Jules of Nature
ellievsbear
KIROKAZE
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
Noah Kahan
blake kathryn
we're not kids anymore.
#extradirty
Keni
The Bowery Presents
The Stonewall Inn
untitled
wallacepolsom
art blog(derogatory)
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
d e v o n
Sweet Seals For You, Always
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
No title available
Love Begins
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from Malaysia
seen from Argentina
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Canada
seen from Hungary
seen from Sri Lanka
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Algeria
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
@magister-christophe
No you don’t understand, before he tweeted that out he used his super secret other twitter account that only the qanon people can follow and told them that it was opposite day. I should go write for vice or vox.
Before he tweeted that out, he was holding a rally where he was convincing people the outcome of the election could be changed and they should make it happen by going to the Capitol
It’s almost like CEOs and cooperations have an agenda making youths have addictions
That’s a pretty wild accusation. I can guarantee you that getting kids addicted is the last thing that the company behind Juul actually wanted.
Yeah why would a company want a generation of users of their product who start having literal withdrawal symptoms when if they try to stop giving said company money?! Why would any company want tha… wait….
Well considering this directly led to them being put in a position where they have to actively fight to prevent being flat-out eradicated from the US market by the FDA, I'd say that's a pretty good reason to avoid it.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn’t “X cost on top of everything else” because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
Yeah…for subsidies. Not complete and total compensation for everything. It would be trillions on top of everything else. That or forced labor and robbery…which would still cost money.
Just to be clear are you saying we can’t manage healthcare as well as every other major developed country that’s currently paying less than us? Or that we shouldn’t try? Because it obviously is possible to pay less so I’m not sure what your exact contention is.
This whole “forced labor” thing is silly. We have a right to an attorney but no one’s putting public defenders in shackles.
My contention is that pushing it to be a right will only cause problems because rights are not services but innate to a person, requiring nothing from anyone but themselves. Pushing this will only make it worse.
You making this false dichotomy of “make Medicare a right”/“We’re inept” doesn’t work since you haven’t actually LISTED any countries to compare with, like quality of care or social difference.
And finally- taxes. But nice job completely ignoring part of the subject.
Sure - there are innate human rights and then there are civil rights. The right to an attorney is not innate to a person but being that *we live in a society* (and a relatively successful one at that) we can provide certain protections to our citizens that go above and beyond what’s philosophically argued to be innately possessed by virtue of being human. Nothing about civil rights is inherently bad or destructive and even our constitution provides some.
I haven’t listed anything because it wasn’t called for yet. If you want me to Google a bunch of relevant stats I will but I’d like to know more about what exact aspects of it you disagree with so I’m not wasting my time. Do you think the standard of care in like France or Australia or Germany is better or worse than our own? Do you think they pay more or less per capita? I want you to state clearly what you think is the case so you can’t avoid information that contradicts it.
I didn’t mention a thing about civil rights because the conversation is about innate rights. Civil rights are in regards to society, innate rights are for the individual. And individuals require healthcare, a society is not a living organism.
Fine then-
My issue is not only that countries pay more, have a lower quality of care and have longer wait times but are also not in line with American culture and society. For example, universal healthcare might be great in a country of healthy people…but not for a country with a high obesity rate and thus higher rates of medical issues.
Or forcing people to go to one provider might be okay for a country that values authority and social cohesion…but not one that values individualism to a radical degree.
Or having a fix all plan for a fair homogeneous country could work…not for one with such vast differences between territories like America.
The finnical shit is just the tip of the iceberg.
No, this conversation is not about innate rights - it’s about healthcare as a right. If it were considered a right, it would fall under the category of civil rights - which already exist without causing problems. So if you want to claim it would cause problems just by virtue of it not being innate to humanity then you should have the same contention with every other civil and political right. And I’m assuming you don’t.
So this is a detailed comparison of healthcare spending by country, adjusted for a variety of factors. This isn’t something that anyone argues - the US spends more, by far, than any other country. Per capita, as a percent of our GDP, PPP adjusted.
We don’t get more for that money. This is a comparison of actual quality of healthcare between countries using patient outcomes, disability, and mortality rates.
Obesity rates are high in the US, and that already currently affects healthcare costs - but you can’t just handwave this all away by saying “lifestyle choices”. New Zealand (30.8), Canada(29.4), and Australia (29), for instance, have an obesity rate similar to America (36.2). Their healthcare costs are under half of ours, despite the rate of obesity being only 10-20% lower.
Regardless of that, ultimately, the cost and availability of healthcare currently is worse for those on private insurance plans. Whatever cost our obesity problem brings would likely be reduced through a public option.
I don’t doubt that wait times would be on average longer but that doesn’t seem to affect the actual quality of care in other countries - and everyone is covered, and no one’s going bankrupt or having to take out a second mortgage on their home because of an unforseen downturn in their health, and their overall cost per capita is lower. This is a no brainer.
…
You didn’t get the definition of civil rights correct (they are rights regarding political and social freedom alongside equality).
Your cost link and your quality link are the same.
Your quality link doesn’t explain shit about how it got these numbers. It cites the OCED for mortality rates but not which part. Assuming it is ‘Avoidable mortality’, you’d need to know what their definitions are among other things (like how it cites the rates from 1980 to 2017…even though the chart now only lists 2010. It’s a headache to analyze for yourself and trust the numbers. We need an actual breakdown and explanation.
