Social Security is not solvent. New congressional estimates say the trust fund that supports Social Security disability will run out of money by 2017, leaving the program unable to pay full benefits, unless Congress acts. About two decades later, Social Security’s much larger retirement fund is projected to run dry as well. It's time to REFORM ALL GOVERNMENT ASSISTANT PROGRAMS NOW -- ELSE WE LOSE THEM! How about the first step to get millionaires off SS and Medicare?
Whats wrong with privatizing social security? The only problem is making it private and mandatory it won't work that way but, If it was voluntary and private I think it will work.
@CarnardP --There really are no true 3rd party candidates--
I hear where you're coming from, but those that bash liberals and Democrats need to support a 3rd party since the GOP does not represent the American people. Just look at this GOP troll who called 70 million of his fellow countrymen idiots simply for voting for Obama. One who is named GOP 2010 and lacks such patriotism, only proves the GOP is no friend of the average American.
I am looking for a man (or men) older than me who would want to be with a straight-acting man who feels like a woman around older men. I have never been with a man before, but it is my secret desire to be with a man (or men) who would be naked with me as if I was their girl, who would be so horny to fuck me or have me suck them. I'm white, thin, and have short hair. Your cock size or body type isn't important to me. It only matters that you are very horny.
It's the theme of America: Survival of the richest.
.
But ofc to educated people, both here in Europe, in Asia, the Pacific, Africa and a minority in the U.S Empire I presume, it's just absurd that there are so many uninsured. What's the number of Americans who take social security btw, 30 million? And they want to sell even more out to profiteers?
.
Why all this pretending they care about people who weren't born billionaires?
Not everybody is a Bill Gates in the lottery of wealth.
@underbjorn isnt that the theme of the rest of the world as well. i mean correct me if im wrong but anyone wealthy anywhere is better off. no room for the poor man. and the amount of americans on social which si 30 millon. isnt that staggering compared to the total population of america which is 300 millon roughly. And its not just one country dont be foolish. where theres money theres a greedy asshole trying to get yours somehow. religion, goverment,scams,pan handling,stealing,and even sex.
I keep hearing the argument that the insurance company make a relatively small profit, however the commercial i see on primetime are all insurance companies. To make THAT many commercials means u have made enough profit to pay the big big bucks it took to air thoae commercials.
@zeitgeist1958: I see. So since they make some profit, they shouldn't allocate any monies to marketing which would increase the pool of insured, which would then lower costs.
Do you get just as pissed when local hospitals advertise on your local stations? They & other medical providers are the ones who actually set those high costs that lefties bitch about & send the bill to the health insurers.
@2010GOP None of it should be "profit" in the 1st place. Healthcare, unless it's elective surgery or something else that's non-essential, is nfp. Also, you think increasing the number of insured is going to lower prices a la some kind of supply-demand scale. That's not true. Do you understand health care administration at all?
The solvency of Social Security depends on demographics. People are living longer, and the population pyramid is changing. This is why many EU countries have raised taxes and reduced benefits. The system worked well at first, but the longer people live, the greater the burden and more revenue has to be collected.
Most EU countries largest expenditure is in their Social Security systems. I'm 21, I will not get SS in my lifetime. Unless taxes are raised across the board, but that just hurts me.
what these old, ignorant, sad cunts in the neocon party will never realize until they are fully shamed and their grip on anything has been pried from their filthy hands is that you can't stop the fact that there will be a shift towards something greater as time goes on.
we made it through evolution of millions of years, what some cunts do with the government is just slowing things down. so they should fuckin give up and pull their head from their ass because it will always fail eventually.
@MaryJesusJoseph and you molest children. See how better off we are when we just make up bullshit about other people? No, she invented objectivism, though I doubt you even know what that is.
@Houshalter And you don't know what the fuck objectivism is. Objectivism is all about selfishness. She found any altruism to be weak and evil. As for your claiming that I molest children--that just shows how weak minded you are that you'd come up with something that vile and idiotic. You're perfect for Ayn Rand becuase you have no morals at all. You, like Rand are a sociopath.
@Houshalter She didn't do a very good job in my opinion. As an atheist, I'm offended at the premise that taking care of each other is a religious idea. The average person does not get their good nature from their religion, but rather their religion is successful because it does a good job of taking credit for their inherently good nature.
Of course altruism and an "inherently good nature" can be shown to be adaptive behavior and therefor expected to be seen in successful communities.
"At least Bill Oreilly has guests with opposing views on his show. 90% of MSNBC interviews have the guests agreeing with the host"
And when that guest states an opinion or fact that goes against his opinions Bill O just cuts off their mic talks over them or otherwise acts like an asshole for the remaining legth of the interview but what can you expect from a tabloid hack who made his bones reporting such earth shattering stories as and "Is Pro Wrestling Fake?" on Inside Edition.
I've seen Bill Oreilly cut off peoples mic 3 times. Once was when that annoying lil 9-11 victims son was on. That kid was an annoying little fuck. The other 2 times he cut their mic due to blatant lying. I've watched thousands of interviews on Orielly Factor and most of them are debates. MSNBC just pats themselves on the back with viewpoints of agreement for their liberal douchbag audience.
As long as Corporations can skew the campaign financing enough so that there will be 5 or 6 TV ads pushing the conservative agenda for every one favoring the Democrats and as long as the conservatives have their own TV network (FOX), the spin game will always be in favor of the right.
It is a shame that although "right" and "correct" might be dictionary synonyms, they are political antonyms.
Ah Rachel Maddow and Cenk on one screen - that's a lot of awesome!
Of course it doesn't hurt that I have a she-crush on Maddow. You know how, like, a man-crush isn't gay? Well this is a she-crush so it's not a straight crush, it's just like non hetero admiration.
Na, it's just a little bromance bro! Okay, I admit that I'm not the best one to talk to as I'm bi anyway, but I think (from my many years as an ostensibly hetero male) that guys can feel a kind of camaraderie based connection to other guys without sexuality or romantic desire being involved. Of course, that may well be a load of bollocks I just believed to suit myself.
Actually yeah, mancrushes only happened with good looking guys. You're probably right. Still, Maddow rocks.
@ViolentRiC lol A little bromance. Uhh, well I am actually in the same situation as you are in, though it took me some time to admit to myself. LOL I am glad you see things the way I do on that. Mancrushes don't happen for Newt or B.Frank, they happen for people like Weiner lol. Thanks though, take care!
Ah well I'm glad you're open with yourself now and hope you can enjoy the fruits of sexual transparency for the rest of your days. I only really discovered my true nature this year (I'm 25) and have only in the past two weeks came out to my close friends. It's a strange, sexy new world.
Anyway, I'm just happy I had an excuse to use the word "bromance" today. Incidentally, one of my friends thinks I may just be "bro-curious". Who knew coming out could be so damn funny?
Obama has been a major disappointment. I'm sure he'll win in 2012, but I bet it won't be by as great a margin as he could get if he had followed through on campaign promises and not been pandering to the Republicans ever single day since the first summer of his presidency.
@Fonzymazer u gave us Bush and flipped our budget surplus, and now you're complaining that we are the ones ruining the country? You are the joke here, and I'm glad to see that you agree that you conservatives are the rapists :D
@Fonzymazer Just saying, but as a European seeing this line I'm starting to wonder if this isn't something more likely to be said by someone who lives in a fundamentalistic 3th world country, than by someone who inhabits a Western country. I'd hoped at least the Western world would be a beacon of moral dignity by now, but than I see stuff like this and I get drawn back to reality. Phrases such as this one are a disgrace for Western civilisation.
