@craekor no it wast. penn is a libertarian, not conservative. you used the wrong sterotype. try thinking for youself and get out of your liberal circlejerk.
Obama showd that he definitely doesn't know everything when he said healthcare costs are high because of corrupt doctors, i.e. his supposed diabetes "foot pirates".
No. Costs are going up because, unlike the past, most conditions are treatible nowdays.
And genetically engineered treatments are very expensive.
@xdearlifex well he did move the (really blanking on the name here... the "gerrymanderer's") the organization that considers voting districts--- he moved under the white house's jurisdiction, while thats not illegal for a president to do, the gerrymandering organization is now in liberal control and they could manipulate the voting districts so republicans and libertarians, anyone with slightly "right" views may not really get a say in their government
@Rhuarc224 And I'm not on board with that decision. Do you have a website that's non-partisan that can show me how he has extended his office's power? I'd like to inform myself.
On a related note, I'd like to point out that Obama has made very very few executive orders.
Obama, even if you live out all your terms? Seems FDR changes stayed are the most popular changes ever made. So you are stating, if he does soemthing the people like, history shows others can change them? That is not True...We have people trying to kill Medicare and Social Security.... and you are getting the MOBS. Our government making changes for the good, have the people behind the policies and they stay. Ignorant argument.
I completely get what Penn's trying to convey here. I've always thought that Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you..." was BS and it is really supposed to be all about the people. Yet we are so blinded by the current situation going on in the world with these countries and politicians and problems with economy, welfare et.c that we are not realizing the simple fact that the politicians are supposed to be working for us as people. I've become more liberal after Penn's speech now.
I'm no fan of Obama, I'm no fan of continual war, but I like the idea of a president who does something besides war and tax cuts for his buddies. You may not like Obama, hell, I don't either, but you have to give credit to someone WHO'S TRYING. Some things are within the scope of the government, some things ARE NOT for-profit, some things exist in America BECAUSE WE'RE AMERICA. Political ideology be damned, some things are terrible in the wrong hands.
The libertarian position on pretty much everything: "Eh, corporations will do it. Just take away all the rules and they'll do the right thing. Of course they will"
@MagnesDrachen13 It's not a bad idea, if it wasn't for these big corporations we wouldn't have some of the technological break throughs we've had because of competition. But as we've seen, corporations can run wild and screw everything up. There's probably a very plausible middle ground that would be perfect, but right and left politicians are paid off and will never compromise.
I have observed that Penn Jilette is not as articulate on his own, as opposed to having a script writer, like on "Bullshit." He keeps stammering over his words, as though he hasn't thought this through ahead of time.
Something or someone is always going to have 'power'. If it's not a government, it will be an emperor, or a corporation, or a theocracy, or an army, or a warlord, or a gang. Out of that list I'm thinking I'd prefer it to be an elected government. I like Penn but this is bullshit.
I understand your point, but what exactly has Obama done? He hasn't taken us into any wars, but even if he did, every president since WW2 has done the same, since thats the last time congress actually declared war. As far as the kennedy quote, collectively we ARE the country. The quote is saying that you should not live for yourself but rather we should all live for each other, because we only advance when we work together. Bush expanded the powers of the president, Obama hasn't.
@kronosx7, "...what exactly has Obama done? He hasn't taken us into any wars". Are you aware that he hasn't brought our troops back from the middle east. He hasn't discontinued the war like he promised. He's another lying fake politician, just like George W. Bush.
@Nashhinton You sure about that? Afghanistan is scaling down over 2 years (Long time I know) but every soldier from iraq will be home in 2 months. Is that really all you got? If you want to point to Obama for all the bad shit, you can probably find a republican behind the idea, and a group of them fighting to let him not change it. Republicans are obstructing this country, not Obama. Remember, the president doesn't write law, congress does, and congress with its 14% approval rating is a joke
@kronosx7, Well I think president OBAMA has tripled the national debt ever since he came into office. He's not as bad as Bush, but he still sucks. We've been getting a lot of fake ass politicians recently, and I'm sick of it. Also, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. I'm more of a libertarian who believes in a mixed economy, but I'm leaning more towards capitalism than a full blown mixed economy.
@Nashhinton We would be in a depression without obama. plain and simple. Dont let the republicans trip you up with their bullshit about how we need to keep cutting taxes for the super rich while raising them for everyone else. The fair tax, the flat tax, 999 it all massively cuts the tax burden for the super rich, and raises it heavily for the rest of us Dont let them fool you they obstruct him at EVERY turn. Their goal is to ensure Obama is a one term pres, the country can go to hell to get it
@sneakonproductionz Actually most economists say we would be in a depression. Most economists say that the stimulus package wasn't big enough. By the way, republicans LOOOOVE tax breaks, the stimulus was about half tax breaks. Now watch them argue to cut pell grants and raise payroll tax. They're only for tax breaks that save millionaires and billionaires money. The ONLY reason they don't LOVE the stimulus package was because it was Barack Obama's stimulus package.
@Liberum69 Yeah, Paul Krugman, that crazy nobel prize winning economist. I suppose your solution is to keep feeding millionaires and billionaires MORE money. The top 1% pay has risen 275% in the last 30 years, 400 people own more wealth than 150 million, how many of these numbers do you need before you're convinced.
@kronosx7 Yeah, Obama won a Nobel prize, too. Pfft. You know the recent winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics is more towards the Austrian school, which pretty much means he hates Paul Krugman, right? You have no idea what you mean by the top 1% or any of the facts behind its establishment. The top 1% isn't a population. It's a set of assets that typically shifts through the population. A lot of that 1% that are more stagnant are typically well-to-do businessmen like Bill Gates. (cont'd)
That top 1% you're thinking you're referring to was established through the regulations you sheepishly push for. More regulations means less competition, which large corporations love, because it kills small business competition by making it far more expensive for them, while the corporations can afford it. So they spend money on lobbying for these regulations. The stimulus package did nothing but make the dollar worth less, bringing debt to a level we simply cannot pay off. (cont'd)
@kronosx7 Those in the Austrian school that understand this reason for the powershift (towards creating that 1%) predicted the outcome we're currently in YEARS before while those in the Keynesian school were left clueless, and many still are (like Krugman). And STILL people think regulation helps the economy. That's my lesson to you. You need to look a LOT deeper into this if you're going to try to convince me to support ANOTHER stimulus package.
@Liberum69 Uhh we're in this crisis because banks sold bad mortgages, slapped a triple A rating then stuck someone else with the bill. We should have bailed out the people losing their houses not the stupid banks that took their bail out, payed record bonuses and decided not to start lending money. Did I ever mention regulations? No, but a lot do help. I like clean water, air etc. They demonize the EPA, it's ridiculous. The top 1% does not float around. It remains concentrated among a few people
@LIberum69 I want a real stimulus. Not some bullshit thats mostly tax cuts. If corporations aren't going to start hiring then the government needs to. People need money to spark demand, tax cuts do not lead the hiring, demand does. Oh, and how about a GI bill for all. It's about time that we start investing in our education, it directly helps out economy. Oh, I will not respond to anymore comments, so go nuts, arguing on youtube comments is ridiculous, especially when you're a goddamn idiot.
@kronosx7 Oh, you want a REAL stimulus? The kind that could further bankrupt us into a state where we can't afford to pay off our massive debts without crippling taxation causing more unemployment in the private sector? You don't even know how those 1% assets were created, do you? It's through business regulation through corporatism. Small businesses can't afford them, but corporations can, so competition goes down bringing prices up and innovations down.
@Liberum69 Our country is not gonna last much longer.The only thing that ever decreases taxes is force. As long as we stay pussies and keep thinking we can vote someone into office to fix everything nothing will change, except for the worse. Congress and the rest of the Government will never cut it's salaries. Would you?
@kronosx7 You want the government to bail out the people who decided to buy a house they couldn't afford? Wow. And I'm supposed to be the idiot? Hahahaha. No. The government bailed the banks out because that was money that belonged to PEOPLE who DIDN'T exactly decide for the bank to make such a critical error. You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about. Even moreso when you try to tell me the 1% remains stagnant. Haha, you're clearly not nearly as smart as you think you are.
You keep talking about demand. That has absolutely nothing to do with this. Demand is what it is. People need the money to buy more, yes. But they need even MORE money if they're taking it directly from the business. Small businesses need room to grow, and your stupid stimulus is putting such a strain on them it's ridiculous. Krugman supported the stimulus. Austrians yelled out "NO, YOU IDIOT!!" Then when it doesn't work, Krugman's like "Oh, I guess it wasn't big enough, derrrp." You're an idiot
It'd be nice to see some new conservatives step up and acknowledge that lowering the defense budget doesn't make you a liberal pussy. Spending more than the next 17 countries combined doesn't make us safe, it makes us the largest employer in the world with 3.2 Million employees. That's more people than the Chinese army, and the vast majority of them would be more productive if we just payed for their college tuition.