Even ignoring how 10-20% is really just 20% and greater as well being rather significant*, your own link shows the US standing at 12th in ranking with New Zeland being 19th. Said insignificant difference caused a 7 place difference.
And your last link doesn’t even bother giving its data.
I also find it funny that you completely ignored the whole ‘taxes’ thing. Fun fact, Canada has a tax rate of about 15%. Which is over 7% more than the highest tax rate in my state. New Zealand is 9% higher for me. And uh…it would get far worse for me if I tried getting a better paying job.
That’s also complete bullshit about the cost. I don’t even need to look it up because, surprise, I have medical debt from being treated for diabetic ketoacidosis. And I didn’t need to sell my organs- with my mom’s medical insurance, I only recently needed to ask for finical assistance and that was due to my workplace cutting my hours.
This discussion has been done before. We already know it is extremely expensive. And I’m from a family of social workers, I know how healthcare fucks over people because my mom and aunt know this firsthand. Making it universal is not a good idea.
I did get the definition correct - believe it or not, the concept of civil rights goes a bit deeper than a sentence long definition from bing. Regardless, you’re ignoring the actual content of what I said. You should be able to recognize that there are rights you are entitled to that go beyond what is granted to you by virtue of being human. The right to vote, to not be discriminated against based on your ethnicity, the right to legal representation, etc.
Those two links are not the same - check again.
You can see how the OECD gets its data here. And here is their description of avoidable mortality. Why even ask me for lists if you’re going to neg on literally everything I share without putting a modicum of effort into answering your own questions? If you have a concern with how they collect data then actually go look into it instead of feigning skepticism for the sole purpose of writing it off.
The difference of 7 places on a list is wholly irrelevant to the actual statistical difference in obesity (which is more accurately 14.92%-19.89%, not 20%, since we’re real concerned over this) because you can’t derive how significant the difference is from a numerical place in a list. So - if you’ll permit me to round just a little bit here - a 15-20% difference in obesity rates is not responsible for an over 200% increase in cost.
For my last link here is the study. I just searched “JAMA private vs public study” and it was the first result. I don’t know why you need this much hand holding.
I did not ignore the taxes thing - I’ve addressed it more than once and I’ll try again:
You need to go get some insulin meds or else you’ll die. Let’s say it’ll cost you $100 for the sake of it. Now, tomorrow, a bill to create a public option passes, and you are required to immediately pay a $50 tax to fund this program - but as a result, you don’t have to pay that $100 to get your life saving medication.
I know the math is a little tricky here but I hope you were able to follow along. I don’t give a shit if the letter coming to my house is labeled “Medical Tax” or “Medical Bill” - if the tax is less than the bill, it doesn’t make any sense to choose the bill.
“I don’t even need to look it up” my brother you haven’t looked up shit here I’m literally doing all the work for you. Why don’t you reciprocate a bit here and find me, let’s say, the top five reasons why people declare bankruptcy in the US?
… You know, maybe I would have listened at all considering I wanted to talk more in depth.
But between the misuse of civil rights AGAIN (All of those are clearly NOT like healthcare because they relate to society not you personally. Which I mentioned BEFORE you. BTW We consider those rights innate to humans in our country ANYWAY so your point was fucking moot).
The condescending bullshit of ‘Oh well, here it is! Why could YOU find it?’ As if it’s my job to fucking support YOUR argument.
And the fact that your smug bullshit completely ignores two problems-
“forcing people to go to one provider might be okay for a country that values authority and social cohesion…but not one that values individualism to a radical degree.“
“Or having a fix all plan for a fair homogeneous country could work…not for one with such vast differences between territories like America. “
So, how’s that implementation gonna work when you have roughly about HALF the fucking country who will resist it not on an economic level but on a MORALLY level? Remember- America is not cohesive in the slightest. Numerous right wingers don’t like this shit because they view it as an infringement of their right to choose. What’s your solution there?
Or are you gonna ignore that, spout off some links with no explanation that is about the economic side and ignore that? Not to mention that even Bernie Sanders who pushed for this admitted it would cost about 1.4 trillion dollars a year on average for a decade.
So your economic side, assuming that everything you said is correct which is entirely possible, would need to find the money to do so. Which, again, is entirely possible but we have NO fucking indication of such for a plan that might not even work due to factors OUTSIDE of money.
My guy on your own damn link that you posted to try and correct me, two lines down is another explanation of civil rights that defines it as rights granted by virtue of citizenship, as distinguised from just being human.
How is the right to an attorney not a direct 1 to 1 example of what you claim makes healthcare not applicable as a right? Just replace “attorney” with “doctor” and it’s the same damn thing. It’s someone else’s labor that you’re given the right to. And there’s no problem with it.
“We consider those rights innate to humans in our country anyway”
So close! The key here is not humans in our country - but specifically, citizens of our country. Jus civitas: the right of the citizen. Civil rights. I don’t know why you’re fighting tooth and nail on this inconsequential point that you are most assuredly taking an L on. The right to vote is not fucking “innate to humans” it literally requires an external body to exist. And you need to be a citizen.
“Bernie Sanders admitted it would cost 1.4 trillion dollars a year” - cool, you’re missing the other half of the equation here - tell me how much we currently spend on healthcare, because without that this number is completely meaningless.