@drummerponsi You DO know that TYT is NOT an unbiased news network right? You know that they are a biased opinion reporting network right? They don't have investigative reporters.
@shadowmyfeet I'm fully aware of that. Still, that doesn't make your comment any less disgraceful. Replace 'liberals' with a word like 'jews' or 'infidels' and perhaps then you will understand how you sound.
@drummerponsi Its cool, its hard to tell because of Youtube's comment format. My comment is really a serious question though. I don't know but it sounded like you might have not seen TYT often, so I figured I would ask a question with some detail to it. Sorry if that was not very clear. Take care.
I mean should we even believe democrats want to really save social security. personally i think alot of dems want a weaker safety net to pleas there corporate friends. They just do it through inaction.
@TAz69x Who are Neocons? Name 1000 of them otherwise the "Neocon" group is so small that you bringing it up is laughable.
350,000,000 in the US. 1% of that is 3,500,000. So 1000 is nothing. 1000 1000 is only 1,000,000. That is 1/350th of the population. I think you're pretty ignorant and useless.
@Houshalter wow nice blatant lie. Last i checked the economy went down the shitter after Coolidge and Hoover, after FDR it improved significantly and fell significantly as well, but the overall result was that he left office as one of the favorite presidents in US history. His regulations on banks held for many years and created two of the most successful social programs of all time, which many countries copied and improved on. and world war 2?? seriously?? we'd be speaking deutsch if not 4 that
@Andy180084 the economy didn't improve until after he died and the new deal ended. What more do I need to prove it was a failure?
"favorite presidents" means nothing, I'm not interested in the manipulable opinion of the uneducated masses.
The most successful ponzi scheme of all time. What an accomplishment.
No, there wouldn't have been a war in the first place. Well, I guess that is at least somewhat debatable, but to just blindly assert everything he did was justifiable by default is bad.
Why on earth would you want to get rid of social secuirty? Not only does it provide funding for people once one has hit retirement (And usually becomes unable to get a job.) But it also provides a source of income for those who can't work due to disablity and age. If you take that away you sure as hell will be doing more harm then good.
@wtfjaftw And what exactly do you suggest? You can't have a country without government, as anyone who is put in charge, shockingly, becomes part of the government.
@sleedolfine15 Negative. You contradict yourself in your own comment. Either it's BROKE (no payouts), or there will be a 23% reduction of benefits. Which is it, and do you feel confused? The fact is that it will NOT be broke because that would imply everybody stops paying into it at once, leaving the fund empty. However, to avoid the 23% cut, removing the cap on the rich that is currently in place will solve that (future) problem. It comes down to modest revenue increases, not crisis mode.
@sicklesickle: YES, it will be broke. That's not even debatable.
The average worker pays in $55k for Medicare taxes in a lifetime while their medical costs average $250k until death.
WASHINGTON (UPI) - 6/7/2011: "Medicare alone shouldered $1.8 trillion in new liabilities, Social Security added $1.4 trillion. The $61.6 trillion in unfunded obligations amounts to $534,000 per household."
@sicklesickle (1) Obviously,to say the system will go broke does not mean that there will be zero money coming into the system. That won't happen since money will still come in via ssi taxes collected. What is meant by broke is more money goes out than is coming in which will create a deficit and the law necessitate a 23% reduction in benefits to correct the inbalance.(2)I doubt that either one of us are experts,but the trustees who are experts seem to think that the system is in crisis.
@sleedolfine15 But again, 23% (though a significant drop in cuts) is NOT A REASON to eliminate or even drastically alter social security! That 23% drop can easily be shored up. This is from Wiki: "The Social Security Wage Base (SSWB) is the maximum earned gross income or upper threshold on which a wage earner's Social Security tax may be imposed." This cap is currently $106,800. This could be raised, the problem would be solved. I know... Fair taxation on the rich. Unthinkable!
@sicklesickle The top 1% of earners who earn 19% of the income pays 37% of fed.income taxes. The top 10% of earners pay 68% of the tab whereas the bottom 50% of earners earn 13% of the income & pay 3% of the fed. income taxes. No tax increases. I would mean test Social Security & eliminate future SSI taxes on those who would be effected, plus replenish the trust fund from cuts in our overseas empire. This would only be a temporary fix until we can abolish this ponzi scheme in the future.
@sicklesickle Ponzi schemes give excessively high return to early investors--higher than the investment can possibly pay out consistent with sound financial practices. Consequently early investors are happy with the system because what they receive greatly exceed their contribution, whereas later investors will get royally screwed as the system collaspes. SSI is great for the presently retired,but terrible for the generation x. Besides no one forces you to contributes to a private ponzi scheme.
@sleedolfine15 Social Security is not a ponzi scheme. Unless the fund is raided by loser politicians who can't balance a budget using simple mathematical formulas and common sense, Social Security will continue to benefit new and old members.
There *will* come a time when our money is so inflated that it becomes worthless, and at THAT point SS will struggle to pay new members. That will not be the fault of the program, but the failing of government monetary policy.
@sicklesickle The money is already becoming worthless which is why I am moving my net worth into stronger standards of value like gold and pacific rim currencies. But Social Security is facing an inevitable crisis brought on by the impending retirement of the enormous baby boom generation. The present system will end. The only question is will it happen in an intelligent ,orderly fashion which gives people the opportunity to make the necessary adjustments or will the change occur chaotically.
@sleedolfine15 It's not chaotic. They knew this day was coming for DECADES. And they planned for it, decades ago! That's why we don't have an impending fiscal "crisis," at least not where SS is involved. They knew the baby boomers would retire in massive numbers, so they adjusted the rates and tables accordingly. It's not a surprise, sleedo! Having planned for it, we now have until 2037 to adjust. Increase higher-bracket taxes by 4 or 5 percent, starting now, and it's problem solved. No crisis.
@sicklesickle Politicians have no incentive for forethought. In fact they have the opposite incentive. Senator X get himself elected by promising to give to his voters many expensive programs knowing that the bill won't come due until he is out of office or better yet dead. This is part of the reason why both Social Insecurity & Medi-snare have a cost many--many--many times its orginal calculation. Those idiots have'nt a clue how much all this will cost--only it will cost more than they think.
Lefties don't remember the economic downturn left by Clinton after his d0t c0m bust. Bush had that to contend with + 9/11. The economy was relatively strong despite all of that, only to take another dive when Democrats took control, winning both houses November 2006.
However, we also know Lefties don't understand the power of Congress either.
Lefties don't understand that congress controls 1/3rd of government. They blame the recession on Bush, even though it happened because of Democrats forcing banks to give low income citizens mortgage loans . Then the economy collapsed under a democrat congress. Then Obama comes to the white house and spends more than every president in the history of the uUnited States, then the unemployment rate jumps up to 10%. It's been 2 fucking years and Obama hasn't fixed anything.
@pennjersey83: You nailed it. Except I think you mean Republicans are currently only about 1/2 of 1/3 of Government.
Couple the Democrats push for the creation of risky mortgages w/their refusal to place tighter regulation on their Fannie/Freddie buddies & their erroneous accounting practices.
4 years of Democrats controlling both Houses, still control the Senate, and Obama in his 3rd year of a 4 year term. What a fine job they've done (destroying America)
@2010GOP oh my, some people just don't want to learn. your political ignorance is a detriment to this country. the powers that be depend on you and your ill informed kind to be oblivious as to what they're doing.