I totally agree with his position on the JFK quote I always hated that quote because I felt I shouldn't be obligated to serve the country and conversley never felt the country should serve me. The only way I want the country to serve me is observe the constitution and keep there damn hands out my pocket.
I consider Penn an intelligent commentator on libertarian values. I don't always agree with him, but I can usually understand where he's coming from. Well, not this time. We are spending 19% of our GDP on health care right now. I know Libertarians want sick people with no insurance to just roll up and die, but hospitals don't turn those people away, and that cost gets passed on to me. I don't care if the government makes those assholes get insurance. It's called community responsibility.
I consider Penn an intelligent commentator on libertarian values. I don't always agree with him, but I can usually understand where he's coming from. Well, not this time. We are spending 19% of our GDP on health care right now. I know Libertarians want sick people with no insurance to just roll up and die, but hospitals don't turn those people away, and that cost gets passed on to me. I don't care if the government makes those assholes get insurance. It's called community responsibility.
@kcnativnla The reason healthcare costs so much in this country is because in 1973 congress passed the HMO act, forcing employers to provide coverage for their workers. Before that insurance was only used for catastrophies like heart attack,cancer ect. Routine visits were paid out of pocket, and because customers wern't delivered on a silver platter by the government like now, there was competitive pricing.
@jdowfleetwood Healthcare was out of control back then with insurance premiums inflating prices for EVERYTHING!!! Dont get blinded by the good old days,go see how much it cost and how much of your salary it took an then all the rejected payouts since a car accident on a slippery road is an act of god(the rain from the heavens made the highway slippery)so they wont pay out leaving your family members suffering ,among other excuses.That act gave workers rights to fight big insurance companys.
Penn, logic is wasted on a liberal, that is, a leftist. They know only emotion - primarily knee jerk kindergartenisms. They cannot think beyond the most basic aspects of any issue. But I appreciate your efforts at explaining limited government to those who literally want to be kept in perpetual infancy by a massive all powerful state.
I'm pretty sure Penn is towards the left and all you did was make assumptions of liberals. I'm sorry that liberals don't agree with massive tax cuts to the rich and lobbying for the rich.
@lildread1 Wrong. Penn is Libertarian, not 'toward the Left'. Libertarians believe, among other things, in small government, limited taxation & limited regulation. What's more, Penn is one of those big mean rich people who works his butt off and pays more taxes in a month than you earn in years. I'm not going to explain economics to you here, but please believe me, that the class warfare rubbish that's been shoved down your throat your whole life is a LIE, and is destroying this country.
@lildread1 What the hell are u talking about? What are u, 14 years old? I Never insulted you, I debated w/ you. I also never said 'your life' was a lie. I said the class warfare rhetoric that's been sold you your whole life is a lie - not you personally. So then you go on an infantile name-calling rant because I dared to correct you - and you call me an asshole? I'm afraid dear, that it's you who are coming off like a sour-puss dick - and a baby. Go back and read my comments again, then grow up.
@lildread1 I never said he was a right winger either. He's a Libertarian. Libertarians take a definitive stance on the each issue. But generally speaking, they are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - not leftist. Leftist is not 'liberal', but totalitarian. The Left believes in an ever expanding, controlling State; Libertarians, like Conservatives, are staunchly against the growth of government and believe in individual liberty and self-governance.
Libertarians always amuse me. The prattle on about "the individual" and his ability to make the best choice for himself as long as it doesn't harm another. That is such a pie-in-the-sky sentiment that I find it difficult to believe that someone as bright as Penn buys into it. Serving yourself will invariably lead to negative consequences to others, the environment, and the economy. Libertarianism works only in one place: On paper in the absence of any counterarguments.
I, too, love Penn but his logic is flawed in this video. By this argument, an elected official should never try to make a major change (or anything for that matter) that he and his constituents want because he won't always be there to control the outcome. That's just stupid. It's like saying "I won't buy this car because even though I know I'll drive it safely, the next guy who owns it might plow into a family of six." Definitely not one of Penn's better moments.
@GodlessAndHappy1 no he is saying that you cant give the gov power just because obama is good because someone else will get in and abuse that new power he should make major changes just not major changes in how much power he has and your analogy is incorrect it would be more like a trucker who works for a large company that requires governors on there trucks getting in a tight spot and removing the governor even tho he is only going to remove it to make one trip and he may be safe the next guy
@kris6682 (CONTINUED) to drive the truck could abuse the fact that the top speed isnt limited and could cause alot of damage because the previous driver removed the governor
damn, i never thought that way. But he's absolutely right.
that's why I love Penn, He can argue a point completely opposite of what you believe, and make you at least see where he's coming from, if not agree with him.
I'm not an Obama supporter but I am a libertarian, and @pennpoint this is a great theory. I completely conquer. "It's not the man that is always wrong, it the power" SMALL GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!
Penn, Our government is designed to be able to handle this. It isn't the 1st time the president had to much power and Congress and the Senate took it away. It is all about check and balance. See the next president may inherent all that power but it is unlikely that he/she will be able to keep it.
Well... what he is saying sounds really good but there is one thing he is leaving out. What about corporate power? If the government gets smaller and less and less powerful who could possibly stand up to the massive multi-national corporations that are not subject to American ideals at all but exist for the benefit of shareholders many of whom aren't American. Granted the government is largely already under their control but at least the people have a chance to be heard through the government.
Although I agree with Penn, he is incorrect in his assessment that Obama has taken more presidential power, as that implies that a president hasn't acted without the permission of Congress before. What Penn should've expressed is that what Obama had done by initiating acts on Libya via the UN was something he himself had at one point (while serving in Congress) argued against while Jr. was in power, the difference is Obama wasn't crossing new lines, just old ones.
Bravo. I don't even entirely agree, but his point makes perfect sense and I absolutely understand his position. It is marvelously refreshing to see such clear, intelligent, consistent thinking behind a political view instead of the too-common pointless bile based on dubious data and vague buzzwords. Rock on, Penn.
Obama is going to the right now because of upcoming elections that why he gave more tax breaks to the rich,voting seems like we either vote for the best liar or the lesser of two(three if you want to count the independents)evils.
Obama isnt a good man ,he killed a man without a wepon,it was unfair no matter what binladin did ,it dosent mean he should die. If gets killed for murder the person sentenced him to execution is also killing him which means he should also die, apparently acording to obama,. What im saying is obama shouldnt have killed binladin because he didnt have a fucking weopon.
First off. Penn is a great guy. Certainly not an idiot. I have to respectfully disagree to an extent. The greatest increase in executive power was seen under GWB. If the power is wrong that's fine. We need an informed and empowered electorate to counter the power of government. Sadly, that isn't happening because our corporate masters are busy keeping us divided. With the presence of Fox News the facts are subjective and bent to the views of those in power.
@tyrrax That's not entirely true. His expansions of presidential power are unprecedented in several ways, including openly declaring assassination of an American citizen; prosecuting more whistleblowers than the last five presidents combined; and expanding the Patriot Act's targets from terrorists to mere media pirates. However, his greatest crime is the normalization of the formerly controversial national security state policies of George W. Bush.
though I've drifted politically from libertarian to progressive, I still think Penn's main point regarding the expansion of executive power is correct. While I'm certainly willing to grant government the authority to offer a social safety net, I am in no way willing to condone the absurd policies in effect regarding military involvement overseas or erosion of civil liberties here at home.
I fucking love Penn. And I'm a liberal pussy. My thing with Penn though is unlike Glenn Beck and most of the other right wing pundits he's one of the smartest commentators out there. It's refreshing to see an opposing opinion and being able to relate to it.
@OverlordGiygas What's so "right-wing" about Glenn? He claims to be a patriot yet criticizes Nationalism. That's a contradiction. The mainstream has entirely the wrong idea about Nationalism. Anyone who opposes fascism, socialism, communism, and/or global government should be a Libertarian Nationalist (aka Constitutionalist).
Yes, governments are capable of great evil, but to take away your government's power to do good NOW because it MIGHT do evil in the future does not stand up to a rational risk/benefit analysis.
L:ibertarianism is a great idea in principle, but unfortunately it doesn't work in real life. If you want to have a happy, safe, healthy, and secure populace, you need big government. Because America has resisted this fact, the wealthiest nation in the world now more resembles a third world country than it does comparable nations such as Canada or Britain.
The point is simple: "DEMOCRACY BEATS DICTATORSHIP, SO KEEP POWER WITH THE PEOPLE!"
Well, duh. But what he misses entirely, is that the federal government has WAAAYYYY MORE power than the Constitution allows; Penn pretends to be a maverick iconoclast, but in reality he's just as much a die-hard neoconservative as Rush Limbaugh or any other right-wing whacko.
He exposed Mother Theresa as a fraud, but he won't TOUCH Neocon-icons like Lincoln or Jackson.
@AdmiralCasey18 Of course he knows. He's a smart guy. You're missing his point. Even if he were perfect in every way, it's still wrong to have that kind of power. If that's true, then it's even MORE wrong to give it to someone who's pretty good, but fallible on some points. Worse yet, that power doesn't go away. It's inherited by whatever jackass takes the throne next. Penn's just hypothesizing a fictitious scenario so he can take the PERSON out of the equation, and critique the OFFICE.