“Or are you going to ignore that”
I am 100% going to ignore that. Why would I go through the trouble of answering this when you’re just going to reject the answer without providing any justification of your own? We haven’t even dealt with your misunderstanding of rights, why the hell would we move on to a whole new topic?
“As if it’s my job to fucking support YOUR argument”
No, it’s your job to engage honestly with the fuckin topic. I brought up data that contradicts your (seemingly baseless) opinion. Instead of engaging with the data, you feign skepticism for the sole purpose of throwing it away. “I don’t know what methodology they used to collect it” then go look at it?? All this tells me is that you don’t actually care if you’re wrong.
And the alternative you’re asking for here is for me to, what, draft up and spoon feed you a fuckin MLA format research paper while you sit on your ass and critique it? And you want me to engage respectably with you? This has to be a joke right?
I’m extending an olive branch. We can drop the attitudes and return to civility, let bygones be bygones - but you have to actually reciprocate something. Give me some stats that support your opinion - the ones already discussed. You can even be as snarky and insulting as you want in the next post, my response won’t be hostile.
Fuck it.
This whole thing is just sloppy on my end. I really don’t know if this is a good idea but it was not right of me to argue when I did not do the proper research.
I wasted your time and I apologize for that.
It's all good, I lost my cool a bit as well. If you find something out you wanna share you can PM me or something nbd
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
It is indeed cheaper.
Yeah I mean I don't think I've seen any sort of analysis suggesting the alternative aside from like vague allusions to government bloat or mismanagement, as if the private sector is immune to that.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn’t “X cost on top of everything else” because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
Yeah…for subsidies. Not complete and total compensation for everything. It would be trillions on top of everything else. That or forced labor and robbery…which would still cost money.
Just to be clear are you saying we can’t manage healthcare as well as every other major developed country that’s currently paying less than us? Or that we shouldn’t try? Because it obviously is possible to pay less so I’m not sure what your exact contention is.
This whole “forced labor” thing is silly. We have a right to an attorney but no one’s putting public defenders in shackles.
My contention is that pushing it to be a right will only cause problems because rights are not services but innate to a person, requiring nothing from anyone but themselves. Pushing this will only make it worse.
You making this false dichotomy of “make Medicare a right”/“We’re inept” doesn’t work since you haven’t actually LISTED any countries to compare with, like quality of care or social difference.
And finally- taxes. But nice job completely ignoring part of the subject.
Sure - there are innate human rights and then there are civil rights. The right to an attorney is not innate to a person but being that *we live in a society* (and a relatively successful one at that) we can provide certain protections to our citizens that go above and beyond what’s philosophically argued to be innately possessed by virtue of being human. Nothing about civil rights is inherently bad or destructive and even our constitution provides some.
I haven’t listed anything because it wasn’t called for yet. If you want me to Google a bunch of relevant stats I will but I’d like to know more about what exact aspects of it you disagree with so I’m not wasting my time. Do you think the standard of care in like France or Australia or Germany is better or worse than our own? Do you think they pay more or less per capita? I want you to state clearly what you think is the case so you can’t avoid information that contradicts it.
I didn’t mention a thing about civil rights because the conversation is about innate rights. Civil rights are in regards to society, innate rights are for the individual. And individuals require healthcare, a society is not a living organism.
Fine then-
My issue is not only that countries pay more, have a lower quality of care and have longer wait times but are also not in line with American culture and society. For example, universal healthcare might be great in a country of healthy people…but not for a country with a high obesity rate and thus higher rates of medical issues.
Or forcing people to go to one provider might be okay for a country that values authority and social cohesion…but not one that values individualism to a radical degree.
Or having a fix all plan for a fair homogeneous country could work…not for one with such vast differences between territories like America.
The finnical shit is just the tip of the iceberg.
No, this conversation is not about innate rights - it’s about healthcare as a right. If it were considered a right, it would fall under the category of civil rights - which already exist without causing problems. So if you want to claim it would cause problems just by virtue of it not being innate to humanity then you should have the same contention with every other civil and political right. And I’m assuming you don’t.
So this is a detailed comparison of healthcare spending by country, adjusted for a variety of factors. This isn’t something that anyone argues - the US spends more, by far, than any other country. Per capita, as a percent of our GDP, PPP adjusted.
We don’t get more for that money. This is a comparison of actual quality of healthcare between countries using patient outcomes, disability, and mortality rates.
Obesity rates are high in the US, and that already currently affects healthcare costs - but you can’t just handwave this all away by saying “lifestyle choices”. New Zealand (30.8), Canada(29.4), and Australia (29), for instance, have an obesity rate similar to America (36.2). Their healthcare costs are under half of ours, despite the rate of obesity being only 10-20% lower.
Regardless of that, ultimately, the cost and availability of healthcare currently is worse for those on private insurance plans. Whatever cost our obesity problem brings would likely be reduced through a public option.
I don’t doubt that wait times would be on average longer but that doesn’t seem to affect the actual quality of care in other countries - and everyone is covered, and no one’s going bankrupt or having to take out a second mortgage on their home because of an unforseen downturn in their health, and their overall cost per capita is lower. This is a no brainer.
…
You didn’t get the definition of civil rights correct (they are rights regarding political and social freedom alongside equality).
