C.O.G. has a single payer healthcare package coming to a town near you just as soon as Kissinger & Associates are able to have it arranged through FEMA and Department of Homeland Security.
It will be a bullet delivered at close range to the back of your skull, NKVD style.
A corpse does not suffer, so it is viewed as the perfect cure.
He hates corporate military and private health insurance and is in love with government run military and healthcare. This is exactly what Big Brother wants you to believe. Jeremy's big brother might as well be Obama because they're pushing things in the same direction, i.e., complete governmental control. It's the classic good cop bad cop ploy.
Either government has a hand in health care administration and poor and sick people get covered or steely corporate decision-making cuts people off more and more as it becomes more profitable. If you have healthcare right now it's pretty cold to work toward the status quo.
I don't have health insurance because part of the problem is the idea of insurance itself. Why would I give someone else my money to hold onto just in case I needed it later? I save and preserve my wealth for future events all on my own. When you surrender such control over your life to someone else, who is really the fool when that someone else doesn't take care of you in the end?
You obviously make enough money to cover a wide range of potential high-cost medical situations. That's nice. But if you make $20,000 per year and have kids to support there isn't any saving going on. You realize, I hope, that the majority of people in the world don't have the luxury of saving money at all.
Hah, me, rich? I wish. My last job was as a clerk.
You missed my point. You pay less by not having insurance. How else do you think insurance companies make money? Also, subsidizing insurance via government programs has the unintentional consequence of increasing healthcare costs over time. The more people can pay via aid, the more providers will charge, driving prices higher.
Plus, it's immoral to force one family to provide for another family. Families ought to help one another when they can, but it is not something that should be forced upon them. An act of goodness must be voluntary. A society that forces kindness by threat of imprisonment is not a good society.
At present the alternative isn't any good either. Let's privatise everything and let corporate powers run the land? What is the difference? What Scahill fundamentally is supporting is a return to democratic control of the gov't and from there democratic control over the corporations. This Socialism Vs Corporatism isn't a real issue. It is the pro wrestling of debate. The cheerleaders cooking up the debate (on both sides) are all not what either of us want (Corporatists/Fascists).
@jgbloyd Yes they can. Check your tooth paste Isle. Tons of brands aren't there. You can pick and choose. You can pick and choose between a hundred brand names all owned by one or two corporations. Let's talk television. Hundreds of channels only 4 media giants. The numbers of big guys at the top are dwindling. Choice in a free market is a temporary thing. One day all your tooth paste and TV will be provided by 1 corp.
I dont think thats whats going on at ALL. What Jeremy stands for and what the Obama administration stands for are two completely different things. Jeremy has been very critical of Obama....look up some videos, theres plenty
I do think Jeremy has good intentions. I just think he's misguided.
I never understood why he thinks mercs are so bad when that's all our military is today. The only difference between a soldier and a merc is where their paychecks come from.
I think there are a few more differences than that. The largest being that if a soldier screws up they are accountable to a court Marshall and the American justice system whereas if a merc screws up they're accountable to the company which usually results in paid leave at best
Giving poor people health care is called decency. Corporations have been blocking it for decades even though public opinion has always been for it. Luckily they have neocorporatists like you to defend their actions under the guise of protecting freedoms. There has been a huge ideological campaign to confuse helping poor people (the vast majority of the world) with taking away freedom - that's pure Orwell for you (the socialist whom you quote) .
healthcare is not the same thing as health insurance. One is good, the other bad. One is about helping people, the other is a ponzi scheme that cheats people out of their savings and raises healthcare costs for all.
Oh, please. He's saying exactly what Obama's camp wants you to hear. The end game is a New World Order, complete control of our lives, including our health, by the governmental body, and completely out of private hands. If I were Obama, I'd give Jeremy more airtime, perhaps even instruct cops to leave him alone. Funny thing, Jeremy probably isn't aware of his role.
Oh, great, another idol. Don't you see, following idols is part of the problem. Never follow just one person. Learn to think for yourself. If you ever find yourself agreeing with someone 100%, then warning lights ought to be going off.
Jeremy Scahill for president please...
Rahmendanel 2 months ago
C.O.G. has a single payer healthcare package coming to a town near you just as soon as Kissinger & Associates are able to have it arranged through FEMA and Department of Homeland Security.
It will be a bullet delivered at close range to the back of your skull, NKVD style.
A corpse does not suffer, so it is viewed as the perfect cure.
centurion180ad 9 months ago
I wish everyone would stop talking about Barky. We need to be arresting criminals, and taking out //actual// terrorists.
centurion180ad 9 months ago
Scahill is the conscience of US journalism. What a breath of fresh air. Thanks for the upload.