Well, I dont necessarily agree with EVERYTHING he says, I must say he makes alot of good points and pretty much sums up what bullshit the US Goverment does
@1tjos Im just gonna guess your some British Liberal cunt... That knows nothing about American history and cant justify or defend or back up and accusations he makes.
@1tjos Washington had nothing to do with the French-Indian War. He was an officer in the colonial militias, and plus the French-Indian War was a by product of the 7 years war between England and France at the time. Just because he beat the strongest power at the time with a bunch of woodsmen and farmers doesn't mean he was a dick, you just sound bitter that us colonials have surpassed you little islanders in power and productivity.
@metzger90 i'm a bit bitter but its still believe if the British wanted America we could of taken it back are soilders all around the world must of outnumbered the colonists with unbeatable odds, they were trained soilders aswell but if Americans didnt gain independants we wouldn't have The Simpsons or my Xbox so i'm not complaining to much.
Really, that's it? "Obama won't be here forever". That's your point that took 5 minutes to get here and you rant about it for another 7 minutes? Somebody someday will take healthcare money and spend it on something else, that's why there can't be a healthcare program? Seriously?
@devourerofbabies I interpreted the argument more like, "It is rather risky to expand the president's power substantially, because the person you granted that power to wont always be in that position." Personally, I feel that argument is pretty compelling for any side. Imagine the power and expanse of government instated and intended for Obama, transferred to Palin.
@HomelessWolfman But he was putting it into context of healthcare and why there shouldn't be a healthcare program. I don't know enough about Penn's specific stances on a lot of issues, but I'm given to wonder how much he railed against the patriot act when it was passed, or the two wars, or the tripling of the military budget since Clinton left. There are far bigger fish to fry if you're worried about the reckless expansion of the powers of state. Obamacare hardly merits a mention.
@devourerofbabies I think he's arguing that revenue generated by Obamacare could at some point be used to fund things that aren't necessarily Obamacare. Whether by Obama, or a future president, the power is there. It is more money being taken from everyone and given to the government to do what they want with.
@HomelessWolfman Yes, that is what he's arguing, but it's stupid because it applies to ANY program. Let's end Medicare and social security too then. Same argument applies. What, governments just shouldn't have any revenue at all? And choosing to target Obamacare is suspicious. It's a drop in the bucket next to the military. Why not go after that? I haven't watched a lot of Penn's stuff, but every time I have it's been a specious argument shilling for some right wing talking point.
@devourerofbabies Social security's gonna end itself, not to worry. And yes, the same argument applies to many gov't programs. Systems like those, (Medicare, SS, OCare) don't generate revenue. They use revenue that's been generated via taxes, like anything else gov't does. That doesn't mean gov't should have no revenue, nor does it mean the way they justify their revenue generation is just. Just because OCare is small compared, doesn't mean it should be overlooked. Penn isn't pro-war, also.
@HomelessWolfman It's a nonsense argument. It's not an argument against any program or programs, it's an argument against collecting revenue. It doesn't apply to healthcare anymore than it applies to the FBI or the military. No, just because something is small potatoes does not mean it shouldn't be mentioned, but when you're talking about massive govt funds being co-opted for nefarious reasons and you whine about healthcare and you don't even mention the military, you're being a demagogue.
@devourerofbabies I'd phrase it, 'It applies to healthcare as much as the FBI or military'. Perhaps Penn's stance is more revenue based, but I don't think it is purely a revenue issue. It's growth of government, granting them more control over our lives, and it happens to be that we're paying them to do it. I -think- Penn didn't mention the military because it's not directly controlling us. I wish he did here, too. At least he does rant about it in other videos.
@HomelessWolfman Again, if you're worried about growth of government, there are bigger fish to fry. It's like having your house hit by a tornado and crying over a broken tea cup. If you're worried about growth of government it doesn't even make sense to talk about Obama-just-the-same-as-before-care. It's ridiculous. I'd like it if you sent me a link to him ranting about the military though.
@devourerofbabies I think saying it's ridiculous to talk about something is sorta ridiculous. But anyways, /watch?v=RAHDDy7SFGo - /watch?v=DA76wlJAE-c Those are more about reasons and killing though. From these I don't think he's for the war(s), but I dunno what his stance is on spending. Since he doesn't like government spending in general, he's probably not happy. There might be a video on it somewhere, but I haven't watched all his stuff either.
@HomelessWolfman It seems like you're missing the point on purpose. It's a nonsense argument against healthcare because it applies to ALL government spending. All of it. Get it? It's not an argument against healthcare, it's an argument against ANY spending that he is using against healthcare in particular. Get it yet? He's taking a general argument against spending and applying it to healthcare without mentioning any other programs. That's disingenuous. Get it?
@devourerofbabies Yes, it applies to all government spending. I don't think that invalidates his overall point, though. I think he specified healthcare because it's a pretty prominent thing that Obama supporters would say could do no wrong, and was trying to put government spending repercussions into terms relentless Obama supporters could understand. He does mention war and other things too, not only healthcare. Obama went over congress like Bush did, but there aren't anti-war rallies anymore.
@HomelessWolfman Then what is his overall point? Government money can be co-opted for nefarious purposes? So what? That's a simple observation. What does it have to do with healthcare specifically? If it's a general argument, why mention healthcare and only healthcare? Yeah, it was Obama's big thing, but if you really care about the issue, then talk about the massive amounts that have already been co-opted. With respect to his "overall point" healthcare is totally insignificant.
@devourerofbabies I agree with you that it's a simple observation, and I'd have preferred it if he went deeper. There's a surplus of issues and greater reasons than this to dislike spending. Again, I'm thinking he's using healthcare as a buzz term to get Obama supporters to realize the repercussions of expanding government, since they probably don't think about that being an issue under their president. There are better ways to show it, but it might be enough to get people thinking at least.
This episode helped me to realize a completely new aspect of political power, thanks for that. Pretty simple thing that's so easy to overlook. A big thank you for making me a bit less ignorant.
Here in florida our new governor has done just about the only thing I agree with. Our governor is a conman (literally, he squandered and embezzled alot of money in the last business he was in, and got away with it). He in my honest opinion is a scumbag. BUT. He has put a law into play that says all people on welfare need to get drug tests on a regular basis. Who else agrees with this? Btw dont bring up weed, I have no problem with it and we all know much worse is used in the ghettos
Amen. I've always thought, that J.F.K's "ask not " speach was something that would make more sense if it came from the mouth of Mussolini. Because, it has got to be the most facsist statement ever made by a American, or for that matter western, leader ever made.
I agree with this to some extent, but there are SOME things the government SHOULD protect for ALL CITIZENS. and I think the right to healthcare is one of those.
You know, I do see your point, but I from what I understand (and I'm not claiming to be an expert ) your countries health system is just plain broken. You said once that the government should be limited to police, defence of the country and edgication (if I'm remembering correctly). I think health should be added to that, because it seems that for profit health care companies are not a good option.
@Disthron Agree. I'm a small government liberarian who believes in universal single payer healthcare. It's one of the few functions government should have, IMO.
@Nemesis000000 The problem is the more power you give the govt the less rights we have as ppl. SImple things such as food we choice to eat or a car we deciede to drive or even a pet we deciede to own maybe limited so that we cannot deciede for ourselfs because someone else is decieding for you, And I personally dont want to pay a bunch of money to lazy ppl who deciede they dont WANT to work!
@nikigurl08 Single payer healthcare does not take away any choice. And I am against the elaborate welfare system that props up lazy people to the point where they don't have to work if they can. So those people wouldn't exist under my ideal. Even if they did, I wouldn't want them to die because they have no money either.
@Nemesis000000 Its does take away choice if you dont have insurance you get FINED and thrown in jail, so basically you HAVE to have insurance wheater you want it or NOT!! That's a personal choice that under the health care system would be taken away. And with that healthcare plan the government deciedes who your doctor is! Now personally I dont know about you, but I WANT to choose who operates on me and who doesn't!
@nikigurl08 I dont agree with Obama's health plan. Mandating purchasing insurance is abhorrent to me. Single payer coverage is what I'm in favour of. You might say its the same thinb because it "forces" you to "buy" it through taxes, but you could say the same thing about military protection, the fire department etc, which I see as equivalent services.
@Nemesis000000 As far as the elaborate welfare system goes, lazy ppl who dont want to work, will work if it mean they dont get to eat. And Welfare holds ppl back, its like that 40 yr old man who still lives with his mom, because she doesn't want to him to live on the street. Well if that mom would throw her son out and let him man up, he would learn to fend for himself if ppl werent givin him a bunch of handouts. And if he man up he could benefit society and not leech off it.
@Nemesis000000 And which case if someone works for a living they have a feeling of self worth. Most ppl will find a way to survive if they are thrown into that scenario, the will to survive is a very powerful force, and ppl need struggle and obstacles in their lives to become better ppl and stronger ppl. This is why Welfare can hold ppl back it shelters ppl so they can't grow and become strong and find their calling. Welfare is going good for ppl WHO ACTUALLY NEED IT!