Your cost link and your quality link are the same.
Your quality link doesn’t explain shit about how it got these numbers. It cites the OCED for mortality rates but not which part. Assuming it is ‘Avoidable mortality’, you’d need to know what their definitions are among other things (like how it cites the rates from 1980 to 2017…even though the chart now only lists 2010. It’s a headache to analyze for yourself and trust the numbers. We need an actual breakdown and explanation.
Even ignoring how 10-20% is really just 20% and greater as well being rather significant*, your own link shows the US standing at 12th in ranking with New Zeland being 19th. Said insignificant difference caused a 7 place difference.
And your last link doesn’t even bother giving its data.
I also find it funny that you completely ignored the whole ‘taxes’ thing. Fun fact, Canada has a tax rate of about 15%. Which is over 7% more than the highest tax rate in my state. New Zealand is 9% higher for me. And uh…it would get far worse for me if I tried getting a better paying job.
That’s also complete bullshit about the cost. I don’t even need to look it up because, surprise, I have medical debt from being treated for diabetic ketoacidosis. And I didn’t need to sell my organs- with my mom’s medical insurance, I only recently needed to ask for finical assistance and that was due to my workplace cutting my hours.
This discussion has been done before. We already know it is extremely expensive. And I’m from a family of social workers, I know how healthcare fucks over people because my mom and aunt know this firsthand. Making it universal is not a good idea.
I did get the definition correct - believe it or not, the concept of civil rights goes a bit deeper than a sentence long definition from bing. Regardless, you’re ignoring the actual content of what I said. You should be able to recognize that there are rights you are entitled to that go beyond what is granted to you by virtue of being human. The right to vote, to not be discriminated against based on your ethnicity, the right to legal representation, etc.
Those two links are not the same - check again.
You can see how the OECD gets its data here. And here is their description of avoidable mortality. Why even ask me for lists if you’re going to neg on literally everything I share without putting a modicum of effort into answering your own questions? If you have a concern with how they collect data then actually go look into it instead of feigning skepticism for the sole purpose of writing it off.
The difference of 7 places on a list is wholly irrelevant to the actual statistical difference in obesity (which is more accurately 14.92%-19.89%, not 20%, since we’re real concerned over this) because you can’t derive how significant the difference is from a numerical place in a list. So - if you’ll permit me to round just a little bit here - a 15-20% difference in obesity rates is not responsible for an over 200% increase in cost.
For my last link here is the study. I just searched “JAMA private vs public study” and it was the first result. I don’t know why you need this much hand holding.
I did not ignore the taxes thing - I’ve addressed it more than once and I’ll try again:
You need to go get some insulin meds or else you’ll die. Let’s say it’ll cost you $100 for the sake of it. Now, tomorrow, a bill to create a public option passes, and you are required to immediately pay a $50 tax to fund this program - but as a result, you don’t have to pay that $100 to get your life saving medication.
I know the math is a little tricky here but I hope you were able to follow along. I don’t give a shit if the letter coming to my house is labeled “Medical Tax” or “Medical Bill” - if the tax is less than the bill, it doesn’t make any sense to choose the bill.
“I don’t even need to look it up” my brother you haven’t looked up shit here I’m literally doing all the work for you. Why don’t you reciprocate a bit here and find me, let’s say, the top five reasons why people declare bankruptcy in the US?
… You know, maybe I would have listened at all considering I wanted to talk more in depth.
But between the misuse of civil rights AGAIN (All of those are clearly NOT like healthcare because they relate to society not you personally. Which I mentioned BEFORE you. BTW We consider those rights innate to humans in our country ANYWAY so your point was fucking moot).
The condescending bullshit of ‘Oh well, here it is! Why could YOU find it?’ As if it’s my job to fucking support YOUR argument.
And the fact that your smug bullshit completely ignores two problems-
“forcing people to go to one provider might be okay for a country that values authority and social cohesion…but not one that values individualism to a radical degree.“
“Or having a fix all plan for a fair homogeneous country could work…not for one with such vast differences between territories like America. “
So, how’s that implementation gonna work when you have roughly about HALF the fucking country who will resist it not on an economic level but on a MORALLY level? Remember- America is not cohesive in the slightest. Numerous right wingers don’t like this shit because they view it as an infringement of their right to choose. What’s your solution there?
Or are you gonna ignore that, spout off some links with no explanation that is about the economic side and ignore that? Not to mention that even Bernie Sanders who pushed for this admitted it would cost about 1.4 trillion dollars a year on average for a decade.
So your economic side, assuming that everything you said is correct which is entirely possible, would need to find the money to do so. Which, again, is entirely possible but we have NO fucking indication of such for a plan that might not even work due to factors OUTSIDE of money.
My guy on your own damn link that you posted to try and correct me, two lines down is another explanation of civil rights that defines it as rights granted by virtue of citizenship, as distinguised from just being human.
How is the right to an attorney not a direct 1 to 1 example of what you claim makes healthcare not applicable as a right? Just replace "attorney" with "doctor" and it's the same damn thing. It's someone else's labor that you're given the right to. And there's no problem with it.