The GOP is trying hard to make America another 3rd world nation, rich get richer and the middle class gets screwed.....so glad to be a Canadian with my universal health care (nobody goes broke because we get sick)
@2010GOP so you are blaming doctors for health care cost. They have virtually nothing to do with it unless they are plastic surgeons. Once, the government sold a drug but I forgot the name for $18. Once it was privatized it rose to $1000. There should be no profit motif on our health.
@thetechgeneration They charge $1,000 dollars because other companies are prohibitted BY LAW from competing and undercutting them. That's not "privatization" it's monopolization. If profit motive was the only problem, than non-profit organizations could easily take over the industry without government help.
@thetechgeneration and who do you think wants to stop competition from them, the same republicans that privatized it, probably because they were payed off, and they would not want to upset the highest bidder. I am a capitalist, but health care should not be in the hands of private corporations, and trust me conservatives dont want it to be taken care of by your local non profit church.
@SmaragdineSage you're not kidding it really is we need to stop our government we used to be such a great country but money hungry bankers and polititions are ruining our country but the sad thing is there aren't enough people who will band together to stop things from continuing
@Fonzymazer Another reasonable solution from a conservative. You American neo-cons are a joke and a disgrace to freedom, democracy and the whole western world. You should be ashamed.
@zebbedi ROFLMAO Yet another idiot. Neo-cons? Who are they? Can you list their names for me and give comparisons to regular cons, meta-cons, proto-cons, semi-cons? Can you compare them to Neo-libs? The Center? No? You can't provide any meaningful thought of your own? What a surprise. No wonder you can comment the way you do.
@shadowmyfeet The prefix 'neo' means post modern and the word 'con' is short for conservative. It's a branch of conservatism that among other things (like free market capitalism) endorses the use of violence to protect there idea of 'America'. Ronald Reagan, Dick Cheney and George Bush are 3 famous neo-cons that come to mind. We can argue the validity of the terms use and the connotations it implies but then we could just as easily do that about any other term.
@zebbedi I didn't ask you "what" a Neo-Con is, I know what the words mean. And they are certainly NOT the only people who endorse the use of violence to protect their idea of The United States. You gave me three people, you did not compare them to anyone nor did you give me any comparison of anything I mentioned, you just told me what neo and con means.. what the hell is wrong with you? How can you even consider that a half-way decent answer? It doesn't address anything I asked. Who is not What.
@zebbedi The closest thing to anything of any answer is RR, DC and GB. That's it.. but that's pretty poor. I think Obama, Biden, and Rahm are Neo-Cons. Proof positive right?
@shadowmyfeet You asked who neocons are, I answered. You asked me to name some and I did. You asked for comparisons and I said it would take too long. I then gave you a thought of my own. I completely addressed your every point. You once again answered with an insult and a rhetorical question. Proving once more that you don't have the mental capacity to contribute to a debate and stepping into even deeper hypocritical territory.
@zebbedi I'm sorry, naming three celebrities who EVERYONE knows is not an example of a Neo Con. I asked for 1000, not three. Three might as well have been zero. You also DID NOT say anything about anything taking too long. Just re-read your post you'll see I'm right. Where is the rhetorical question?
"What the hell is wrong with you, How can you even consider that a half-way decent answer, Proof positive, right" do not answer themselves, thats what rhetorical is, a question that answers itself
@zebbedi You are also redundant, don't try to intellectually engage people, please. "You asked who neocons are, I answered. You asked me to name some and I did." That is redundant. So you're an unintelligent, redundant liar. No surprise here.
@shadowmyfeet Do you even know what 'redundant' means? You asked questions I answered them. You then said that I didn't answer, so I gave you a break down of how I answered and now you are saying that me answering you about a question you asked regarding my answers to questions that I answered but you claimed I didn't is redundant.
You have nothing substantive to say. For the third time you came back with insults but this time you left out the question and quoted me. Getting lazier.
@zebbedi Yes, but thank you for providing me with an explanation. Redundant means unnecessarily repetitive. I think YOU don't know what it means. LOL I guess that is a break down when you have little intellect. You don't know what something substantive is, please. If you did, you would have tried to show how I am misinterpreting 'redundant' as opposed to you. Well, I tried. You're just a used up, written-on wall. Take care now. Don't step too hard.
@shadowmyfeet Redundant: 1. No longer needed or useful; superfluous.
2. (of words or data) Able to be omitted without loss of meaning or function.
Go to Thesaurus (dot) com and type in 'Repetitive', you will find many synonyms. Unfortunately, redundant is not one of them.
Once again you have managed to make yourself look even more stupid. I'm going to guess that you are an American and a conservative. Only this demographic of people could be this ignorant and dumb.
@shadowmyfeet Well that is the only example of it being used in that context. Neither of my ACTUAL Oxford dictionaries state it's use with repetitive. Such is the constantly shifting nature of semantics. The far more suitable word would have been' tautological'.
Despite this, even under the definition of redundant per your agreement it was not applicable, since nothing I actually said was repetitive.
Just admit that you were made to look stupid and now you have to argue over trivial details.
@shadowmyfeet Now that I have answered all of your questions I will summarise with my OWN thought.... To me an idiot would be better defined as someone who doesn't understand the colloquial terms or local vernacular in their own country to the extent that a foreigner who has never been to that country knows it better. Someone who preaches the use of ones own thoughts but is only able to insult instead of offering meaningful contribution. A vastly hypocritical individual who leads with ROFLMAO ;)
If it was up to the GOP then everything would be privately-run and the regular people would be screwed from all angles just as everyone is now with the healthcare companies.
It's also a shame that the Democrats are experts at snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory so they consistently keep on falling in to Republican traps of consistently moving more and more right-wing.
@Saaduk92 what's wrong with successful businesses running things rather than bureaucracies? Why would it ever be better to let government run something if the private sector can do it better? And no, republicans are not for privatizing anything. If you think politicians believe what they say they believe, welcome to the real world.
Everything is wrong with that. The profit motive degenerates the system when it's a necessity-based one, especially when it gets coupled with little or bad regulation. Haven't you even wondered why the US' healthcare system is the worst in the developed world?
As for your last line, I suggest paying attention. Republicans have never explicitly stated what I'd written, but it's obvious they're heading there. Have been for decades.
@Saaduk92: Clearly you've never studied or researched economics from a historical perspective. Not necessarily even globally, but right here in the U.S.
Government breaking thru the limits & barriers of the U.S. Constitution is the recipe for not just greed, as you allege w/corporations, but also power over millions. That well-proven recipe of corruption, destruction, which then results in increased power, leaves little to no recourse for citizens/consumers.
I like that your comment is all talk with zero substance.
You didn't counteract the fact that the US' healthcare system is the worst in the developed world, nor that it's badly regulated. Come back when you have an argument to make.
@Saaduk92 You didn't answer my question. Why shouldn't the private sector do something if it can do it better than the government? And yes, it always does. Private companies have an incentive to do things right and have to compete; bureaucracies don't.
The US has the best health care system in the world, it's just the cost that is the problem, and you can blame the government for that.
@KyoxXxlove Before the government "fixed" it, health care cost only a few days wages per year at most. To solve the problem, they gave pharmaceutical companies monopolies, limited the number of doctors, eliminated fraternal societies, which were like non-profit insurance companies, than made the new insurance companies a cartel, etc. There is absolutely no reason health care should cost as much as it does. I can't go over every destructive regulation in one comment though.
@Saaduk92 According to who? As I said, the US has the best health care system in the world, the price is the problem, and why it is ranked so low.