@nikigurl08 I totally agree with you on welfare. Like I said, I'm not in favour of the welfare state. People need to be alive to have that chance, though.
So the argument against providing free healthcare to those who need it is that the government will become too powerfull? Your tax money pays to keep police on the streets. People with higher incomes pay more than those on lower incomes but the police are there to keep EVERYONE safe. Not just the rich. So what about the doctors? Only if you can afford it...
@DrSpooglemon Uhhhh yes, if the government takes over healthcare it will become even more big and powerful than it already is. We need to ween ourselves off as many government programs as possible to maximize liberty. With universal healthcare the government really has you by the balls. When you depend on the government too much, they can turn on you at any time. And fuck the police. If you need protection you're weak and you should hire a dominatrix instead.
@DrSpooglemon Oh excellent argument! Name-calling! You know, that's the first sign of a small mind- when you resort to name-calling. Clearly you don't have a valid argument for your claims and you clearly don't understand economics if you think government regulation is the answer.
@DrSpooglemon A fuckwit huh? That's slang so it's not in the dictionary. But as long as we're avoiding intelligent arguments and just resorting to name-calling, you're a liberal pussy who needs the government to take care of you because you're too much of a retard to take care of yourself. The reason why we shouldn't have universal healthcare is because we need idiots like you to just die off. Economic darwinism bitch. I bet you collect welfare checks you hippie faggot. Go suck obama's cock
@TurquoiseCowboy I don't think intelligent discussion is something you have a proclivity for. Fuckwit may be slang but it is still in the dictionary. Besides you are the one who introduced profanity to this discussion...
@TurquoiseCowboy I just had a look at your channel. I watched two seconds of one of your videos and that is enough to assure me of my conviction that you ARE a fuckwit...
@DrSpooglemon Hey, I may play a dumb CHARACTER on my youtube channel, but even that character isn't enough of a "fuckwit" to advocate something as dumb as universal healthcare. But you originally made your conviction that I'm a fuckwit based on the fact that I don't like the police- which is absolutely ridiculous. Your channel says you don't even live in america so you haven't experienced or seen the police brutality here. But I apologize for my earlier insults, they were uncalled for.
@TurquoiseCowboy Police brutality aside, the fact is that there are some members of society who need protection. Abuse of power is an inherent problem in any powerbase - the police are no exception - but this should be dealt with through enforced compliance with rules. Inteligent discussion and appropriate legislation is required. If there were no police at all the situation would be worse because there are others who will abuse any power they can attain with impunity. As far as my opinion --->
@TurquoiseCowboy on universal health care is concerned; I live in a country not too dissimilar to america. We have the NHS. The philosophy is "give what you can, take what you need". If you can afford it you can pay for private health care, but if you cannot then you can recieve treatment when you need it. I know people who have been treated for cancer who could not have afforded the treatment. To rely on charities would be foly. State ordained health care is more reliable than charity --->
@TurquoiseCowboy If there was less of a gap in income the everyone could afford healthcare but the fact is that some people get paid very little and whattever view you want to take of such people bear in mind someone has to do the job. In a civilised society everyone should be respected and if not by the person who pays their wages then at least by the tax payer. Or would you rather live in the wild west? Anywho, apology accepted...
@DrSpooglemon I agree with you that police are necessary in any society, I just wish they didn't abuse their power so much. I also wish they were more reactive than proactive, but that's another argument. As far as state-funded healthcare goes, I feel like private charity is more reliable than people think. Altruism is built into our genes, so we are inclined to look out for one another. When it's funded by the state, the charity is taken by governement force, which I feel takes away (con.)
Square space wont be advertising here again...
temporaldisplacement 1 week ago
pfft..Penn just being a racist redneck <3
craekor 1 week ago
@craekor do you know what libertarianism is?
toSTONEiGO 2 days ago
@toSTONEiGO unrelated question to an unrelated response?
craekor 2 days ago
@craekor no it wast. penn is a libertarian, not conservative. you used the wrong sterotype. try thinking for youself and get out of your liberal circlejerk.
toSTONEiGO 2 days ago
@toSTONEiGO It was a joke you retard, Penn said go ahead and call me racist so I did. Welcome to the internet.
craekor 2 days ago
Obama showd that he definitely doesn't know everything when he said healthcare costs are high because of corrupt doctors, i.e. his supposed diabetes "foot pirates".
No. Costs are going up because, unlike the past, most conditions are treatible nowdays.
And genetically engineered treatments are very expensive.
charlesvan13 1 month ago 4
good pen point he made) hes abit of a maths teacher is pen very logical
ThePhil909 1 month ago
ahahah go ahead call mmme racist now!!!
ThePhil909 1 month ago
Oh man, you liberals need to change your selves. Pissing yourself in the comments, nasty.
ledawg1138 1 month ago in playlist More videos from pennpoint
''Even if I.. You're it by a truck...''
kristofergudmunds 2 months ago
I don't completely agree with obama, but I don't think he's extending the gov't's power as much as you think he is.
xdearlifex 2 months ago
@xdearlifex well he did move the (really blanking on the name here... the "gerrymanderer's") the organization that considers voting districts--- he moved under the white house's jurisdiction, while thats not illegal for a president to do, the gerrymandering organization is now in liberal control and they could manipulate the voting districts so republicans and libertarians, anyone with slightly "right" views may not really get a say in their government
Rhuarc224 1 month ago
@Rhuarc224 And I'm not on board with that decision. Do you have a website that's non-partisan that can show me how he has extended his office's power? I'd like to inform myself.
On a related note, I'd like to point out that Obama has made very very few executive orders.
xdearlifex 1 month ago
@xdearlifex i do not. everyone views it one way or another, youre not going to find anything unbiased.
Rhuarc224 1 month ago
Obama, even if you live out all your terms? Seems FDR changes stayed are the most popular changes ever made. So you are stating, if he does soemthing the people like, history shows others can change them? That is not True...We have people trying to kill Medicare and Social Security.... and you are getting the MOBS. Our government making changes for the good, have the people behind the policies and they stay. Ignorant argument.
joraejean 2 months ago
Don't get me wrong. I think that Penn is awesome. I agree with a lot of what he says. But damn that guy can ramble on endlessly.
2Gobbleme 2 months ago
I completely get what Penn's trying to convey here. I've always thought that Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you..." was BS and it is really supposed to be all about the people. Yet we are so blinded by the current situation going on in the world with these countries and politicians and problems with economy, welfare et.c that we are not realizing the simple fact that the politicians are supposed to be working for us as people. I've become more liberal after Penn's speech now.
Terminator6385 2 months ago
I'm no fan of Obama, I'm no fan of continual war, but I like the idea of a president who does something besides war and tax cuts for his buddies. You may not like Obama, hell, I don't either, but you have to give credit to someone WHO'S TRYING. Some things are within the scope of the government, some things ARE NOT for-profit, some things exist in America BECAUSE WE'RE AMERICA. Political ideology be damned, some things are terrible in the wrong hands.
MagnesDrachen13 2 months ago
The libertarian position on pretty much everything: "Eh, corporations will do it. Just take away all the rules and they'll do the right thing. Of course they will"
MagnesDrachen13 2 months ago
@MagnesDrachen13 It's not a bad idea, if it wasn't for these big corporations we wouldn't have some of the technological break throughs we've had because of competition. But as we've seen, corporations can run wild and screw everything up. There's probably a very plausible middle ground that would be perfect, but right and left politicians are paid off and will never compromise.
thispoorguy 2 months ago
I have observed that Penn Jilette is not as articulate on his own, as opposed to having a script writer, like on "Bullshit." He keeps stammering over his words, as though he hasn't thought this through ahead of time.
SamonMarquis 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Clinton was Awesome he should have been lifelong king. We would still be an economic power house if he was still at the helm.
Luigi84289 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fuck Obama. Never seen such a lazy President.
Luigi84289 2 months ago
Can anyone explain how you could still possibly love Obama (as a president not a person)
stickinthemud1524 2 months ago
I LOVEEEEE what Penn said about JFK's quote. THANK YOU. My gawd. I never thought I'd meet someone that hated that quote as much as me.
Liberum69 3 months ago
Something or someone is always going to have 'power'. If it's not a government, it will be an emperor, or a corporation, or a theocracy, or an army, or a warlord, or a gang. Out of that list I'm thinking I'd prefer it to be an elected government. I like Penn but this is bullshit.
jasta07 3 months ago
I understand your point, but what exactly has Obama done? He hasn't taken us into any wars, but even if he did, every president since WW2 has done the same, since thats the last time congress actually declared war. As far as the kennedy quote, collectively we ARE the country. The quote is saying that you should not live for yourself but rather we should all live for each other, because we only advance when we work together. Bush expanded the powers of the president, Obama hasn't.
kronosx7 3 months ago
@kronosx7, "...what exactly has Obama done? He hasn't taken us into any wars". Are you aware that he hasn't brought our troops back from the middle east. He hasn't discontinued the war like he promised. He's another lying fake politician, just like George W. Bush.