"We consider those rights innate to humans in our country anyway"
So close! The key here is not humans in our country - but specifically, citizens of our country. Jus civitas: the right of the citizen. Civil rights. I don't know why you're fighting tooth and nail on this inconsequential point that you are most assuredly taking an L on. The right to vote is not fucking "innate to humans" it literally requires an external body to exist. And you need to be a citizen.
"Bernie Sanders admitted it would cost 1.4 trillion dollars a year" - cool, you're missing the other half of the equation here - tell me how much we currently spend on healthcare, because without that this number is completely meaningless.
"Or are you going to ignore that"
I am 100% going to ignore that. Why would I go through the trouble of answering this when you're just going to reject the answer without providing any justification of your own? We haven't even dealt with your misunderstanding of rights, why the hell would we move on to a whole new topic?
"As if it's my job to fucking support YOUR argument"
No, it's your job to engage honestly with the fuckin topic. I brought up data that contradicts your (seemingly baseless) opinion. Instead of engaging with the data, you feign skepticism for the sole purpose of throwing it away. "I don't know what methodology they used to collect it" then go look at it?? All this tells me is that you don't actually care if you're wrong.
And the alternative you're asking for here is for me to, what, draft up and spoon feed you a fuckin MLA format research paper while you sit on your ass and critique it? And you want me to engage respectably with you? This has to be a joke right?
I'm extending an olive branch. We can drop the attitudes and return to civility, let bygones be bygones - but you have to actually reciprocate something. Give me some stats that support your opinion - the ones already discussed. You can even be as snarky and insulting as you want in the next post, my response won't be hostile.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn’t “X cost on top of everything else” because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
Yeah…for subsidies. Not complete and total compensation for everything. It would be trillions on top of everything else. That or forced labor and robbery…which would still cost money.
Just to be clear are you saying we can’t manage healthcare as well as every other major developed country that’s currently paying less than us? Or that we shouldn’t try? Because it obviously is possible to pay less so I’m not sure what your exact contention is.
This whole “forced labor” thing is silly. We have a right to an attorney but no one’s putting public defenders in shackles.
My contention is that pushing it to be a right will only cause problems because rights are not services but innate to a person, requiring nothing from anyone but themselves. Pushing this will only make it worse.
You making this false dichotomy of “make Medicare a right”/“We’re inept” doesn’t work since you haven’t actually LISTED any countries to compare with, like quality of care or social difference.
And finally- taxes. But nice job completely ignoring part of the subject.
Sure - there are innate human rights and then there are civil rights. The right to an attorney is not innate to a person but being that *we live in a society* (and a relatively successful one at that) we can provide certain protections to our citizens that go above and beyond what’s philosophically argued to be innately possessed by virtue of being human. Nothing about civil rights is inherently bad or destructive and even our constitution provides some.
I haven’t listed anything because it wasn’t called for yet. If you want me to Google a bunch of relevant stats I will but I’d like to know more about what exact aspects of it you disagree with so I’m not wasting my time. Do you think the standard of care in like France or Australia or Germany is better or worse than our own? Do you think they pay more or less per capita? I want you to state clearly what you think is the case so you can’t avoid information that contradicts it.
I didn’t mention a thing about civil rights because the conversation is about innate rights. Civil rights are in regards to society, innate rights are for the individual. And individuals require healthcare, a society is not a living organism.
Fine then-
My issue is not only that countries pay more, have a lower quality of care and have longer wait times but are also not in line with American culture and society. For example, universal healthcare might be great in a country of healthy people…but not for a country with a high obesity rate and thus higher rates of medical issues.
Or forcing people to go to one provider might be okay for a country that values authority and social cohesion…but not one that values individualism to a radical degree.
Or having a fix all plan for a fair homogeneous country could work…not for one with such vast differences between territories like America.
The finnical shit is just the tip of the iceberg.
No, this conversation is not about innate rights - it’s about healthcare as a right. If it were considered a right, it would fall under the category of civil rights - which already exist without causing problems. So if you want to claim it would cause problems just by virtue of it not being innate to humanity then you should have the same contention with every other civil and political right. And I’m assuming you don’t.
So this is a detailed comparison of healthcare spending by country, adjusted for a variety of factors. This isn’t something that anyone argues - the US spends more, by far, than any other country. Per capita, as a percent of our GDP, PPP adjusted.
We don’t get more for that money. This is a comparison of actual quality of healthcare between countries using patient outcomes, disability, and mortality rates.
Obesity rates are high in the US, and that already currently affects healthcare costs - but you can’t just handwave this all away by saying “lifestyle choices”. New Zealand (30.8), Canada(29.4), and Australia (29), for instance, have an obesity rate similar to America (36.2). Their healthcare costs are under half of ours, despite the rate of obesity being only 10-20% lower.
Regardless of that, ultimately, the cost and availability of healthcare currently is worse for those on private insurance plans. Whatever cost our obesity problem brings would likely be reduced through a public option.
I don’t doubt that wait times would be on average longer but that doesn’t seem to affect the actual quality of care in other countries - and everyone is covered, and no one’s going bankrupt or having to take out a second mortgage on their home because of an unforseen downturn in their health, and their overall cost per capita is lower. This is a no brainer.
…
You didn’t get the definition of civil rights correct (they are rights regarding political and social freedom alongside equality).
Your cost link and your quality link are the same.
Your quality link doesn’t explain shit about how it got these numbers. It cites the OCED for mortality rates but not which part. Assuming it is ‘Avoidable mortality’, you’d need to know what their definitions are among other things (like how it cites the rates from 1980 to 2017…even though the chart now only lists 2010. It’s a headache to analyze for yourself and trust the numbers. We need an actual breakdown and explanation.
Even ignoring how 10-20% is really just 20% and greater as well being rather significant*, your own link shows the US standing at 12th in ranking with New Zeland being 19th. Said insignificant difference caused a 7 place difference.
And your last link doesn’t even bother giving its data.
I also find it funny that you completely ignored the whole ‘taxes’ thing. Fun fact, Canada has a tax rate of about 15%. Which is over 7% more than the highest tax rate in my state. New Zealand is 9% higher for me. And uh…it would get far worse for me if I tried getting a better paying job.
That’s also complete bullshit about the cost. I don’t even need to look it up because, surprise, I have medical debt from being treated for diabetic ketoacidosis. And I didn’t need to sell my organs- with my mom’s medical insurance, I only recently needed to ask for finical assistance and that was due to my workplace cutting my hours.
This discussion has been done before. We already know it is extremely expensive. And I’m from a family of social workers, I know how healthcare fucks over people because my mom and aunt know this firsthand. Making it universal is not a good idea.
I did get the definition correct - believe it or not, the concept of civil rights goes a bit deeper than a sentence long definition from bing. Regardless, you're ignoring the actual content of what I said. You should be able to recognize that there are rights you are entitled to that go beyond what is granted to you by virtue of being human. The right to vote, to not be discriminated against based on your ethnicity, the right to legal representation, etc.
Those two links are not the same - check again.
You can see how the OECD gets its data here. And here is their description of avoidable mortality. Why even ask me for lists if you're going to neg on literally everything I share without putting a modicum of effort into answering your own questions? If you have a concern with how they collect data then actually go look into it instead of feigning skepticism for the sole purpose of writing it off.
The difference of 7 places on a list is wholly irrelevant to the actual statistical difference in obesity (which is more accurately 14.92%-19.89%, not 20%, since we're real concerned over this) because you can't derive how significant the difference is from a numerical place in a list. So - if you'll permit me to round just a little bit here - a 15-20% difference in obesity rates is not responsible for an over 200% increase in cost.
For my last link here is the study. I just searched "JAMA private vs public study" and it was the first result. I don't know why you need this much hand holding.
I did not ignore the taxes thing - I've addressed it more than once and I'll try again:
You need to go get some insulin meds or else you'll die. Let's say it'll cost you $100 for the sake of it. Now, tomorrow, a bill to create a public option passes, and you are required to immediately pay a $50 tax to fund this program - but as a result, you don't have to pay that $100 to get your life saving medication.
I know the math is a little tricky here but I hope you were able to follow along. I don't give a shit if the letter coming to my house is labeled "Medical Tax" or "Medical Bill" - if the tax is less than the bill, it doesn't make any sense to choose the bill.
"I don't even need to look it up" my brother you haven't looked up shit here I'm literally doing all the work for you. Why don't you reciprocate a bit here and find me, let's say, the top five reasons why people declare bankruptcy in the US?
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn’t “X cost on top of everything else” because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
Yeah…for subsidies. Not complete and total compensation for everything. It would be trillions on top of everything else. That or forced labor and robbery…which would still cost money.
Just to be clear are you saying we can’t manage healthcare as well as every other major developed country that’s currently paying less than us? Or that we shouldn’t try? Because it obviously is possible to pay less so I’m not sure what your exact contention is.
This whole “forced labor” thing is silly. We have a right to an attorney but no one’s putting public defenders in shackles.
My contention is that pushing it to be a right will only cause problems because rights are not services but innate to a person, requiring nothing from anyone but themselves. Pushing this will only make it worse.
You making this false dichotomy of “make Medicare a right”/“We’re inept” doesn’t work since you haven’t actually LISTED any countries to compare with, like quality of care or social difference.
And finally- taxes. But nice job completely ignoring part of the subject.
Sure - there are innate human rights and then there are civil rights. The right to an attorney is not innate to a person but being that *we live in a society* (and a relatively successful one at that) we can provide certain protections to our citizens that go above and beyond what’s philosophically argued to be innately possessed by virtue of being human. Nothing about civil rights is inherently bad or destructive and even our constitution provides some.
I haven’t listed anything because it wasn’t called for yet. If you want me to Google a bunch of relevant stats I will but I’d like to know more about what exact aspects of it you disagree with so I’m not wasting my time. Do you think the standard of care in like France or Australia or Germany is better or worse than our own? Do you think they pay more or less per capita? I want you to state clearly what you think is the case so you can’t avoid information that contradicts it.
I didn’t mention a thing about civil rights because the conversation is about innate rights. Civil rights are in regards to society, innate rights are for the individual. And individuals require healthcare, a society is not a living organism.
Fine then-
My issue is not only that countries pay more, have a lower quality of care and have longer wait times but are also not in line with American culture and society. For example, universal healthcare might be great in a country of healthy people…but not for a country with a high obesity rate and thus higher rates of medical issues.
Or forcing people to go to one provider might be okay for a country that values authority and social cohesion…but not one that values individualism to a radical degree.
Or having a fix all plan for a fair homogeneous country could work…not for one with such vast differences between territories like America.
The finnical shit is just the tip of the iceberg.
No, this conversation is not about innate rights - it's about healthcare as a right. If it were considered a right, it would fall under the category of civil rights - which already exist without causing problems. So if you want to claim it would cause problems just by virtue of it not being innate to humanity then you should have the same contention with every other civil and political right. And I'm assuming you don't.
So this is a detailed comparison of healthcare spending by country, adjusted for a variety of factors. This isn't something that anyone argues - the US spends more, by far, than any other country. Per capita, as a percent of our GDP, PPP adjusted.
We don't get more for that money. This is a comparison of actual quality of healthcare between countries using patient outcomes, disability, and mortality rates.
Obesity rates are high in the US, and that already currently affects healthcare costs - but you can't just handwave this all away by saying "lifestyle choices". New Zealand (30.8), Canada(29.4), and Australia (29), for instance, have an obesity rate similar to America (36.2). Their healthcare costs are under half of ours, despite the rate of obesity being only 10-20% lower.
Regardless of that, ultimately, the cost and availability of healthcare currently is worse for those on private insurance plans. Whatever cost our obesity problem brings would likely be reduced through a public option.
I don't doubt that wait times would be on average longer but that doesn't seem to affect the actual quality of care in other countries - and everyone is covered, and no one's going bankrupt or having to take out a second mortgage on their home because of an unforseen downturn in their health, and their overall cost per capita is lower. This is a no brainer.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn’t “X cost on top of everything else” because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
Yeah…for subsidies. Not complete and total compensation for everything. It would be trillions on top of everything else. That or forced labor and robbery…which would still cost money.
Just to be clear are you saying we can’t manage healthcare as well as every other major developed country that’s currently paying less than us? Or that we shouldn’t try? Because it obviously is possible to pay less so I’m not sure what your exact contention is.
This whole “forced labor” thing is silly. We have a right to an attorney but no one’s putting public defenders in shackles.
My contention is that pushing it to be a right will only cause problems because rights are not services but innate to a person, requiring nothing from anyone but themselves. Pushing this will only make it worse.
You making this false dichotomy of “make Medicare a right”/“We’re inept” doesn’t work since you haven’t actually LISTED any countries to compare with, like quality of care or social difference.
And finally- taxes. But nice job completely ignoring part of the subject.
Sure - there are innate human rights and then there are civil rights. The right to an attorney is not innate to a person but being that *we live in a society* (and a relatively successful one at that) we can provide certain protections to our citizens that go above and beyond what's philosophically argued to be innately possessed by virtue of being human. Nothing about civil rights is inherently bad or destructive and even our constitution provides some.
I haven't listed anything because it wasn't called for yet. If you want me to Google a bunch of relevant stats I will but I'd like to know more about what exact aspects of it you disagree with so I'm not wasting my time. Do you think the standard of care in like France or Australia or Germany is better or worse than our own? Do you think they pay more or less per capita? I want you to state clearly what you think is the case so you can't avoid information that contradicts it.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn’t “X cost on top of everything else” because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
Yeah…for subsidies. Not complete and total compensation for everything. It would be trillions on top of everything else. That or forced labor and robbery…which would still cost money.
Just to be clear are you saying we can't manage healthcare as well as every other major developed country that's currently paying less than us? Or that we shouldn't try? Because it obviously is possible to pay less so I'm not sure what your exact contention is.
This whole "forced labor" thing is silly. We have a right to an attorney but no one's putting public defenders in shackles.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don’t know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we’re not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
No, it doesn’t.
Every single time it has been brought up, it has been stated to require trillions more in taxes. Even the people pushing for it say it would cost billions, even though they’d have every reason to low ball it.
Note: our total amount in taxes in 2018 was 3.3 trillion.
Okay again this isn't "X cost on top of everything else" because we already pay trillions for healthcare. We pay more per capita than any other country, and with little to show for it.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She’s demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
If this medicine is a right, then how do you compensate for it?
You either make it free…or raise taxes so you have even LESS money.
Yeah taxes of course. I don't know why this is always framed as some massive expense on the average taxpayer as if we're not already getting ass blasted on medicine and healthcare costs.
All evidence points to a government option being cheaper to maintain than what we have now.
It's really unsurprising how fags like you always turn out to be wannabe slave owners.
y'all are so fucking stupid
me: "hey, you should pay taxes so we can live in a nice society"
y'all: "so you want slaves, huh? you want to enslave people?"
you guys need to learn how words work.
but a broken clock is right twice a day, I totally want a sex slave, consensually of course, but they'd feed me grapes and kiss me.
I guess these people don’t want welfare programs, want medical care to be even more expensive, want neighborhoods and roads to never be maintained, etc. taxes ensure a LOT of things they take for granted are available. And paying taxes is not even close to comparable to slavery. You are not a slave because you have to pay taxes.
Also, more often than not, people who try to “live outside of society” end up hurting people or don’t actually live outside of society, they just say they do while expecting to still get help from society.
wild paint and hominis block evade CONSTANTLY and hominis is quite literally a white supremacist now
He always was. Don't know if he said anything particularly egregious recently but it was pretty easy to tell regardless.
the fact that anyone has to fucking explain this blows my mind
Thinking about things I’ve read recently about how it’s no use explaining to abusers why abuse is bad, because they don’t do horrible things out of ignorance, they do horrible things because they don’t care. Seeing this woman explain to people why human life is priceless makes me think…they know what they’re doing is evil. They know.
And they don’t care.
Okay, let me put this another way then-
Imagine if AOC here didn’t get paid. At all. She still had to work and was never paid for it.
That is what she is demanding, just on poorer people.
She's demanding people supply medicine without getting paid for it?
yep. now include unborn people too and we agree. 👍🏼
And bodily autonomy isn't absolute at all, and as far as I know everyone on earth intrinsically agrees with this. If it were truly absolute, then it would be ethically wrong to prevent someone from committing suicide or self-harm.
Someone who considers bodily autonomy to be absolute necessarily must agree that suicide and self-harm are permissable. The alternative is to say your body does not belong to you, which is pretty radical in its own way.
yep. now include unborn people too and we agree. 👍🏼
Sure but then you must accept that it's okay for a woman to consume an abortion pill, regardless of the consequences it has on a fetus. Fetus also has rights to do whatever it wants with its body, but until a decent way into development it's biologically incapable of actually wanting anything.
You are holding a baby which is out of the womb in one hand, and your holding a jar with a baby that has not come out of a womb yet You have to drop one. Whichever one you drop, will die. Which do you pick
Nope. I refuse to drop one. That is the whole point.
I refuse to play your rigged game in which one person HAS to die.
Even if you had a gun to my head, I would hold onto them both until you pulled the trigger.
Welcome to being pro-life.
You do realize if you were shot in the head you would drop both?
So basically, both would die because at the end of the day, neither of their lives could hold a candle to your ideology.
Lmfao
Maybe so. But the point is that I refuse to make a choice that makes me responsible for the end of a life. The onus for their deaths and mine would be on the person holding the smoking gun, not me.
“I would rather people die than my morals be broken”
Pffft sounds like the pro life movement to me!
Oh no, I’m pretty sure I get the point. The point is you’d never actively kill someone.
But the problem is, I don’t care because people would still die.
Then maybe you should be condemning the ideology which promotes the idea that either child “HAS to be dropped” in the first place. (Hint: it isn’t pro-life.)
If you have to resort to hypotheticals that will never happen to anyone but maybe Batman you might as well just give up and admit you have no real argument.
Hypotheticals work really well to eke out potential holes in someone's logic, as long as the person engaging with it is doing so in good faith.
A better and more realistic hypothetical would be an instance where there's a complication during the pregnancy that could result in the loss of life for the mother, fetus, or both.
@Betterthanabortion, in answering the previous hypothetical, has put himself in the position where he has to justify allowing one or both of these lives to die, or contradict his values.
I’m a pretty big Tim Pool fan, being a 36 year old Asian man from Cook County and all. Vaush has been the only reasonably functional person from the left he’s had on. That Steve guy who talked aboot the civil war was massively uninformed, RA the rugged man is just dumb, and Matt Binder is a niche little media critic who is very ignorant about anything that’s happened in America in the last 70 years. It looks like he’s repetitively punching down. I’d rather see him wash Crosslands hair for 2 hrs and listen to them talk about magic the gathering than see another empty headed leftist on there.
I mean, leftists would have to get better positions and have the brains to put together an argument rather than parroting. You can dig up libertarians and conservatives who are just as thoughtless, but with leftists it’s a whole fucking plague.
Vaush can string words together to make a point, but he’s also a moron and a potential child predator, so there’s that
Plus Vaush is a misogynist as well
Oh god what has he done toward women
I’m almost afraid to ask
I think he got on to it with JK Rowling on Twitter @cyan-opinions
I looked it up and he really said women gotta be quieter and apologize more lmaooooo
I don’t give a crusty fuck about JKR either way but like- DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF M8
Vaush also told Galatea (spelling is wrong probably - her channel is The Authentic Observer) that she wanted to be sexually harassed because of how she was dressed in a video (she was literally just wearing stockings with her skirt)
I love when people project their own rapist fantasies onto others and then act like they’re the good guy
to the original point:
from what i’ve gathered watching tim on and off, it’s not that he’s trying to only have low grade leftists on, it’s that leftists just won’t come on his show for the most part.
recently he’s said that they offer leftists spots on the show all the time and all of them but the ones mentioned above either refuse outright or pretend to accept just to either not show up and leave them having to find someone else to take their place on the spot, or try to sneak in someone else to go for them last second, h3h3 style. i get the sentiment, but how exactly is anyone meant to get meaningful opposition on a show when almost the entirety of the left refuses to speak to anyone right of mao?
Tbh it seems like that “don’t go on media where my beliefs might be challenged” is SOP for lots of leftists.
Jimmy Dore and Russell Brand have talked about the only shows they get invited on anymore are fox news shows. Jimmy especially has figured out the left is only interested in people who are in lockstep agreement with them. Jimmy got excommunicated because he had an adverse reaction to the vaccine and *gasp* talked publicly about it. He was against vaccine mandates because of his experience. That somehow meant he was a Trump-supporting-anti-vaxxer.
It's SOP for a lot of talkshow pundits. That's why you won't see Crowder or Shapiro debate anyone except children on college campuses, despite their popularity being built on having their ideas "challenged".