"Necessity-based" is a completely arbitrary distinction. Private companies always do things better, and if the government can compete they are free to do so. The just can't steal from other people, eg, taxes.
According to the World Health Organization. Again, don't delude yourself in to thinking that it's the "best". Don't assume it's all based on cost, either. Infant mortality, life expectancy, male and female mortality etcetera are all dropping slower than they are in other countries, and hence there's a plummet in rankings.
I use necessity in the traditional sense of the word. This isn't something people can go without. Private companies are failing the people right now.
So by this logic, all farms should be run by the government. They provide necessities. And to various degrees, almost every industry could fit that catagory.
@Saaduk92: That's because you believe any bullshit Democrats throw at you. WHO is a biased organization, ran primarily by socialists. They don't tell you, that:
a) Infant mortality rates are higher in the US because we count them as "infants" past a certain gestational age.
b) The prognosis for 6 of 10 cancers is the highest in the US
c) The US provides 80% of the world's medical research
@2010GOP Race factors/diseases? are you retarded? when the White man came to this united states, the native americans died in numbers of thousands, why because the white man brought diesase, you gop fools are all the same, learn your goddamned history before you troll..
i'm not so sure i like this rachel maddow guy
skillcosby88 4 months ago 2
Comment removed
ERROLCUSTERFLYNN4EVR 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul's plan will balance the budget in 3 years without raising taxes!
Social programs remain untouched as the BIG problems are resolved.
Government employees will be phased out as they quit/retire or moved to other jobs. Learn more at /watch?v=IQAHziV3HoM
vechorik 4 months ago
Socialist Sweden has a private option
Salvysahagun 6 months ago
Privatize it, man!
FatTony726 7 months ago
You republicans cry about abortion when you cant blame gays for it so shhut the fuck up!
padude64 7 months ago 3
Social Security is not solvent. New congressional estimates say the trust fund that supports Social Security disability will run out of money by 2017, leaving the program unable to pay full benefits, unless Congress acts. About two decades later, Social Security’s much larger retirement fund is projected to run dry as well. It's time to REFORM ALL GOVERNMENT ASSISTANT PROGRAMS NOW -- ELSE WE LOSE THEM! How about the first step to get millionaires off SS and Medicare?
vechorik 6 months ago
Whats wrong with privatizing social security? The only problem is making it private and mandatory it won't work that way but, If it was voluntary and private I think it will work.
dukee155 8 months ago
Galveston County, Texas.
That is all. Thank you!
BlameTheFirst 8 months ago
Two polical pundits discussing a real issue, it's not Calc 101, it's math 101. Two idiots agree on spending more? Good plan!
fmckadoo 8 months ago
oh no.. fear the dick army from freedom works..
bla34112 8 months ago
Keith Gone! Cenk in!
youaccoount 8 months ago
@CarnardP --There really are no true 3rd party candidates--
I hear where you're coming from, but those that bash liberals and Democrats need to support a 3rd party since the GOP does not represent the American people. Just look at this GOP troll who called 70 million of his fellow countrymen idiots simply for voting for Obama. One who is named GOP 2010 and lacks such patriotism, only proves the GOP is no friend of the average American.
Scipio2021 8 months ago
@Scipio2021: Yes, I called them idiots. How is that any different than you calling the GOP "worse than al Qaeda"? Hypocrite much, ass-clown?
2010GOP 8 months ago
There is a horribly high pitched buzz in the background of this video. I can't watch it.. sorry.
Julietteisme 8 months ago
Cut defense by 80% and our country is out of the deficit. PERIOD!!!
lapiz4azulli 8 months ago
Dear Metallica,
I am looking for a man (or men) older than me who would want to be with a straight-acting man who feels like a woman around older men. I have never been with a man before, but it is my secret desire to be with a man (or men) who would be naked with me as if I was their girl, who would be so horny to fuck me or have me suck them. I'm white, thin, and have short hair. Your cock size or body type isn't important to me. It only matters that you are very horny.
parafleet 8 months ago
POLLS? BAH! Polls are bias....(R)> -_- <(R)
THAT1UMMAH 8 months ago
It's the theme of America: Survival of the richest.
.
But ofc to educated people, both here in Europe, in Asia, the Pacific, Africa and a minority in the U.S Empire I presume, it's just absurd that there are so many uninsured. What's the number of Americans who take social security btw, 30 million? And they want to sell even more out to profiteers?
.
Why all this pretending they care about people who weren't born billionaires?
Not everybody is a Bill Gates in the lottery of wealth.
underbjorn 8 months ago 2
@underbjorn isnt that the theme of the rest of the world as well. i mean correct me if im wrong but anyone wealthy anywhere is better off. no room for the poor man. and the amount of americans on social which si 30 millon. isnt that staggering compared to the total population of america which is 300 millon roughly. And its not just one country dont be foolish. where theres money theres a greedy asshole trying to get yours somehow. religion, goverment,scams,pan handling,stealing,and even sex.
infernorock11 8 months ago
@infernorock11 ---
10% of the Land of the Free, bastion of democracy and capitalism, leader of the west, superpower.
I don't compare the U.S with Sierra Leone.
underbjorn 8 months ago
Cenk is such a Weiner....
link2randle 8 months ago
@link2randle Thats such a compliment! He isnt as strong, but he is a strong liberal.
MMaeidlilniAW 8 months ago
(crosses fingers and hopes the GOP makes the social security stance in presidential campaign)
DiamondChrome42 8 months ago
THIs is bullshit is fuckin monday and i dont see no new videos.fuckin assholes
XxMzt4RVLCNRYxX 8 months ago
I keep hearing the argument that the insurance company make a relatively small profit, however the commercial i see on primetime are all insurance companies. To make THAT many commercials means u have made enough profit to pay the big big bucks it took to air thoae commercials.
zeitgeist1958 8 months ago
@zeitgeist1958: I see. So since they make some profit, they shouldn't allocate any monies to marketing which would increase the pool of insured, which would then lower costs.
Do you get just as pissed when local hospitals advertise on your local stations? They & other medical providers are the ones who actually set those high costs that lefties bitch about & send the bill to the health insurers.
2010GOP 8 months ago
@2010GOP None of it should be "profit" in the 1st place. Healthcare, unless it's elective surgery or something else that's non-essential, is nfp. Also, you think increasing the number of insured is going to lower prices a la some kind of supply-demand scale. That's not true. Do you understand health care administration at all?
upabittoolate 8 months ago
On a related topic, I've decided to never vote for anyone who insists Weiner resign. Keave it to his district to decide, Today, Obama lost my vote.
BobFromMich 8 months ago
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
RandyNewmanFan 8 months ago
she wants it
codemonkeyslikeme 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thumbs up if you think Cenk should start to refer to Trickle Down Economics as nothing but "a Golden Shower from the super rich" on MSNBC.
LeLimeLine 8 months ago
The solvency of Social Security depends on demographics. People are living longer, and the population pyramid is changing. This is why many EU countries have raised taxes and reduced benefits. The system worked well at first, but the longer people live, the greater the burden and more revenue has to be collected.
Most EU countries largest expenditure is in their Social Security systems. I'm 21, I will not get SS in my lifetime. Unless taxes are raised across the board, but that just hurts me.
groam6666 8 months ago
what these old, ignorant, sad cunts in the neocon party will never realize until they are fully shamed and their grip on anything has been pried from their filthy hands is that you can't stop the fact that there will be a shift towards something greater as time goes on.
we made it through evolution of millions of years, what some cunts do with the government is just slowing things down. so they should fuckin give up and pull their head from their ass because it will always fail eventually.
