73 1 year ago
@judd73 still that straw-man of state-lines insurance.
1- state-right is one of the talking point of the minarchist federal and constitution strict idea! Only when you like it ?
2- by allowing cross state insurer, you allow insurer to bypass local state-law by allowing them to settle in a more lenient state.
3- yet its a moot point if you get a national public plan
ps: the tax exempt do help the employer plan. but bigger pool make the insurer more interrested
moestietabarnak 1 year ago
@moestietabarnak in this case I think the government does have the explicit power to regulate interstate commerce as written in the constitution - which would trump any state law prohibiting selling outside state lines. There's nothing wrong by the way of people "pooling" together to get a discount, but they should be able to do it on THEIR terms and voluntarily. Not by force. What if I don't like the insurance plan? Oh, but you need me and my money so you can pool in for something YOU want.
judd73 1 year ago
Republicans are committed to destroy this country!
Trickle down economics has not worked, instead it has devastated the middle class in USA!
According the Republicans, if you are regular Joe, the only solution for you is to die fast, when get sick!
goru426 1 year ago 5
Hey is the libertarian chick wearing diamonds? How appropot, I guess the rest of us can eat cake with our pitchforks.
furseiseki 1 year ago 33
@furseiseki So nothing that she said or demonstrated mattered just the fact she was wearing diamonds?
If that's any evidence on how you pick the president, you deserve exactly what you are getting.
sirellyn 1 year ago
@furseiseki lmfaoooo
uwmbigb 1 year ago
@furseiseki Diamonds before 6 pm, such a faux pas!
slobomotion 1 year ago
@furseiseki No those are not diamonds, but then someone in your socioeconomic level would not know what diamonds look like.
cheddyrod 1 year ago
@cheddyrod Who cares what diamonds really look like. They have absolutely no practical usage other than as an industrial tool. They are a symbol of the gulibility of the consumer class.
ajames95 1 year ago
@ajames95 The person that I responded to wanted to know what diamonds look like
cheddyrod 1 year ago
@furseiseki she looks anorexic. perhaps she needs to eat more cake!
radogwinemaker 1 year ago
@furseiseki @furseiseki she looks anorexic. perhaps she needs to eat more cake!
radogwinemaker 1 year ago
@furseiseki
No, jerk. It is a silver trinket that you can get for $10 in India....If you don't know about jewelery, don't bring it up. You sound stupid.
TunakTunak1000 1 year ago
@furseiseki
xxxx
TunakTunak1000 1 year ago
@furseiseki
No jerk. It is a silver trinket you can get for less than $10 in India.....Hope you know more about health care than jewelry -- or stay home on election day!
TunakTunak1000 1 year ago
in b4 "death panels" and other red herrings.
furseiseki 1 year ago 3
united states of plutocracy
jordler 1 year ago 23