Cabronosidad 1 year ago
He hates corporate military and private health insurance and is in love with government run military and healthcare. This is exactly what Big Brother wants you to believe. Jeremy's big brother might as well be Obama because they're pushing things in the same direction, i.e., complete governmental control. It's the classic good cop bad cop ploy.
jgbloyd 2 years ago
Either government has a hand in health care administration and poor and sick people get covered or steely corporate decision-making cuts people off more and more as it becomes more profitable. If you have healthcare right now it's pretty cold to work toward the status quo.
bberntson 2 years ago
I don't have health insurance because part of the problem is the idea of insurance itself. Why would I give someone else my money to hold onto just in case I needed it later? I save and preserve my wealth for future events all on my own. When you surrender such control over your life to someone else, who is really the fool when that someone else doesn't take care of you in the end?
jgbloyd 2 years ago
You obviously make enough money to cover a wide range of potential high-cost medical situations. That's nice. But if you make $20,000 per year and have kids to support there isn't any saving going on. You realize, I hope, that the majority of people in the world don't have the luxury of saving money at all.
bberntson 2 years ago
@bberntson
Hah, me, rich? I wish. My last job was as a clerk.
You missed my point. You pay less by not having insurance. How else do you think insurance companies make money? Also, subsidizing insurance via government programs has the unintentional consequence of increasing healthcare costs over time. The more people can pay via aid, the more providers will charge, driving prices higher.
jgbloyd 1 year ago
Yeah, you're clearly informed.
Arkinight 2 years ago
Plus, it's immoral to force one family to provide for another family. Families ought to help one another when they can, but it is not something that should be forced upon them. An act of goodness must be voluntary. A society that forces kindness by threat of imprisonment is not a good society.
jgbloyd 2 years ago
Dear Loyd,
At present the alternative isn't any good either. Let's privatise everything and let corporate powers run the land? What is the difference? What Scahill fundamentally is supporting is a return to democratic control of the gov't and from there democratic control over the corporations. This Socialism Vs Corporatism isn't a real issue. It is the pro wrestling of debate. The cheerleaders cooking up the debate (on both sides) are all not what either of us want (Corporatists/Fascists).
elbowbiter1 2 years ago
@elbowbiter1
The difference is that the private sector can't force anyone into their ponzi scheme plans by gunpoint.
jgbloyd 1 year ago
@jgbloyd Yes they can. Check your tooth paste Isle. Tons of brands aren't there. You can pick and choose. You can pick and choose between a hundred brand names all owned by one or two corporations. Let's talk television. Hundreds of channels only 4 media giants. The numbers of big guys at the top are dwindling. Choice in a free market is a temporary thing. One day all your tooth paste and TV will be provided by 1 corp.
elbowbiter1 1 year ago
I dont think thats whats going on at ALL. What Jeremy stands for and what the Obama administration stands for are two completely different things. Jeremy has been very critical of Obama....look up some videos, theres plenty
dickmoe99 2 years ago
@dickmoe99
I do think Jeremy has good intentions. I just think he's misguided.
I never understood why he thinks mercs are so bad when that's all our military is today. The only difference between a soldier and a merc is where their paychecks come from.
jgbloyd 1 year ago
@jgbloyd
I think there are a few more differences than that. The largest being that if a soldier screws up they are accountable to a court Marshall and the American justice system whereas if a merc screws up they're accountable to the company which usually results in paid leave at best
dickmoe99 1 year ago
Giving poor people health care is called decency. Corporations have been blocking it for decades even though public opinion has always been for it. Luckily they have neocorporatists like you to defend their actions under the guise of protecting freedoms. There has been a huge ideological campaign to confuse helping poor people (the vast majority of the world) with taking away freedom - that's pure Orwell for you (the socialist whom you quote) .
kpirooz92 2 years ago
@kpirooz92
healthcare is not the same thing as health insurance. One is good, the other bad. One is about helping people, the other is a ponzi scheme that cheats people out of their savings and raises healthcare costs for all.
jgbloyd 1 year ago
My idol.
gavin6942 2 years ago
Haha, yeah he is one of the good ones. Two gavins can't be wrong, right?
GavoPBS 2 years ago
Oh, please. He's saying exactly what Obama's camp wants you to hear. The end game is a New World Order, complete control of our lives, including our health, by the governmental body, and completely out of private hands. If I were Obama, I'd give Jeremy more airtime, perhaps even instruct cops to leave him alone. Funny thing, Jeremy probably isn't aware of his role.
jgbloyd 2 years ago
Oh, great, another idol. Don't you see, following idols is part of the problem. Never follow just one person. Learn to think for yourself. If you ever find yourself agreeing with someone 100%, then warning lights ought to be going off.
jgbloyd 2 years ago