Thrashaero 8 months ago
read the Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. The republicans' plan is obvious.
ocerg1111 8 months ago
I can sum up most of these videos and everything everybody needs to know about politics in 5 words: "Republicans suck and are liars."
OukaKisa 8 months ago
Are you saying that Paul Ryan wants to eliminate Medicare? Yup, that sounds about right.
CHAOSoriginal 8 months ago
The Republicans may hand it to them but the Democrats won't know how to take advantage of it.
MaryJesusJoseph 8 months ago
@dhymaxion Ayn Rand was not "openly immoral", she even tried to justify morality without religion.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter No, she found the idea of "morality" to be absurd or repellent. She thought morality had no place for her "super man".
MaryJesusJoseph 8 months ago
@MaryJesusJoseph and you molest children. See how better off we are when we just make up bullshit about other people? No, she invented objectivism, though I doubt you even know what that is.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter And you don't know what the fuck objectivism is. Objectivism is all about selfishness. She found any altruism to be weak and evil. As for your claiming that I molest children--that just shows how weak minded you are that you'd come up with something that vile and idiotic. You're perfect for Ayn Rand becuase you have no morals at all. You, like Rand are a sociopath.
MaryJesusJoseph 8 months ago
@MaryJesusJoseph guess who gives a fuck that you can misrepresent other people's philosophies over the internet? Not me!
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter She didn't do a very good job in my opinion. As an atheist, I'm offended at the premise that taking care of each other is a religious idea. The average person does not get their good nature from their religion, but rather their religion is successful because it does a good job of taking credit for their inherently good nature.
Of course altruism and an "inherently good nature" can be shown to be adaptive behavior and therefor expected to be seen in successful communities.
Phoboskomboa 8 months ago
US looks a way retard state.
envanje 8 months ago
@ElegeantFencer XD
huskyclaw 8 months ago
At least Bill Oreilly has guests with opposing views on his show. 90% of MSNBC interviews have the guests agreeing with the host
pennjersey83 8 months ago
@pennjersey83
"At least Bill Oreilly has guests with opposing views on his show. 90% of MSNBC interviews have the guests agreeing with the host"
And when that guest states an opinion or fact that goes against his opinions Bill O just cuts off their mic talks over them or otherwise acts like an asshole for the remaining legth of the interview but what can you expect from a tabloid hack who made his bones reporting such earth shattering stories as and "Is Pro Wrestling Fake?" on Inside Edition.
Hammerhead547 8 months ago
@Hammerhead547
I've seen Bill Oreilly cut off peoples mic 3 times. Once was when that annoying lil 9-11 victims son was on. That kid was an annoying little fuck. The other 2 times he cut their mic due to blatant lying. I've watched thousands of interviews on Orielly Factor and most of them are debates. MSNBC just pats themselves on the back with viewpoints of agreement for their liberal douchbag audience.
pennjersey83 8 months ago
As long as Corporations can skew the campaign financing enough so that there will be 5 or 6 TV ads pushing the conservative agenda for every one favoring the Democrats and as long as the conservatives have their own TV network (FOX), the spin game will always be in favor of the right.
It is a shame that although "right" and "correct" might be dictionary synonyms, they are political antonyms.
FreddieVee
FreddieVee 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer. Liberals are ruining U.A.E.?
cne08 8 months ago
democrats actually have class thats why they dont take advantage of right's stupidity
gangupnow 8 months ago
Ah Rachel Maddow and Cenk on one screen - that's a lot of awesome!
Of course it doesn't hurt that I have a she-crush on Maddow. You know how, like, a man-crush isn't gay? Well this is a she-crush so it's not a straight crush, it's just like non hetero admiration.
Well it makes sense to me anyhow.
ViolentRiC 8 months ago
@ViolentRiC Man crushes are only not gay to those who have them and want to deny themselves.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet
Na, it's just a little bromance bro! Okay, I admit that I'm not the best one to talk to as I'm bi anyway, but I think (from my many years as an ostensibly hetero male) that guys can feel a kind of camaraderie based connection to other guys without sexuality or romantic desire being involved. Of course, that may well be a load of bollocks I just believed to suit myself.
Actually yeah, mancrushes only happened with good looking guys. You're probably right. Still, Maddow rocks.
ViolentRiC 8 months ago
@ViolentRiC lol A little bromance. Uhh, well I am actually in the same situation as you are in, though it took me some time to admit to myself. LOL I am glad you see things the way I do on that. Mancrushes don't happen for Newt or B.Frank, they happen for people like Weiner lol. Thanks though, take care!
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet
Ah well I'm glad you're open with yourself now and hope you can enjoy the fruits of sexual transparency for the rest of your days. I only really discovered my true nature this year (I'm 25) and have only in the past two weeks came out to my close friends. It's a strange, sexy new world.
Anyway, I'm just happy I had an excuse to use the word "bromance" today. Incidentally, one of my friends thinks I may just be "bro-curious". Who knew coming out could be so damn funny?
ViolentRiC 8 months ago
My two favorite people...
chrispriveco 8 months ago
Obama has been a major disappointment. I'm sure he'll win in 2012, but I bet it won't be by as great a margin as he could get if he had followed through on campaign promises and not been pandering to the Republicans ever single day since the first summer of his presidency.
PhantomofFire 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer u gave us Bush and flipped our budget surplus, and now you're complaining that we are the ones ruining the country? You are the joke here, and I'm glad to see that you agree that you conservatives are the rapists :D
BatmanASB 8 months ago
@BatmanASB Says someone with the name "Batman" rofl You're the joke. Obama = Bush
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer Just saying, but as a European seeing this line I'm starting to wonder if this isn't something more likely to be said by someone who lives in a fundamentalistic 3th world country, than by someone who inhabits a Western country. I'd hoped at least the Western world would be a beacon of moral dignity by now, but than I see stuff like this and I get drawn back to reality. Phrases such as this one are a disgrace for Western civilisation.
drummerponsi 8 months ago
@drummerponsi You DO know that TYT is NOT an unbiased news network right? You know that they are a biased opinion reporting network right? They don't have investigative reporters.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet I'm fully aware of that. Still, that doesn't make your comment any less disgraceful. Replace 'liberals' with a word like 'jews' or 'infidels' and perhaps then you will understand how you sound.
drummerponsi 8 months ago
@drummerponsi What? Oh, I see. You think I am that other douche bag Fonzy. You're both a fucking disgrace.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet Woops, my bad indeed, got you mixed up with that Fonzy guy. Don't get where your sudden comment came from though.
drummerponsi 8 months ago
@drummerponsi Its cool, its hard to tell because of Youtube's comment format. My comment is really a serious question though. I don't know but it sounded like you might have not seen TYT often, so I figured I would ask a question with some detail to it. Sorry if that was not very clear. Take care.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
Texas Oil Billionaires.
flake452 8 months ago
I mean should we even believe democrats want to really save social security. personally i think alot of dems want a weaker safety net to pleas there corporate friends. They just do it through inaction.
DrBandrew 8 months ago
wow, some obvious trolls here
don't get baited with "socialist", "liberal", and other neocon bullshit guys
It's part of the reason TYT viewers are generally smarter and KICK ASS far more than these useless ignorant spineless neocon shits
=3
TAz69x 8 months ago 31
@TAz69x Who are Neocons? Name 1000 of them otherwise the "Neocon" group is so small that you bringing it up is laughable.
