The Leftist Myth: Everyone Loves Our Policies!

[benny01]

Look if I come off a bit manic, and irritated my bad, but the hand waving of facts that are instead replaced by conspiracy is killin me when I talk to people about this stuff. It puts a block in the conversation.

My bad if I'm taking it out on you, but ****. Every time it's "the Jews", "the Corporation", "the media" online. I get called a George Sorous spy weekly now.. Not even kidding. I just get tired of it. And pretty soon people get stuck into their position and they create this fabricated truth, and they never move away from it.

Yeah, you should read your posts in another voice. As ewing has said, you seem to be upset by the very things that you are doing.

In the interest of actual debate, How do so many other countries provide coverage for all of their citizens while spending far less of their GDP to do so? What are the issues that prevent the US from having the ability to do that as well?

[ewing]

Lol. My bad not a spy. A shill.

Trumpers legitimately think Soros is paying people to try to change their opinion online with misinformation... Or I guess. It always circles to the Jews somehow lol.

The Jews are an ingredient in any conspiracy theory worth its “salt” [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MRSpock]

The Jews are an ingredient in any conspiracy theory worth its “salt” [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This was Pm'd to me like 90 times yesterday on a different site.

"When you control all of Hollywood, media, education system, literature you control the narrative. You control how people think. People have been brainwashed and mind controlled and conditioned by these frauds who don't have one ancestor whoever set a big toe in Palestine all of their lives and don't even know it.
You're a good example of that."

[MRSpock]

Yeah, you should read your posts in another voice. As ewing has said, you seem to be upset by the very things that you are doing.

In the interest of actual debate, How do so many other countries provide coverage for all of their citizens while spending far less of their GDP to do so? What are the issues that prevent the US from having the ability to do that as well?

I'll try to do better. I'm just getting really irritated with **** right now.

But yeah I probably need to do a better job of proof reading my posts in general, and be more generous with other peoples opinions.

But cost. I mean this is undisputable. Drug costs. The amount we spend in administration. Lawsuits. Doctors Everything.

People here are right (IMO) that a universal healthcare system such as single payer is the better solution here. The free market does not work with healthcare. Competition does not lower cost. In fact it decreases care.

But we spend more everywhere. I saw a study that said that even if you account for inflation we spend 700% more on cost in the medical system sector then we did 50 years ago.

The problem is half the country is still convinced of "competing markets". So unless you can turn the WH/Senate massively blue you probably will have a difficult time making these changes.

My main point for the thread was to get rid of this notion that the far left are the only people that want these changes, and their ideas are massively popular...

They are not the only ones with these ideas. Democrats have been pushing them for decades. It's the red states that are holding back these changes. Not the "establishment Dems".

[nastynice]

This was Pm'd to me like 90 times yesterday on a different site.

"When you control all of Hollywood, media, education system, literature you control the narrative. You control how people think. People have been brainwashed and mind controlled and conditioned by these frauds ..."

That's a pretty solid statement tho, although it's not necessarily specific to Jews.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[MRSpock]

That's a pretty solid statement tho, although it's not necessarily specific to Jews.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

He's definitely talking about the Jews lol.

Not sure if this statement is "solid"

[nastynice]

He's definitely talking about the Jews lol.

Not sure if this statement is "solid"

I know he is, I disagree with that aspect of what he said.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[MRSpock]

I know he is, I disagree with that aspect of what he said.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

But I'm assuming that you think the Democrats "control Hollywood" and education?...

Nvm. Not worth it.

[nastynice]

But I'm assuming that you think the Democrats "control Hollywood" and education?...

Nvm. Not worth it.

I don't know what controlling education necessarily means, but Hollywood most definitely has a heavy liberal lean. I don't have to tell you that.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[MRSpock]

I don't know what controlling education necessarily means, but Hollywood most definitely has a heavy liberal lean. I don't have to tell you that.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Yeah but that's very different than "controlling".

And media does not have a left wing bias. Talk radio has been poisoning people with Rush Limbaugh and others for years. Different medias have different bias. Education and literature? Lol.

To quote Colbert - "Reality has a liberal bias".

[mike_noodles]

He's definitely talking about the Jews lol.

Not sure if this statement is "solid"

But only if they're working in conjunction with the reptiliians.

[SiteWolf]

[nastynice]

Yeah but that's very different than "controlling".

And media does not have a left wing bias. Talk radio has been poisoning people with Rush Limbaugh and others for years. Different medias have different bias. Education and literature? Lol.

To quote Colbert - "Reality has a liberal bias".

Well it's a blurry line between influence and control.

Mainstream American media by and large has an anti right wing bias to it. Whether that bias is justified or not is a (slightly) diff topic, as my point has more to do with methods of propaganda.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[zookman65]

Yeah, you should read your posts in another voice. As ewing has said, you seem to be upset by the very things that you are doing.

In the interest of actual debate, How do so many other countries provide coverage for all of their citizens while spending far less of their GDP to do so? What are the issues that prevent the US from having the ability to do that as well?

Well its pure math here in the US. A huge portion of our collective health spend goes to "for profit" insurance companies to the tune of over a trillion dollars per year. If we truly had a collective universal risk pool and took the non value add profit out of the risk pool, we would be able to cover every citizen with full coverage for less than the total outlay now. Of course that would mean that 10s of thousands of very highly compensated insurance executives would need to find something else to do.

[nastynice]

Well its pure math here in the US. A huge portion of our collective health spend goes to "for profit" insurance companies to the tune of over a trillion dollars per year. If we truly had a collective universal risk pool and took the non value add profit out of the risk pool, we would be able to cover every citizen with full coverage for less than the total outlay now. Of course that would mean that 10s of thousands of very highly compensated insurance executives would need to find something else to do.

I def support single payer health insurance in theory. But one thing I can't ignore is how much better our vaccines are at 90% and 95% effect compared to England Oxford was at like 70% or something. I wonder how much innovation comes from america vs other countries.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk