Perfect storm? - Page 23 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078360
Julian658 wrote:We are in agreement. People need to fish on their own. Giving them fish causes destruction of the human spirit.


I also oppose Trump’s $1.5 trillion bailout.

Let them fail.
By Julian658
#15078389
Pants-of-dog wrote:I also oppose Trump’s $1.5 trillion bailout.

Let them fail.


As a libertarian I sympathize with the idea of not doing the bail out, however, both the Dems and the Reps want to be elected and that is more important than mortgaging the nation so future generations have to pay. Both right and the left coincide in the concept of staying in office forever. Trump will do whatever gets him elected.

Nevertheless, help to businesses in the manner of loans to be repaid later is OK.

POD: That was mediocre sarcasm from your part.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078391
I was not sarcastic at all. I completely oppose corporate bailouts.

If Trump wanted to do well by injecting money into the economy, he could have spent the 1.5 trillion on public healthcare for all.
By Julian658
#15078394
Pants-of-dog wrote:I was not sarcastic at all. I completely oppose corporate bailouts.

If Trump wanted to do well by injecting money into the economy, he could have spent the 1.5 trillion on public healthcare for all.


Giving cash to people with no job prospects is a short term solution. Helping the businesses that can provide jobs for the long term is a better solution. However, I get your point of view. You would rather have everybody work for the state.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078405
Doctors, nurses, lab technicians, and all the other people on the front line of this viral outbreak are not “people with no job prospects”. They are literally the people who are out there saving lives while we chat. They have job security.

And injecting money into a public healthcare plan instead of bailing out failed businesses also helps businesses that employ people. The only difference between that and Trump’s bailout is that the money would ho to those who are actually saving lives now instead of cronies and lobbyists.
By Julian658
#15078414
Pants-of-dog wrote:Doctors, nurses, lab technicians, and all the other people on the front line of this viral outbreak are not “people with no job prospects”. They are literally the people who are out there saving lives while we chat. They have job security.

And injecting money into a public healthcare plan instead of bailing out failed businesses also helps businesses that employ people. The only difference between that and Trump’s bailout is that the money would ho to those who are actually saving lives now instead of cronies and lobbyists.


Doctors, nurses, laboratory technician etc. have employment security and as you said are well paid. There is no point in giving them extra income since they are actually working. However there are many businesses that are now closed. If they stay closed for a long time they will go permanently out of business. This would markedly increased unemployment. It makes more sense to help the businesses that can provide long-term employment for the people that are now unemployed. The help provided to these businesses comes in the form of the loan which is to be paid back once the crisis is over.

I already told you that I am for UHC even though I will not need it. I realize it is best to have universal coverage for the masses. However, this does not necessarily improves the quality of care or prevents epidemics. Furthermore, UHC does not prevent a shortage of supplies. Only the private sector can provide in abundance. This is something that even the most staunch socialists will admit. You are the only exception.
Last edited by Julian658 on 26 Mar 2020 11:42, edited 1 time in total.
By Patrickov
#15078498
Maybe we do not need to debate on such fine details.

I think "let them fail" is doable if the resourceful, creative and / or industrious common people can readily provide replacement for the vacated economic ecology space.

In other words, I only care whether the said suggestion harms the "innocent". If yes then the advocate (who seem to sympathise common innocent people) is wrong. Otherwise we are in no place to judge him.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078520
Julian658 wrote:Doctors, nurses, laboratory technician etc. have employment security and as you said are well paid. There is no point in giving them extra income since they are actually working.


....and the point is to expand and strengthen their industry. So there would be more of them, they could afford healthcare themselves, and the whole population would be healthier.

However there are many businesses that are now closed. If they stay closed for a long time they will go permanently out of business. This would markedly increased unemployment. It makes more sense to help the businesses that can provide long-term employment for the people that are now unemployed. The help provided to these businesses comes in the form of the loan which is to be paid back once the crisis is over.


Or the money could be used to provide income security for the people working in those businesses, so that they can take the time off and still come back to a job.

I already told you that I am for UHC even though I will not need it. I realize it is best to have universal coverage for the masses. However, this does not necessarily improves the quality of care or prevents epidemics.


And you keep repeating this obviously incorrect claim that private haelthcare is just as good.

Why do you believe things for which there is no evidence?

Furthermore, UHC does not prevent a shortage of supplies. Only the private sector can provide in abundance. This is something that even the most staunch socialists will admit. You are the only exception.


Provide evidence for this claim. This is getting ridiculous, how often you repeat things that are obviously wrong.
By Julian658
#15078557
Pants-of-dog wrote:....and the point is to expand and strengthen their industry. So there would be more of them, they could afford healthcare themselves, and the whole population would be healthier.



POD. the unhealthy portion of the population are the poor obese people, the drug users, the alcoholics, smokers, and the young 18-26 men killing each other in the inner city. Stop the platitudes and try to post something meaningful.



Or the money could be used to provide income security for the people working in those businesses, so that they can take the time off and still come back to a job.


That is exactly what the bill that passed will do.


And you keep repeating this obviously incorrect claim that private haelthcare is just as good.


Health care in nations with a national health care plan is still provided by the private sector POD. Only Cuba and North Korea have state doctors. Do you think North Korea has the best health care in the world ? Is it as good as Cuba?

Provide evidence for this claim. This is getting ridiculous, how often you repeat things that are obviously wrong.


I will not provide citations for the obvious POD. Use google.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078570
Julian658 wrote:POD. the unhealthy portion of the population are the poor obese people, the drug users, the alcoholics, smokers, and the young 18-26 men killing each other in the inner city.


Is their mortality rate and/or their conditions amenable to health care? If so, then you would have more people alive and in better health.

That is exactly what the bill that passed will do.


Sure. Better late than never. This does not contradict my point. Note that this a government solution to a problem with the market caused by its inability to cope with the outbreak.

Health care in nations with a national health care plan is still provided by the private sector POD.


This does not mean that private health care systems are just as good.

Only Cuba and North Korea have state doctors. Do you think North Korea has the best health care in the world ? Is it as good as Cuba?


Do you know what a whataboutism is?

I will not provide citations for the obvious POD. Use google.


So your claim that private markets never have shortages and planned economies always do is unsupported.

It is obviously incorrect.

Your refusal to provide evidence indicates that you are not interested in finding out what actually causes shortages and how economic systems handle these factors differently.

Stop the platitudes and try to post something meaningful.


You seem to enjoy making these passive aggressive comments.
By Julian658
#15078614
Pants-of-dog wrote:Is their mortality rate and/or their conditions amenable to health care? If so, then you would have more people alive and in better health.


Obesity among the poor is due to lack of education, receiving free income and food, and a sedentary lifestyle. But, don't get me wrong, plenty in the middle class are also massively obese and sedentary. Only the phD types exercise and eat healthy food. The latter use very little health care resources.

Sure. Better late than never. This does not contradict my point. Note that this a government solution to a problem with the market caused by its inability to cope with the outbreak.


The market did not cause this problem POD. The outbreak is one of those instances where the government needs to step in. This would be the case in all capitalist nations.


So your claim that private markets never have shortages and planned economies always do is unsupported.


Here is a video of a so called good Cuban hospital. Enjoy!

Best Cuban Hospital!


Your refusal to provide evidence indicates that you are not interested in finding out what actually causes shortages and how economic systems handle these factors differently.

Watch the video about Cuban hospitals. They are using 1950s equipment. Just like the old antique cars you see in the streets.

Do you have the guts to watch? Do you think your world will crumble if you watch. You strike me as a bourgeois pseudo-socialist that enjoys all the benefits of living in a capitalist nation.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078619
Julian658 wrote:Obesity among the poor is due to lack of education, receiving free income and food, and a sedentary lifestyle. But, don't get me wrong, plenty in the middle class are also massively obese and sedentary. Only the phD types exercise and eat healthy food. The latter use very little health care resources.