350,000,000 in the US. 1% of that is 3,500,000. So 1000 is nothing. 1000 1000 is only 1,000,000. That is 1/350th of the population. I think you're pretty ignorant and useless.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet LOL, good thing I don't give a shit what you think
TAz69x 8 months ago
@TAz69x LOL, I know, or you might actually have to think about something for the first time in your life! LOLOLOLOL!
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@TAz69x TYT army too strong, too smart ;)
LetsBringPeace 8 months ago
FDR was such a gem to our world. FUCK Republicans, and the few Dems who are just as spineless and/or corrupt.
Need more Franken's, Sanders', Wiener's, [formerly] Grayson's, etc.
TAz69x 8 months ago 17
@TAz69x FDR fucked over the economy and started the largest war in our history, and even if you look past that, he was corrupt.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter wow nice blatant lie. Last i checked the economy went down the shitter after Coolidge and Hoover, after FDR it improved significantly and fell significantly as well, but the overall result was that he left office as one of the favorite presidents in US history. His regulations on banks held for many years and created two of the most successful social programs of all time, which many countries copied and improved on. and world war 2?? seriously?? we'd be speaking deutsch if not 4 that
Andy180084 8 months ago
@Andy180084 the economy didn't improve until after he died and the new deal ended. What more do I need to prove it was a failure?
"favorite presidents" means nothing, I'm not interested in the manipulable opinion of the uneducated masses.
The most successful ponzi scheme of all time. What an accomplishment.
No, there wouldn't have been a war in the first place. Well, I guess that is at least somewhat debatable, but to just blindly assert everything he did was justifiable by default is bad.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter he's consistently ranked #1 or 2 in polls amongst intellectuals constantly, not "uneducated masses".
Andy180084 8 months ago
Devilish Bastards....
7solseven 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer I'm on your side or I'm losing my will to fight like most americans. Just believe all the junk on tv.
willywaldo1 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer Can't we all just get along?
willywaldo1 8 months ago
Republicans: Cut Social Security!
Democrats: How Much?
robertrulebirtannia 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer I will not and you must be uneducated with all that slang. Back in the 50's....
willywaldo1 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer I feel sorry for your misguided efforts. Liberals are ruining this country.
willywaldo1 8 months ago
@willywaldo1 This country is ruining this country. Liberals are just trying to make it happen a little slower, thats all.
eirefrance 8 months ago
How is this Chenk idiot on every video now?
willywaldo1 8 months ago
i'm so sick of hearing it.
republicans democrats republicans democrats
Maziyar 8 months ago
Remember what cenk used to say?
remember when he had washington Shaking in their $1,000 dollar shoes?
" you gotta FIGHT mr. president ".
Now it's sensational bullshit all day long All Day Long.
you haven't noticed yet? THEY"RE ALL BOUGHT.
they don't give a shit. whats it to you. yeah it's all about the money.
whatever pays bro. TYT. You ain't SHIT anymore. Period.
Maziyar 8 months ago
HEY
WHAT A JOKE
WHAT AN ON RUNNING MILLION DOLLAR JOKE
WE CHOOSE TO WATCH FOX NEWS OR MSNBC
AND THEY DO NOTHING TO HELP US. THEY HAVE NO INTEREST
NONE WHATSOEVER TO KEEP PEOPLE INFORMED.
IT'S TELEVISION. A JOKE. AND CENK WAS FIGHTING FIGHTING!!! AGAINST THIS MACHINE.
NOW HE'S A PART OF IT.
Peace.
Maziyar 8 months ago
Why on earth would you want to get rid of social secuirty? Not only does it provide funding for people once one has hit retirement (And usually becomes unable to get a job.) But it also provides a source of income for those who can't work due to disablity and age. If you take that away you sure as hell will be doing more harm then good.
WolfsStorm 8 months ago
@WolfsStorm: We didn't even have Medicare until 1965 ~ Prior to, our country prospered & no one was dying on the streets.
2010GOP 8 months ago
@wtfjaftw And what exactly do you suggest? You can't have a country without government, as anyone who is put in charge, shockingly, becomes part of the government.
WolfsStorm 8 months ago
Do you see that Liberals?
The Obama Admin is divulging to you that YOUR HOUSEHOLD, as of today, owes 1/2 million dollars just for unfunded liabilities.
But somehow, your Senate Majority leader is just appalled when funding for his "Cowboy Poetry Festival" is cut.
Democrats = Looney Tunes
2010GOP 8 months ago
Maddow=yummy
I almost wish I was a girl.
Kamicolod 8 months ago
Check out this channel guys /watch?v=t5oHbMKKx54
cupwnd 8 months ago
@sleedolfine15 Negative. You contradict yourself in your own comment. Either it's BROKE (no payouts), or there will be a 23% reduction of benefits. Which is it, and do you feel confused? The fact is that it will NOT be broke because that would imply everybody stops paying into it at once, leaving the fund empty. However, to avoid the 23% cut, removing the cap on the rich that is currently in place will solve that (future) problem. It comes down to modest revenue increases, not crisis mode.
sicklesickle 8 months ago
@sicklesickle: YES, it will be broke. That's not even debatable.
The average worker pays in $55k for Medicare taxes in a lifetime while their medical costs average $250k until death.
WASHINGTON (UPI) - 6/7/2011: "Medicare alone shouldered $1.8 trillion in new liabilities, Social Security added $1.4 trillion. The $61.6 trillion in unfunded obligations amounts to $534,000 per household."
And don't forget about baby boomers!
2010GOP 8 months ago
@sicklesickle (1) Obviously,to say the system will go broke does not mean that there will be zero money coming into the system. That won't happen since money will still come in via ssi taxes collected. What is meant by broke is more money goes out than is coming in which will create a deficit and the law necessitate a 23% reduction in benefits to correct the inbalance.(2)I doubt that either one of us are experts,but the trustees who are experts seem to think that the system is in crisis.
sleedolfine15 8 months ago
@sleedolfine15 But again, 23% (though a significant drop in cuts) is NOT A REASON to eliminate or even drastically alter social security! That 23% drop can easily be shored up. This is from Wiki: "The Social Security Wage Base (SSWB) is the maximum earned gross income or upper threshold on which a wage earner's Social Security tax may be imposed." This cap is currently $106,800. This could be raised, the problem would be solved. I know... Fair taxation on the rich. Unthinkable!
sicklesickle 8 months ago
@sicklesickle The top 1% of earners who earn 19% of the income pays 37% of fed.income taxes. The top 10% of earners pay 68% of the tab whereas the bottom 50% of earners earn 13% of the income & pay 3% of the fed. income taxes. No tax increases. I would mean test Social Security & eliminate future SSI taxes on those who would be effected, plus replenish the trust fund from cuts in our overseas empire. This would only be a temporary fix until we can abolish this ponzi scheme in the future.
sleedolfine15 8 months ago
@sleedolfine15 It's not a "Ponzi Scheme," that is a Republican spin phrase!
Every real citizen has a Social Security number.
A ponzi scheme involves paying existing members with the funds from newer members, IMMEDIATELY.
SS uses money from ALL members to pay out to ALL the members, after an ENTIRE CAREER. Nobody turns 18 and gets SS benefits!!
Ponzi schemes pay out immediately, a RETIREMENT fund pays out AFTER you've worked your entire life! Ponzi scheme my ass. Say it with me: PENSION.
sicklesickle 8 months ago
@sicklesickle Ponzi schemes give excessively high return to early investors--higher than the investment can possibly pay out consistent with sound financial practices. Consequently early investors are happy with the system because what they receive greatly exceed their contribution, whereas later investors will get royally screwed as the system collaspes. SSI is great for the presently retired,but terrible for the generation x. Besides no one forces you to contributes to a private ponzi scheme.
sleedolfine15 8 months ago
@sleedolfine15 Social Security is not a ponzi scheme. Unless the fund is raided by loser politicians who can't balance a budget using simple mathematical formulas and common sense, Social Security will continue to benefit new and old members.
There *will* come a time when our money is so inflated that it becomes worthless, and at THAT point SS will struggle to pay new members. That will not be the fault of the program, but the failing of government monetary policy.
sicklesickle 8 months ago
@sicklesickle The money is already becoming worthless which is why I am moving my net worth into stronger standards of value like gold and pacific rim currencies. But Social Security is facing an inevitable crisis brought on by the impending retirement of the enormous baby boom generation. The present system will end. The only question is will it happen in an intelligent ,orderly fashion which gives people the opportunity to make the necessary adjustments or will the change occur chaotically.
sleedolfine15 8 months ago
@sleedolfine15 It's not chaotic. They knew this day was coming for DECADES. And they planned for it, decades ago! That's why we don't have an impending fiscal "crisis," at least not where SS is involved. They knew the baby boomers would retire in massive numbers, so they adjusted the rates and tables accordingly. It's not a surprise, sleedo! Having planned for it, we now have until 2037 to adjust. Increase higher-bracket taxes by 4 or 5 percent, starting now, and it's problem solved. No crisis.
sicklesickle 8 months ago
@sicklesickle Politicians have no incentive for forethought. In fact they have the opposite incentive. Senator X get himself elected by promising to give to his voters many expensive programs knowing that the bill won't come due until he is out of office or better yet dead. This is part of the reason why both Social Insecurity & Medi-snare have a cost many--many--many times its orginal calculation. Those idiots have'nt a clue how much all this will cost--only it will cost more than they think.
sleedolfine15 8 months ago
Cenk would probably tap that dyke's ass
JimboVids 8 months ago
Hey Obama! Fix the fucking economy already! Why is it everytime a democrat is in office during a recession the recession drags on and on and on?
pennjersey83 8 months ago
@pennjersey83: Exactly!
Lefties don't remember the economic downturn left by Clinton after his d0t c0m bust. Bush had that to contend with + 9/11. The economy was relatively strong despite all of that, only to take another dive when Democrats took control, winning both houses November 2006.
However, we also know Lefties don't understand the power of Congress either.
2010GOP 8 months ago
@2010GOP
Lefties don't understand that congress controls 1/3rd of government. They blame the recession on Bush, even though it happened because of Democrats forcing banks to give low income citizens mortgage loans . Then the economy collapsed under a democrat congress. Then Obama comes to the white house and spends more than every president in the history of the uUnited States, then the unemployment rate jumps up to 10%. It's been 2 fucking years and Obama hasn't fixed anything.
pennjersey83 8 months ago
@pennjersey83: You nailed it. Except I think you mean Republicans are currently only about 1/2 of 1/3 of Government.
Couple the Democrats push for the creation of risky mortgages w/their refusal to place tighter regulation on their Fannie/Freddie buddies & their erroneous accounting practices.
4 years of Democrats controlling both Houses, still control the Senate, and Obama in his 3rd year of a 4 year term. What a fine job they've done (destroying America)
2010GOP 8 months ago
@2010GOP oh my, some people just don't want to learn. your political ignorance is a detriment to this country. the powers that be depend on you and your ill informed kind to be oblivious as to what they're doing.
dudeeful1 8 months ago
3:15: "Democrats will have to try hard to screw up"
Hear that Dems? The gauntlet has been thrown! As sad as it makes me, i'm sure you're up to the challenge.
thookerov 8 months ago 28
Cenk should be on Real Time with Bill Maher!
Propagandhi900 8 months ago
The GOP is trying hard to make America another 3rd world nation, rich get richer and the middle class gets screwed.....so glad to be a Canadian with my universal health care (nobody goes broke because we get sick)
SuperShockjock 8 months ago
@SuperShockjock
Democrats are trying to turn a free country into a socialist cesspool like Canada
pennjersey83 8 months ago
@pennjersey83 You know what I hate about Canadians? Half of them speak french, and the other half let them!
TheFunkadelicFan 8 months ago
@TheFunkadelicFan
Canada is a bilingual country and has been since the mid seventies you arsehead.
Hammerhead547 8 months ago
@Hammerhead547 Are you serious? Do you really think I wasn't joking? Please tell me you're not serious!
TheFunkadelicFan 8 months ago
@pennjersey83. Take your opinion about my country and stick it up your ass.
cne08 8 months ago
Solid as usual, Cenk.
mpawsonable 8 months ago
@2010GOP so you are blaming doctors for health care cost. They have virtually nothing to do with it unless they are plastic surgeons. Once, the government sold a drug but I forgot the name for $18. Once it was privatized it rose to $1000. There should be no profit motif on our health.
thetechgeneration 8 months ago
@thetechgeneration: Sorry ~ but your comment makes zero sense.
Hospitals & Medical Supply/Equip companies have higher profit margins than health insurers who pay the cost of the bills produced by them.
If there should be no "profit on your health", what becomes of doctor's salaries, hospitals, etc.?
2010GOP 8 months ago
@thetechgeneration They charge $1,000 dollars because other companies are prohibitted BY LAW from competing and undercutting them. That's not "privatization" it's monopolization. If profit motive was the only problem, than non-profit organizations could easily take over the industry without government help.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@thetechgeneration and who do you think wants to stop competition from them, the same republicans that privatized it, probably because they were payed off, and they would not want to upset the highest bidder. I am a capitalist, but health care should not be in the hands of private corporations, and trust me conservatives dont want it to be taken care of by your local non profit church.
thetechgeneration 8 months ago
wait, did he say Dick Army?
Drummguitar 8 months ago
@SinisterSkip thank you! (:
xleezybee 8 months ago
America has OFFICIALLY become Rome.
IT IS TIME FOR THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
SmaragdineSage 8 months ago
@SmaragdineSage you're not kidding it really is we need to stop our government we used to be such a great country but money hungry bankers and polititions are ruining our country but the sad thing is there aren't enough people who will band together to stop things from continuing
MMAislife86 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm bored. Send me mail.
imboredsendmemail@gmail.com
imboredsendmemail 8 months ago
Rich people are good people and poor people are scum because they are not rich people. And they call the USA great; yeah right.
rollsthepaul 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rollsthepaul no one has ever claimed that.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Fonzymazer Another reasonable solution from a conservative. You American neo-cons are a joke and a disgrace to freedom, democracy and the whole western world. You should be ashamed.
zebbedi 8 months ago 16
@zebbedi ROFLMAO Yet another idiot. Neo-cons? Who are they? Can you list their names for me and give comparisons to regular cons, meta-cons, proto-cons, semi-cons? Can you compare them to Neo-libs? The Center? No? You can't provide any meaningful thought of your own? What a surprise. No wonder you can comment the way you do.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet The prefix 'neo' means post modern and the word 'con' is short for conservative. It's a branch of conservatism that among other things (like free market capitalism) endorses the use of violence to protect there idea of 'America'. Ronald Reagan, Dick Cheney and George Bush are 3 famous neo-cons that come to mind. We can argue the validity of the terms use and the connotations it implies but then we could just as easily do that about any other term.
zebbedi 8 months ago
@zebbedi I didn't ask you "what" a Neo-Con is, I know what the words mean. And they are certainly NOT the only people who endorse the use of violence to protect their idea of The United States. You gave me three people, you did not compare them to anyone nor did you give me any comparison of anything I mentioned, you just told me what neo and con means.. what the hell is wrong with you? How can you even consider that a half-way decent answer? It doesn't address anything I asked. Who is not What.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@zebbedi The closest thing to anything of any answer is RR, DC and GB. That's it.. but that's pretty poor. I think Obama, Biden, and Rahm are Neo-Cons. Proof positive right?