Nashhinton 3 months ago
@Nashhinton You sure about that? Afghanistan is scaling down over 2 years (Long time I know) but every soldier from iraq will be home in 2 months. Is that really all you got? If you want to point to Obama for all the bad shit, you can probably find a republican behind the idea, and a group of them fighting to let him not change it. Republicans are obstructing this country, not Obama. Remember, the president doesn't write law, congress does, and congress with its 14% approval rating is a joke
kronosx7 3 months ago
@kronosx7, Well I think president OBAMA has tripled the national debt ever since he came into office. He's not as bad as Bush, but he still sucks. We've been getting a lot of fake ass politicians recently, and I'm sick of it. Also, I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. I'm more of a libertarian who believes in a mixed economy, but I'm leaning more towards capitalism than a full blown mixed economy.
Nashhinton 3 months ago
@Nashhinton We would be in a depression without obama. plain and simple. Dont let the republicans trip you up with their bullshit about how we need to keep cutting taxes for the super rich while raising them for everyone else. The fair tax, the flat tax, 999 it all massively cuts the tax burden for the super rich, and raises it heavily for the rest of us Dont let them fool you they obstruct him at EVERY turn. Their goal is to ensure Obama is a one term pres, the country can go to hell to get it
kronosx7 3 months ago
@kronosx7 some ecnomists would argue that it would have snapped back much more quickly without bailouts and meddling.
sneakonproductionz 3 months ago
@sneakonproductionz Actually most economists say we would be in a depression. Most economists say that the stimulus package wasn't big enough. By the way, republicans LOOOOVE tax breaks, the stimulus was about half tax breaks. Now watch them argue to cut pell grants and raise payroll tax. They're only for tax breaks that save millionaires and billionaires money. The ONLY reason they don't LOVE the stimulus package was because it was Barack Obama's stimulus package.
kronosx7 3 months ago
@kronosx7 Most?? No. Just Paul Krugman and some other Keynesian nuts.
Liberum69 3 months ago
@Liberum69 Yeah, Paul Krugman, that crazy nobel prize winning economist. I suppose your solution is to keep feeding millionaires and billionaires MORE money. The top 1% pay has risen 275% in the last 30 years, 400 people own more wealth than 150 million, how many of these numbers do you need before you're convinced.
kronosx7 3 months ago
@kronosx7 Yeah, Obama won a Nobel prize, too. Pfft. You know the recent winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics is more towards the Austrian school, which pretty much means he hates Paul Krugman, right? You have no idea what you mean by the top 1% or any of the facts behind its establishment. The top 1% isn't a population. It's a set of assets that typically shifts through the population. A lot of that 1% that are more stagnant are typically well-to-do businessmen like Bill Gates. (cont'd)
Liberum69 3 months ago
That top 1% you're thinking you're referring to was established through the regulations you sheepishly push for. More regulations means less competition, which large corporations love, because it kills small business competition by making it far more expensive for them, while the corporations can afford it. So they spend money on lobbying for these regulations. The stimulus package did nothing but make the dollar worth less, bringing debt to a level we simply cannot pay off. (cont'd)
Liberum69 3 months ago
@kronosx7 Those in the Austrian school that understand this reason for the powershift (towards creating that 1%) predicted the outcome we're currently in YEARS before while those in the Keynesian school were left clueless, and many still are (like Krugman). And STILL people think regulation helps the economy. That's my lesson to you. You need to look a LOT deeper into this if you're going to try to convince me to support ANOTHER stimulus package.
Liberum69 3 months ago
@Liberum69 Uhh we're in this crisis because banks sold bad mortgages, slapped a triple A rating then stuck someone else with the bill. We should have bailed out the people losing their houses not the stupid banks that took their bail out, payed record bonuses and decided not to start lending money. Did I ever mention regulations? No, but a lot do help. I like clean water, air etc. They demonize the EPA, it's ridiculous. The top 1% does not float around. It remains concentrated among a few people
kronosx7 3 months ago
@LIberum69 I want a real stimulus. Not some bullshit thats mostly tax cuts. If corporations aren't going to start hiring then the government needs to. People need money to spark demand, tax cuts do not lead the hiring, demand does. Oh, and how about a GI bill for all. It's about time that we start investing in our education, it directly helps out economy. Oh, I will not respond to anymore comments, so go nuts, arguing on youtube comments is ridiculous, especially when you're a goddamn idiot.
kronosx7 3 months ago
@kronosx7 Oh, you want a REAL stimulus? The kind that could further bankrupt us into a state where we can't afford to pay off our massive debts without crippling taxation causing more unemployment in the private sector? You don't even know how those 1% assets were created, do you? It's through business regulation through corporatism. Small businesses can't afford them, but corporations can, so competition goes down bringing prices up and innovations down.
Liberum69 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Liberum69 Our country is not gonna last much longer.The only thing that ever decreases taxes is force. As long as we stay pussies and keep thinking we can vote someone into office to fix everything nothing will change, except for the worse. Congress and the rest of the Government will never cut it's salaries. Would you?
Luigi84289 2 months ago
@kronosx7 You want the government to bail out the people who decided to buy a house they couldn't afford? Wow. And I'm supposed to be the idiot? Hahahaha. No. The government bailed the banks out because that was money that belonged to PEOPLE who DIDN'T exactly decide for the bank to make such a critical error. You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about. Even moreso when you try to tell me the 1% remains stagnant. Haha, you're clearly not nearly as smart as you think you are.
Liberum69 3 months ago
You keep talking about demand. That has absolutely nothing to do with this. Demand is what it is. People need the money to buy more, yes. But they need even MORE money if they're taking it directly from the business. Small businesses need room to grow, and your stupid stimulus is putting such a strain on them it's ridiculous. Krugman supported the stimulus. Austrians yelled out "NO, YOU IDIOT!!" Then when it doesn't work, Krugman's like "Oh, I guess it wasn't big enough, derrrp." You're an idiot
Liberum69 3 months ago
this is bullshit come on penn say that
fashanu1000 3 months ago
It'd be nice to see some new conservatives step up and acknowledge that lowering the defense budget doesn't make you a liberal pussy. Spending more than the next 17 countries combined doesn't make us safe, it makes us the largest employer in the world with 3.2 Million employees. That's more people than the Chinese army, and the vast majority of them would be more productive if we just payed for their college tuition.
MikeDeFi 4 months ago
I totally agree with his position on the JFK quote I always hated that quote because I felt I shouldn't be obligated to serve the country and conversley never felt the country should serve me. The only way I want the country to serve me is observe the constitution and keep there damn hands out my pocket.
xtntxex 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I consider Penn an intelligent commentator on libertarian values. I don't always agree with him, but I can usually understand where he's coming from. Well, not this time. We are spending 19% of our GDP on health care right now. I know Libertarians want sick people with no insurance to just roll up and die, but hospitals don't turn those people away, and that cost gets passed on to me. I don't care if the government makes those assholes get insurance. It's called community responsibility.
kcnativnla 4 months ago
I consider Penn an intelligent commentator on libertarian values. I don't always agree with him, but I can usually understand where he's coming from. Well, not this time. We are spending 19% of our GDP on health care right now. I know Libertarians want sick people with no insurance to just roll up and die, but hospitals don't turn those people away, and that cost gets passed on to me. I don't care if the government makes those assholes get insurance. It's called community responsibility.
kcnativnla 4 months ago
@kcnativnla Libertarians don't want sick people to die, jackass.
jbevan70 4 months ago
@kcnativnla The reason healthcare costs so much in this country is because in 1973 congress passed the HMO act, forcing employers to provide coverage for their workers. Before that insurance was only used for catastrophies like heart attack,cancer ect. Routine visits were paid out of pocket, and because customers wern't delivered on a silver platter by the government like now, there was competitive pricing.
jdowfleetwood 4 months ago
@jdowfleetwood Healthcare was out of control back then with insurance premiums inflating prices for EVERYTHING!!! Dont get blinded by the good old days,go see how much it cost and how much of your salary it took an then all the rejected payouts since a car accident on a slippery road is an act of god(the rain from the heavens made the highway slippery)so they wont pay out leaving your family members suffering ,among other excuses.That act gave workers rights to fight big insurance companys.
Thelondonbadger 4 months ago
I'm not sure that I fully understood the point/message of this video.
taylormah92 4 months ago
Why does Penn have one finger nail red???
flyingscience 4 months ago
Penn, logic is wasted on a liberal, that is, a leftist. They know only emotion - primarily knee jerk kindergartenisms. They cannot think beyond the most basic aspects of any issue. But I appreciate your efforts at explaining limited government to those who literally want to be kept in perpetual infancy by a massive all powerful state.