I did not ask about the causes.

I asked if their conditions or mortality rate was amenable to health care.

Do you know what that means?

The market did not cause this problem POD. The outbreak is one of those instances where the government needs to step in. This would be the case in all capitalist nations.


I did not claim the market caused the virus.

I said it caused the problem of people being out of work.

Do you know what that means?

Here is a video of a so called good Cuban hospital. Enjoy!

Best Cuban Hospital!


The topic is not Cuba.

It us about how the free market health care system does or does not cope with viral outbreaks.

Do you know what that means?

Watch the video about Cuban hospitals. They are using 1950s equipment. Just like the old antique cars you see in the streets.

Do you have the guts to watch? Do you think your world will crumble if you watch. You strike me as a bourgeois pseudo-socialist that enjoys all the benefits of living in a capitalist nation.


And now we are back to your passive aggressive attacks.

Do you know why free market health care has smaller waiting lists?

Because most of the people cannot afford the treatment so they do not make it onto the waiting list.

It is called “let them die”.
By Julian658
#15078639
Pants-of-dog wrote:I did not ask about the causes.

I asked if their conditions or mortality rate was amenable to health care.

Do you know what that means?


POD: Some people love fast food, booze, smoking, etc. They mostly have self induced diseases. What we need is education! Young men in the inner city shoot each other 24/7, people OD on opiods--------------- that drives down life expectancy averages. In this sense Cuba does it better because they have an authoritarian system where this crap is not tolerated.



I said it caused the problem of people being out of work.

Do you know what that means?

POD: Putting people to work for the sake of work means nothing. Did you forget the old saying commie Russians used to say" They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work". Meaningful work is productive. Work for the sake of work means nothing.


It us about how the free market health care system does or does not cope with viral outbreaks.


POD: In an outbreak all rules go out the door. Everybody works together whether the system is private or public. You seem to imply the private sector will not lift a hand.


Do you know why free market health care has smaller waiting lists?

Because most of the people cannot afford the treatment so they do not make it onto the waiting list.

It is called “let them die”.


I am with you on national health care. However, as for myself I prefer a private system. I don't mind if others want to go public.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078643
Julian658 wrote:POD: Some people love fast food, booze, smoking, etc. They mostly have self induced diseases. What we need is education! Young men in the inner city shoot each other 24/7, people OD on opiods--------------- that drives down life expectancy averages.


And since many of the effects of these diseases are amenable to health care, this is all irrelevant.

POD: Putting people to work for the sake of work means nothing. Did you forget the old saying commie Russians used to say" They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work". Meaningful work is productive. Work for the sake of work means nothing.


Did you notice that the stock market and most of the economy is in free fall? Why? We are not missing any infrastructure or materials. The bosses are still there investing their inheritances. The only thing missing is this labour that you define as “unproductive”.

If it is so “unproductive”, then why is every company worthless without this labour?

POD: In an outbreak all rules go out the door. Everybody works together whether the system is private or public. You seem to imply the private sector will not lift a hand.


I think they will lift a hand if they can make money off it. I also think they will deliberately do nothing if they can make money that way. And they would also deliberately do something that increases infection and death rates if they could make money off it.

The common factor is that they will do whatever makes the most money. At this point, that seems like squeezing the government for bailout money. The private sector is lifting a hand and using it take your taxpayer money for free.

I am with you on national health care. However, as for myself I prefer a private system. I don't mind if others want to go public.


What individuals like you want does not matter. Insurance companies have lobbyists who give money to politicians. These politicians then make sure that you do not have a public option.

When it comes to healthcare, you have fewer options with the free market.
By Julian658
#15078659
Pants-of-dog wrote:
Did you notice that the stock market and most of the economy is in free fall? Why? We are not missing any infrastructure or materials. The bosses are still there investing their inheritances. The only thing missing is this labour that you define as “unproductive”.

If it is so “unproductive”, then why is every company worthless without this labour?



POD, you can work incredibly hard splitting rocks in your backyard and create ZERO wealth. Or you can work under the direction of an inventor and help him (or her) develop the Apple computer. Yes, the labor is important , but what creates the wealth is the innovation of the business.


I think they will lift a hand if they can make money off it. I also think they will deliberately do nothing if they can make money that way. And they would also deliberately do something that increases infection and death rates if they could make money off it.

The common factor is that they will do whatever makes the most money. At this point, that seems like squeezing the government for bailout money. The private sector is lifting a hand and using it take your taxpayer money for free.



“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest."

I challenge you to analyze the above statement. What is Adam Smith saying above? Can you answer?

When it comes to healthcare, you have fewer options with the free market.


Let's see who discovers the cure for Corona? Do you think it will be the North Koreans?
User avatar
By Godstud
#15078668
@Julian658 Your Cuban Hospital video was filmed in....







wait for it...






1992

:knife:
By Pants-of-dog
#15078709
Julian658 wrote:POD, you can work incredibly hard splitting rocks in your backyard and create ZERO wealth. Or you can work under the direction of an inventor and help him (or her) develop the Apple computer. Yes, the labor is important , but what creates the wealth is the innovation of the business.


Then all those companies do not need bailouts. They have “innovation”!

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest."

I challenge you to analyze the above statement. What is Adam Smith saying above? Can you answer?


Yes.

He is saying the same thing I am. Adam Smith and I have apparently observed the same fact: capitalists work in their own self-interest.

Let's see who discovers the cure for Corona? Do you think it will be the North Koreans?


Have you guys started widespread testing yet?
By Julian658
#15078721
Pants-of-dog wrote:Then all those companies do not need bailouts. They have “innovation”!


I am a centrist libertarian and I detest bailouts. I am with you! However, when the companies go down the tubes people become unemployed. In any event this bail out is designed so the business has cash for payroll in the absence of income. That is probably better than allowing the business to die and giving cash directly to an unemployed person.


He is saying the same thing I am. Adam Smith and I have apparently observed the same fact: capitalists work in their own self-interest.


Exactly, and while looking for their interest they have to compete with others. This competition causes them to provide better services or goods. In order to compete they must provide a better product at a lower price.

Adam Smith recognized down side as well: “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices".

Capitalism is not perfect. Carlos Marx was 100% correct.

Have you guys started widespread testing yet?


It is ramping up big time, but the population is large. IN any event I am confident the free market will get it done because:

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest".

Don't get me wrong the public sector is also involved.
By Pants-of-dog
#15078724
Julian658 wrote:I am a centrist libertarian and I detest bailouts. I am with you! However, when the companies go down the tubes people become unemployed. In any event this bail out is designed so the business has cash for payroll in the absence of income. That is probably better than allowing the business to die and giving cash directly to an unemployed person.


The government can give the money directly to the person through the employment insurance system, and simply pass a law saying that they have to be hired again when business restarts.

Exactly, and while looking for their interest they have to compete with others. This competition causes them to provide better services or goods. In order to compete they must provide a better product at a lower price.

Adam Smith recognized down side as well: “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices".

Capitalism is not perfect. Carlos Marx was 100% correct.


If you want to discuss how economics and health care are related, we can.

Do you know what information asymmetry is?

It is ramping up big time, but the population is large. IN any event I am confident the free market will get it done because:

“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest".

Don't get me wrong the public sector is also involved.


So that is a “no”.

Meanwhile, places with public healthcare have already started.
  • 1
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26

This raises a risk of extreme blowback. Every oth[…]

@foxdemon Cultural Marxism is a conspiracy theo[…]

What does China really want? Good question and I t[…]

What's wrong with the 45%? A majority of America[…]