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet You asked who neocons are, I answered. You asked me to name some and I did. You asked for comparisons and I said it would take too long. I then gave you a thought of my own. I completely addressed your every point. You once again answered with an insult and a rhetorical question. Proving once more that you don't have the mental capacity to contribute to a debate and stepping into even deeper hypocritical territory.
zebbedi 8 months ago
@zebbedi I'm sorry, naming three celebrities who EVERYONE knows is not an example of a Neo Con. I asked for 1000, not three. Three might as well have been zero. You also DID NOT say anything about anything taking too long. Just re-read your post you'll see I'm right. Where is the rhetorical question?
"What the hell is wrong with you, How can you even consider that a half-way decent answer, Proof positive, right" do not answer themselves, thats what rhetorical is, a question that answers itself
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@zebbedi You are also redundant, don't try to intellectually engage people, please. "You asked who neocons are, I answered. You asked me to name some and I did." That is redundant. So you're an unintelligent, redundant liar. No surprise here.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet Do you even know what 'redundant' means? You asked questions I answered them. You then said that I didn't answer, so I gave you a break down of how I answered and now you are saying that me answering you about a question you asked regarding my answers to questions that I answered but you claimed I didn't is redundant.
You have nothing substantive to say. For the third time you came back with insults but this time you left out the question and quoted me. Getting lazier.
zebbedi 8 months ago
@zebbedi Yes, but thank you for providing me with an explanation. Redundant means unnecessarily repetitive. I think YOU don't know what it means. LOL I guess that is a break down when you have little intellect. You don't know what something substantive is, please. If you did, you would have tried to show how I am misinterpreting 'redundant' as opposed to you. Well, I tried. You're just a used up, written-on wall. Take care now. Don't step too hard.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet Redundant: 1. No longer needed or useful; superfluous.
2. (of words or data) Able to be omitted without loss of meaning or function.
Go to Thesaurus (dot) com and type in 'Repetitive', you will find many synonyms. Unfortunately, redundant is not one of them.
Once again you have managed to make yourself look even more stupid. I'm going to guess that you are an American and a conservative. Only this demographic of people could be this ignorant and dumb.
zebbedi 8 months ago
@zebbedi You're pretty stupid because this is from dictionary . com, the very first entry:
–adjective
1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style.
Looks like you ARE as stupid as you make yourself out to be. So funny because I'm a progressive minded person.
shadowmyfeet 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet Well that is the only example of it being used in that context. Neither of my ACTUAL Oxford dictionaries state it's use with repetitive. Such is the constantly shifting nature of semantics. The far more suitable word would have been' tautological'.
Despite this, even under the definition of redundant per your agreement it was not applicable, since nothing I actually said was repetitive.
Just admit that you were made to look stupid and now you have to argue over trivial details.
zebbedi 8 months ago
@shadowmyfeet Now that I have answered all of your questions I will summarise with my OWN thought.... To me an idiot would be better defined as someone who doesn't understand the colloquial terms or local vernacular in their own country to the extent that a foreigner who has never been to that country knows it better. Someone who preaches the use of ones own thoughts but is only able to insult instead of offering meaningful contribution. A vastly hypocritical individual who leads with ROFLMAO ;)
zebbedi 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
check out my channel for a good cover
Idiotofthedayaward 8 months ago
If it was up to the GOP then everything would be privately-run and the regular people would be screwed from all angles just as everyone is now with the healthcare companies.
It's also a shame that the Democrats are experts at snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory so they consistently keep on falling in to Republican traps of consistently moving more and more right-wing.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92 what's wrong with successful businesses running things rather than bureaucracies? Why would it ever be better to let government run something if the private sector can do it better? And no, republicans are not for privatizing anything. If you think politicians believe what they say they believe, welcome to the real world.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter
Everything is wrong with that. The profit motive degenerates the system when it's a necessity-based one, especially when it gets coupled with little or bad regulation. Haven't you even wondered why the US' healthcare system is the worst in the developed world?
As for your last line, I suggest paying attention. Republicans have never explicitly stated what I'd written, but it's obvious they're heading there. Have been for decades.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92: Clearly you've never studied or researched economics from a historical perspective. Not necessarily even globally, but right here in the U.S.
Government breaking thru the limits & barriers of the U.S. Constitution is the recipe for not just greed, as you allege w/corporations, but also power over millions. That well-proven recipe of corruption, destruction, which then results in increased power, leaves little to no recourse for citizens/consumers.
2010GOP 8 months ago
@2010GOP
I like that your comment is all talk with zero substance.
You didn't counteract the fact that the US' healthcare system is the worst in the developed world, nor that it's badly regulated. Come back when you have an argument to make.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92 You didn't answer my question. Why shouldn't the private sector do something if it can do it better than the government? And yes, it always does. Private companies have an incentive to do things right and have to compete; bureaucracies don't.
The US has the best health care system in the world, it's just the cost that is the problem, and you can blame the government for that.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter How is the government responsible for the price of health care exactly?
KyoxXxlove 8 months ago
@KyoxXxlove Before the government "fixed" it, health care cost only a few days wages per year at most. To solve the problem, they gave pharmaceutical companies monopolies, limited the number of doctors, eliminated fraternal societies, which were like non-profit insurance companies, than made the new insurance companies a cartel, etc. There is absolutely no reason health care should cost as much as it does. I can't go over every destructive regulation in one comment though.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter
I did answer your question. The private sector shouldn't do it because it can't do it well in terms of necessity-based services.
The US is ranked 37th in healthcare. Deluding yourself by assuming it's the "best" is absurd.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92 According to who? As I said, the US has the best health care system in the world, the price is the problem, and why it is ranked so low.
"Necessity-based" is a completely arbitrary distinction. Private companies always do things better, and if the government can compete they are free to do so. The just can't steal from other people, eg, taxes.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter
According to the World Health Organization. Again, don't delude yourself in to thinking that it's the "best". Don't assume it's all based on cost, either. Infant mortality, life expectancy, male and female mortality etcetera are all dropping slower than they are in other countries, and hence there's a plummet in rankings.
I use necessity in the traditional sense of the word. This isn't something people can go without. Private companies are failing the people right now.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92 quality wise, it is.
So by this logic, all farms should be run by the government. They provide necessities. And to various degrees, almost every industry could fit that catagory.
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter
Except that they aren't necessary. Nice straw man.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92 according to whom?
Houshalter 8 months ago
@Houshalter
Anyone with more than four working brain cells.
Saaduk92 8 months ago
@Saaduk92: That's because you believe any bullshit Democrats throw at you. WHO is a biased organization, ran primarily by socialists. They don't tell you, that:
a) Infant mortality rates are higher in the US because we count them as "infants" past a certain gestational age.
b) The prognosis for 6 of 10 cancers is the highest in the US
c) The US provides 80% of the world's medical research
d) Race factors/diseases
e) More autos; hence more automobile accidents
.... and on & on
2010GOP 8 months ago
@2010GOP Race factors/diseases? are you retarded? when the White man came to this united states, the native americans died in numbers of thousands, why because the white man brought diesase, you gop fools are all the same, learn your goddamned history before you troll..
odom602 8 months ago