HayPennie 5 months ago
@HayPennie
I'm pretty sure Penn is towards the left and all you did was make assumptions of liberals. I'm sorry that liberals don't agree with massive tax cuts to the rich and lobbying for the rich.
lildread1 5 months ago
@lildread1 Wrong. Penn is Libertarian, not 'toward the Left'. Libertarians believe, among other things, in small government, limited taxation & limited regulation. What's more, Penn is one of those big mean rich people who works his butt off and pays more taxes in a month than you earn in years. I'm not going to explain economics to you here, but please believe me, that the class warfare rubbish that's been shoved down your throat your whole life is a LIE, and is destroying this country.
HayPennie 5 months ago 14
@HayPennie
damn you are one pissed off person, my life may be a "lie", but atleast I'm not some pissed of asshole.
Also I have not yet to tell you my political stances on anything, all you have done is made assumptions and made yourself look like a dick.
lildread1 5 months ago
@lildread1 What the hell are u talking about? What are u, 14 years old? I Never insulted you, I debated w/ you. I also never said 'your life' was a lie. I said the class warfare rhetoric that's been sold you your whole life is a lie - not you personally. So then you go on an infantile name-calling rant because I dared to correct you - and you call me an asshole? I'm afraid dear, that it's you who are coming off like a sour-puss dick - and a baby. Go back and read my comments again, then grow up.
HayPennie 5 months ago
@HayPennie
You continue to prove you are one gigantic engulfing asshole.
lildread1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lildread1 Whatever you say emo kid.
HayPennie 5 months ago
@HayPennie
Also socially he appears to be left leaning, and furthermore being a libertarian does not automatically make you towards the right.
lildread1 5 months ago
@lildread1 I never said he was a right winger either. He's a Libertarian. Libertarians take a definitive stance on the each issue. But generally speaking, they are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - not leftist. Leftist is not 'liberal', but totalitarian. The Left believes in an ever expanding, controlling State; Libertarians, like Conservatives, are staunchly against the growth of government and believe in individual liberty and self-governance.
HayPennie 5 months ago
Libertarians always amuse me. The prattle on about "the individual" and his ability to make the best choice for himself as long as it doesn't harm another. That is such a pie-in-the-sky sentiment that I find it difficult to believe that someone as bright as Penn buys into it. Serving yourself will invariably lead to negative consequences to others, the environment, and the economy. Libertarianism works only in one place: On paper in the absence of any counterarguments.
GodlessAndHappy1 5 months ago
I, too, love Penn but his logic is flawed in this video. By this argument, an elected official should never try to make a major change (or anything for that matter) that he and his constituents want because he won't always be there to control the outcome. That's just stupid. It's like saying "I won't buy this car because even though I know I'll drive it safely, the next guy who owns it might plow into a family of six." Definitely not one of Penn's better moments.
GodlessAndHappy1 5 months ago
@GodlessAndHappy1 no he is saying that you cant give the gov power just because obama is good because someone else will get in and abuse that new power he should make major changes just not major changes in how much power he has and your analogy is incorrect it would be more like a trucker who works for a large company that requires governors on there trucks getting in a tight spot and removing the governor even tho he is only going to remove it to make one trip and he may be safe the next guy
kris6682 5 months ago
@kris6682 (CONTINUED) to drive the truck could abuse the fact that the top speed isnt limited and could cause alot of damage because the previous driver removed the governor
kris6682 5 months ago
The way to fix all mistakes is to make a system that works.
Even if you have greedy people in politics you can use that to your advantage.
The system in the USA has worked before the corruption started.
That is why you all ways need to update the law and it must be used on everybody.
AlekSensej 5 months ago
HOLY SHIT!
damn, i never thought that way. But he's absolutely right.
that's why I love Penn, He can argue a point completely opposite of what you believe, and make you at least see where he's coming from, if not agree with him.
Why? because he makes sense.
dudemanbobthing 5 months ago
best Penn Point EVER
pstreiner 5 months ago
The federal government shrunk in size since Obama took office. Thousands of people less.
Medicare and Medicaid are solvable until, like, 2050.
The entire civilised world has better healthcare insurance system than the US.
Why do you think medical drama's on TV are so popular? Because so many people can relate to it!! (same as cop shows and courtroom shows).
dinoballz 5 months ago
I don't necessarily agree with all Penn's views, but he is so considerate and intelligent that I find his videos so fascinating.
craigdevlin1 5 months ago
I'm not an Obama supporter but I am a libertarian, and @pennpoint this is a great theory. I completely conquer. "It's not the man that is always wrong, it the power" SMALL GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!
TrayWiks 5 months ago
@TrayWiks completely concur* not conquer...not trying to diminish what you're saying just pointing that out
SlauterHouZe101 5 months ago
Penn, Our government is designed to be able to handle this. It isn't the 1st time the president had to much power and Congress and the Senate took it away. It is all about check and balance. See the next president may inherent all that power but it is unlikely that he/she will be able to keep it.
Xatasha6611 5 months ago
Well... what he is saying sounds really good but there is one thing he is leaving out. What about corporate power? If the government gets smaller and less and less powerful who could possibly stand up to the massive multi-national corporations that are not subject to American ideals at all but exist for the benefit of shareholders many of whom aren't American. Granted the government is largely already under their control but at least the people have a chance to be heard through the government.
voncello 5 months ago
Although I agree with Penn, he is incorrect in his assessment that Obama has taken more presidential power, as that implies that a president hasn't acted without the permission of Congress before. What Penn should've expressed is that what Obama had done by initiating acts on Libya via the UN was something he himself had at one point (while serving in Congress) argued against while Jr. was in power, the difference is Obama wasn't crossing new lines, just old ones.
Snoobs17 6 months ago
@Snoobs17 Sure. Assuming he had the power to see the future, that is.
Zanderith 6 months ago
Bravo. I don't even entirely agree, but his point makes perfect sense and I absolutely understand his position. It is marvelously refreshing to see such clear, intelligent, consistent thinking behind a political view instead of the too-common pointless bile based on dubious data and vague buzzwords. Rock on, Penn.
antialiasis 6 months ago 15
@antialiasis I just don't get how his point makes perfect sense to you yet don't agree with him.
munkyusm 4 months ago
Absolutely brilliant approach to the liberal viewpoint. Libertarianism ftw yet again...
tehicebear 6 months ago
Obama is going to the right now because of upcoming elections that why he gave more tax breaks to the rich,voting seems like we either vote for the best liar or the lesser of two(three if you want to count the independents)evils.
johndebbra 6 months ago
Obama isnt a good man ,he killed a man without a wepon,it was unfair no matter what binladin did ,it dosent mean he should die. If gets killed for murder the person sentenced him to execution is also killing him which means he should also die, apparently acording to obama,. What im saying is obama shouldnt have killed binladin because he didnt have a fucking weopon.
Armydude655 6 months ago
@Armydude655
Yeah! Cosigning a shitload of people to death and indirectly causing a war isn't worth death at all!
Leave osama alone guys, i'm sure he's not all that bad!
TheFingerbuns 6 months ago
First off. Penn is a great guy. Certainly not an idiot. I have to respectfully disagree to an extent. The greatest increase in executive power was seen under GWB. If the power is wrong that's fine. We need an informed and empowered electorate to counter the power of government. Sadly, that isn't happening because our corporate masters are busy keeping us divided. With the presence of Fox News the facts are subjective and bent to the views of those in power.
tyrrax 6 months ago
@tyrrax That's not entirely true. His expansions of presidential power are unprecedented in several ways, including openly declaring assassination of an American citizen; prosecuting more whistleblowers than the last five presidents combined; and expanding the Patriot Act's targets from terrorists to mere media pirates. However, his greatest crime is the normalization of the formerly controversial national security state policies of George W. Bush.
Madfoot713 5 months ago
though I've drifted politically from libertarian to progressive, I still think Penn's main point regarding the expansion of executive power is correct. While I'm certainly willing to grant government the authority to offer a social safety net, I am in no way willing to condone the absurd policies in effect regarding military involvement overseas or erosion of civil liberties here at home.
nvonliph 6 months ago
I fucking love Penn. And I'm a liberal pussy. My thing with Penn though is unlike Glenn Beck and most of the other right wing pundits he's one of the smartest commentators out there. It's refreshing to see an opposing opinion and being able to relate to it.
OverlordGiygas 6 months ago 18
@OverlordGiygas I'm confused how you can like what he says here, but still consider yourself a "liberal pussy".
munkyusm 4 months ago
@OverlordGiygas What's so "right-wing" about Glenn? He claims to be a patriot yet criticizes Nationalism. That's a contradiction. The mainstream has entirely the wrong idea about Nationalism. Anyone who opposes fascism, socialism, communism, and/or global government should be a Libertarian Nationalist (aka Constitutionalist).
IggyHazard 2 months ago in playlist More videos from pennpoint
Yes, governments are capable of great evil, but to take away your government's power to do good NOW because it MIGHT do evil in the future does not stand up to a rational risk/benefit analysis.
In short, stop being such an idealogue, Penn.
Sarcasticron 6 months ago
L:ibertarianism is a great idea in principle, but unfortunately it doesn't work in real life. If you want to have a happy, safe, healthy, and secure populace, you need big government. Because America has resisted this fact, the wealthiest nation in the world now more resembles a third world country than it does comparable nations such as Canada or Britain.
Sarcasticron 6 months ago
this is an awesome video penn rock on man!
THESLICKNESSEDM 6 months ago
The point starts at 4:40 :-)
MissPrettyBean 6 months ago 2
I like Penn but he needs to GET TO THE FUCKING POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SCROGY 6 months ago
@SCROGY
The point is simple: "DEMOCRACY BEATS DICTATORSHIP, SO KEEP POWER WITH THE PEOPLE!"
Well, duh. But what he misses entirely, is that the federal government has WAAAYYYY MORE power than the Constitution allows; Penn pretends to be a maverick iconoclast, but in reality he's just as much a die-hard neoconservative as Rush Limbaugh or any other right-wing whacko.
He exposed Mother Theresa as a fraud, but he won't TOUCH Neocon-icons like Lincoln or Jackson.
postalmeter 6 months ago
I dont like any american party. I suport social democrasy.
gulbirk 6 months ago
I'm a Liberal, and I don't love Obama. A perfect president is an impossibility.
JackKlompus13 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
America deserved 9/11. Fuck all the US troops currently oppressing the rest of the world.
MegaChairmanMao 7 months ago
Too bad he didn't know that even liberals critisis Obama.
AdmiralCasey18 7 months ago
@AdmiralCasey18 Of course he knows. He's a smart guy. You're missing his point. Even if he were perfect in every way, it's still wrong to have that kind of power. If that's true, then it's even MORE wrong to give it to someone who's pretty good, but fallible on some points. Worse yet, that power doesn't go away. It's inherited by whatever jackass takes the throne next. Penn's just hypothesizing a fictitious scenario so he can take the PERSON out of the equation, and critique the OFFICE.
rmcdaniel423 6 months ago
@AdmiralCasey18
Liberals worship Obama
Progressives criticize him.
Jpkingu2 6 months ago
@Jpkingu2 You wished
AdmiralCasey18 6 months ago
Well, I dont necessarily agree with EVERYTHING he says, I must say he makes alot of good points and pretty much sums up what bullshit the US Goverment does
collateralJvlogs 7 months ago
I disagree with this, but Penn is awesome.
Kentarules2 7 months ago
I fucking love Penn.
I'm in britain and I never heard of him, but this month I've really gotten into him.
He's like me, only with the balls to tell people to FUCK OFF :D
ThatsMrFrank 7 months ago
george washington was a dick he started a war with france when the america's were just colonies and britain had to defend them.
1tjos 7 months ago
@1tjos Im just gonna guess your some British Liberal cunt... That knows nothing about American history and cant justify or defend or back up and accusations he makes.
collateralJvlogs 7 months ago
@1tjos Washington had nothing to do with the French-Indian War. He was an officer in the colonial militias, and plus the French-Indian War was a by product of the 7 years war between England and France at the time. Just because he beat the strongest power at the time with a bunch of woodsmen and farmers doesn't mean he was a dick, you just sound bitter that us colonials have surpassed you little islanders in power and productivity.
metzger90 7 months ago
@metzger90 i'm a bit bitter but its still believe if the British wanted America we could of taken it back are soilders all around the world must of outnumbered the colonists with unbeatable odds, they were trained soilders aswell but if Americans didnt gain independants we wouldn't have The Simpsons or my Xbox so i'm not complaining to much.
1tjos 7 months ago
@1tjos British outnumbered the Maori's as well, and they did not have guns. Kind of ended in a draw.
TheAlhero 6 months ago
this is EXACTLY the crux of the matter! those who don't get it aren't paying attention.
one of your best, penn.
Ecosse57 7 months ago
1:00 He'll get to the point soon I'm sure
2:00 Not yet.
3:00 Still babbling?
4:00 Really? Get to the fucking point already?
5:00 Here it comes....
Really, that's it? "Obama won't be here forever". That's your point that took 5 minutes to get here and you rant about it for another 7 minutes? Somebody someday will take healthcare money and spend it on something else, that's why there can't be a healthcare program? Seriously?
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies I interpreted the argument more like, "It is rather risky to expand the president's power substantially, because the person you granted that power to wont always be in that position." Personally, I feel that argument is pretty compelling for any side. Imagine the power and expanse of government instated and intended for Obama, transferred to Palin.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman But he was putting it into context of healthcare and why there shouldn't be a healthcare program. I don't know enough about Penn's specific stances on a lot of issues, but I'm given to wonder how much he railed against the patriot act when it was passed, or the two wars, or the tripling of the military budget since Clinton left. There are far bigger fish to fry if you're worried about the reckless expansion of the powers of state. Obamacare hardly merits a mention.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies I think he's arguing that revenue generated by Obamacare could at some point be used to fund things that aren't necessarily Obamacare. Whether by Obama, or a future president, the power is there. It is more money being taken from everyone and given to the government to do what they want with.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman Yes, that is what he's arguing, but it's stupid because it applies to ANY program. Let's end Medicare and social security too then. Same argument applies. What, governments just shouldn't have any revenue at all? And choosing to target Obamacare is suspicious. It's a drop in the bucket next to the military. Why not go after that? I haven't watched a lot of Penn's stuff, but every time I have it's been a specious argument shilling for some right wing talking point.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies Social security's gonna end itself, not to worry. And yes, the same argument applies to many gov't programs. Systems like those, (Medicare, SS, OCare) don't generate revenue. They use revenue that's been generated via taxes, like anything else gov't does. That doesn't mean gov't should have no revenue, nor does it mean the way they justify their revenue generation is just. Just because OCare is small compared, doesn't mean it should be overlooked. Penn isn't pro-war, also.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman It's a nonsense argument. It's not an argument against any program or programs, it's an argument against collecting revenue. It doesn't apply to healthcare anymore than it applies to the FBI or the military. No, just because something is small potatoes does not mean it shouldn't be mentioned, but when you're talking about massive govt funds being co-opted for nefarious reasons and you whine about healthcare and you don't even mention the military, you're being a demagogue.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies I'd phrase it, 'It applies to healthcare as much as the FBI or military'. Perhaps Penn's stance is more revenue based, but I don't think it is purely a revenue issue. It's growth of government, granting them more control over our lives, and it happens to be that we're paying them to do it. I -think- Penn didn't mention the military because it's not directly controlling us. I wish he did here, too. At least he does rant about it in other videos.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman Again, if you're worried about growth of government, there are bigger fish to fry. It's like having your house hit by a tornado and crying over a broken tea cup. If you're worried about growth of government it doesn't even make sense to talk about Obama-just-the-same-as-before-care. It's ridiculous. I'd like it if you sent me a link to him ranting about the military though.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies I think saying it's ridiculous to talk about something is sorta ridiculous. But anyways, /watch?v=RAHDDy7SFGo - /watch?v=DA76wlJAE-c Those are more about reasons and killing though. From these I don't think he's for the war(s), but I dunno what his stance is on spending. Since he doesn't like government spending in general, he's probably not happy. There might be a video on it somewhere, but I haven't watched all his stuff either.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman I think it's ridiculous to make a nonsense argument. This is a nonsense argument.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies If you're alright with expanding government and giving the president exponential power then yes, it is a nonsense argument.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman It seems like you're missing the point on purpose. It's a nonsense argument against healthcare because it applies to ALL government spending. All of it. Get it? It's not an argument against healthcare, it's an argument against ANY spending that he is using against healthcare in particular. Get it yet? He's taking a general argument against spending and applying it to healthcare without mentioning any other programs. That's disingenuous. Get it?
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies Yes, it applies to all government spending. I don't think that invalidates his overall point, though. I think he specified healthcare because it's a pretty prominent thing that Obama supporters would say could do no wrong, and was trying to put government spending repercussions into terms relentless Obama supporters could understand. He does mention war and other things too, not only healthcare. Obama went over congress like Bush did, but there aren't anti-war rallies anymore.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman Then what is his overall point? Government money can be co-opted for nefarious purposes? So what? That's a simple observation. What does it have to do with healthcare specifically? If it's a general argument, why mention healthcare and only healthcare? Yeah, it was Obama's big thing, but if you really care about the issue, then talk about the massive amounts that have already been co-opted. With respect to his "overall point" healthcare is totally insignificant.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@HomelessWolfman And believe me I'm no Obama fan.
devourerofbabies 7 months ago
@devourerofbabies I agree with you that it's a simple observation, and I'd have preferred it if he went deeper. There's a surplus of issues and greater reasons than this to dislike spending. Again, I'm thinking he's using healthcare as a buzz term to get Obama supporters to realize the repercussions of expanding government, since they probably don't think about that being an issue under their president. There are better ways to show it, but it might be enough to get people thinking at least.
HomelessWolfman 7 months ago
This episode helped me to realize a completely new aspect of political power, thanks for that. Pretty simple thing that's so easy to overlook. A big thank you for making me a bit less ignorant.
OrangeVision 7 months ago
I believe Mr. President came from Thomas Jefferson
darkdudironaji 7 months ago
Here in florida our new governor has done just about the only thing I agree with. Our governor is a conman (literally, he squandered and embezzled alot of money in the last business he was in, and got away with it). He in my honest opinion is a scumbag. BUT. He has put a law into play that says all people on welfare need to get drug tests on a regular basis. Who else agrees with this? Btw dont bring up weed, I have no problem with it and we all know much worse is used in the ghettos
generosos87 8 months ago
@generosos87 I love the idea, but most people won't agree.
darkdudironaji 7 months ago
Its less dangerous to give even more money to businessmen?
HConstantine 8 months ago
regardless of penn's view you gotta admire his ability to speak and bring across his point
JakeHRogers 8 months ago
What Penn is basically saying here, is DON'T APPOINT A KING!!!
Yeah genius, that's just what the prophet said to the people of ISRAEL about 3000 fucking years ago, before Aristotle even condemned statism.
Gee Penn, does power REALLY corrupt absolutely?
Do we REALLY want democracy instead of benevolent dictator?
Does Frodo REALLY have to put the ring in the fire instead of keeping it?
Penn has NO clue about basic political philosophy, he's just rambling vague platitudes.
postalmeter 8 months ago
Penn is an IDIOT
Obama is a fucking IDIOT and a CROOK.
Those who put him on a pedestal so they can stick their nose up his ass to better sniff his farts, are even BIGGER idiots.
I wouldn't say "Mr.President," I'd just say "PRESIDENT," since as an American citizen I OUT-RANK him.
postalmeter 8 months ago
Amen. I've always thought, that J.F.K's "ask not " speach was something that would make more sense if it came from the mouth of Mussolini. Because, it has got to be the most facsist statement ever made by a American, or for that matter western, leader ever made.
SocialAnathema 8 months ago
@SocialAnathema
That's why JFK was considered "American Royalty," i.e. he believed that the people should serve him, rather than the other way around.
postalmeter 8 months ago
I agree with this to some extent, but there are SOME things the government SHOULD protect for ALL CITIZENS. and I think the right to healthcare is one of those.
the1janitor 8 months ago
I love how you criticize your sponsors haha keep up the great work!
praisetothesinners 8 months ago
You know, I do see your point, but I from what I understand (and I'm not claiming to be an expert ) your countries health system is just plain broken. You said once that the government should be limited to police, defence of the country and edgication (if I'm remembering correctly). I think health should be added to that, because it seems that for profit health care companies are not a good option.
Disthron 8 months ago
@Disthron Agree. I'm a small government liberarian who believes in universal single payer healthcare. It's one of the few functions government should have, IMO.
Nemesis000000 8 months ago
@Nemesis000000 The problem is the more power you give the govt the less rights we have as ppl. SImple things such as food we choice to eat or a car we deciede to drive or even a pet we deciede to own maybe limited so that we cannot deciede for ourselfs because someone else is decieding for you, And I personally dont want to pay a bunch of money to lazy ppl who deciede they dont WANT to work!
nikigurl08 8 months ago
@nikigurl08 Single payer healthcare does not take away any choice. And I am against the elaborate welfare system that props up lazy people to the point where they don't have to work if they can. So those people wouldn't exist under my ideal. Even if they did, I wouldn't want them to die because they have no money either.
Nemesis000000 8 months ago
@Nemesis000000 Its does take away choice if you dont have insurance you get FINED and thrown in jail, so basically you HAVE to have insurance wheater you want it or NOT!! That's a personal choice that under the health care system would be taken away. And with that healthcare plan the government deciedes who your doctor is! Now personally I dont know about you, but I WANT to choose who operates on me and who doesn't!
nikigurl08 8 months ago
@nikigurl08 I dont agree with Obama's health plan. Mandating purchasing insurance is abhorrent to me. Single payer coverage is what I'm in favour of. You might say its the same thinb because it "forces" you to "buy" it through taxes, but you could say the same thing about military protection, the fire department etc, which I see as equivalent services.
Nemesis000000 8 months ago
@Nemesis000000 As far as the elaborate welfare system goes, lazy ppl who dont want to work, will work if it mean they dont get to eat. And Welfare holds ppl back, its like that 40 yr old man who still lives with his mom, because she doesn't want to him to live on the street. Well if that mom would throw her son out and let him man up, he would learn to fend for himself if ppl werent givin him a bunch of handouts. And if he man up he could benefit society and not leech off it.
nikigurl08 8 months ago
@nikigurl08
Nope. A lazy person will be a lazy person regardless of what circumstances you throw them in.
OriginalFroggyStyle 8 months ago
@OriginalFroggyStyle
Indeed, welfare seems to be more a method of enabling said laziness.
TheIrredeemable 8 months ago
@Nemesis000000 And which case if someone works for a living they have a feeling of self worth. Most ppl will find a way to survive if they are thrown into that scenario, the will to survive is a very powerful force, and ppl need struggle and obstacles in their lives to become better ppl and stronger ppl. This is why Welfare can hold ppl back it shelters ppl so they can't grow and become strong and find their calling. Welfare is going good for ppl WHO ACTUALLY NEED IT!
nikigurl08 8 months ago
@nikigurl08 I totally agree with you on welfare. Like I said, I'm not in favour of the welfare state. People need to be alive to have that chance, though.
Nemesis000000 8 months ago
where is the REALLY LIKE button?
ThePassiveFist 8 months ago
So the argument against providing free healthcare to those who need it is that the government will become too powerfull? Your tax money pays to keep police on the streets. People with higher incomes pay more than those on lower incomes but the police are there to keep EVERYONE safe. Not just the rich. So what about the doctors? Only if you can afford it...
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon Uhhhh yes, if the government takes over healthcare it will become even more big and powerful than it already is. We need to ween ourselves off as many government programs as possible to maximize liberty. With universal healthcare the government really has you by the balls. When you depend on the government too much, they can turn on you at any time. And fuck the police. If you need protection you're weak and you should hire a dominatrix instead.
TurquoiseCowboy 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy "And fuck the police"
Says it all...
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon "Says it all..." What does it say exactly? I'm curious
TurquoiseCowboy 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy You're a fuckwit...
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon Oh excellent argument! Name-calling! You know, that's the first sign of a small mind- when you resort to name-calling. Clearly you don't have a valid argument for your claims and you clearly don't understand economics if you think government regulation is the answer.
TurquoiseCowboy 8 months ago
Comment removed
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon A fuckwit huh? That's slang so it's not in the dictionary. But as long as we're avoiding intelligent arguments and just resorting to name-calling, you're a liberal pussy who needs the government to take care of you because you're too much of a retard to take care of yourself. The reason why we shouldn't have universal healthcare is because we need idiots like you to just die off. Economic darwinism bitch. I bet you collect welfare checks you hippie faggot. Go suck obama's cock
TurquoiseCowboy 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy I don't think intelligent discussion is something you have a proclivity for. Fuckwit may be slang but it is still in the dictionary. Besides you are the one who introduced profanity to this discussion...
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy I just had a look at your channel. I watched two seconds of one of your videos and that is enough to assure me of my conviction that you ARE a fuckwit...
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon Hey, I may play a dumb CHARACTER on my youtube channel, but even that character isn't enough of a "fuckwit" to advocate something as dumb as universal healthcare. But you originally made your conviction that I'm a fuckwit based on the fact that I don't like the police- which is absolutely ridiculous. Your channel says you don't even live in america so you haven't experienced or seen the police brutality here. But I apologize for my earlier insults, they were uncalled for.
TurquoiseCowboy 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy Police brutality aside, the fact is that there are some members of society who need protection. Abuse of power is an inherent problem in any powerbase - the police are no exception - but this should be dealt with through enforced compliance with rules. Inteligent discussion and appropriate legislation is required. If there were no police at all the situation would be worse because there are others who will abuse any power they can attain with impunity. As far as my opinion --->
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy on universal health care is concerned; I live in a country not too dissimilar to america. We have the NHS. The philosophy is "give what you can, take what you need". If you can afford it you can pay for private health care, but if you cannot then you can recieve treatment when you need it. I know people who have been treated for cancer who could not have afforded the treatment. To rely on charities would be foly. State ordained health care is more reliable than charity --->
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@TurquoiseCowboy If there was less of a gap in income the everyone could afford healthcare but the fact is that some people get paid very little and whattever view you want to take of such people bear in mind someone has to do the job. In a civilised society everyone should be respected and if not by the person who pays their wages then at least by the tax payer. Or would you rather live in the wild west? Anywho, apology accepted...
DrSpooglemon 8 months ago
@DrSpooglemon I agree with you that police are necessary in any society, I just wish they didn't abuse their power so much. I also wish they were more reactive than proactive, but that's another argument. As far as state-funded healthcare goes, I feel like private charity is more reliable than people think. Altruism is built into our genes, so we are inclined to look out for one another. When it's funded by the state, the charity is taken by governement force, which I feel takes away (con.)
TurquoiseCowboy 8 months ago