@ew

Your just going to ignore my other points, namely that its a spectrum and im not at the extreme and of either. therefore I can and do incorporate elements from each side to varying degrees,

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture it's a spectrum of more government vs less government. left libertarianism isn't a thing, neither is right-wing authoritarianism.

@ew

You are making no sense.. if someone is near the middle and not at eithe extreme it means they beleive in some level of control, but less than those who would be higher up.. you seem to be laboring under the delusion that the second you cross the line even if your close to the center any form of control to any degree is no longer valid.. which makes no sense.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture your politics is fake shit, red line is what is real

@ew

saying complete nonsense that makes no sense when you explain it sounds just as ridiculous when scribble said nonsense on a diagram.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture it's non-sense to you because you live in fantasy land thinking you can pay for social programs without holding a gun to the heads of citizens

@ew @freemo so are charities holding guns to you? They fit the definition of social programs

@louiscouture @freemo yeah good luck paying for something like medicare with donations

@ew @freemo that's pretty much gofundme at this point

@ew

no im well aware that you need to "hold a gun" to peoples heads to pay for social programs, roads, snow removal on the highway, fire deartments, police, military, etc.. nor did I ever claim anything to the contrary... you dont see to bright as you completely ignored my entire counter argument and are going on some unrelated tangent... so probably not worth me discussing this with you.. your already having trouble following the conversation.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture good, glad we agree. so move yourself up back to the reality line and stop claiming you are libertarian. you are a leftist and you believe in a moderate amount of authoritarianism

@ew

I told you the conversation was over, you can go away now.

@louiscouture

@freemo @louiscouture left "libertarians" every time

@ew

I listened to you, I just determined you were an idiot, bit difference. good bye.

@louiscouture

@ew @freemo where is trump on the political axis?

@louiscouture @freemo probably right in the exact center. he doesn't really have policies tbh he just wants to be liked.

@freemo @ew can we stop pretending a system without someone holding a gun at you is somehow possible? What about the courts, what about the police? Someone gotta pay for this, and it's definitively not the free market

@louiscouture @freemo it's easy enough to prove as a dialectic if you want.

@louiscouture

There is only one political compass

@ew

@louiscouture @freemo @ew

If America didn’t have fire departments and we tried to implement them now, people would cry at the socialism and shout “I don’t want my tax dollars to pay for someone else’s fire” some things are not meant to be privatized. Cough like prisons Cough.

@lfrffs @louiscouture @freemo this is nonsense. prisons are incentivized to keep people in cages because that's what the government pays them to do. government doesn't pay them based on how well they rehabilitate criminals.

@lfrffs

Not sure i agree entierly. Most americans I think would have no problem supporting tax-payer paid fire departments. The Truth is the USA has some of the highest taxes in the world and we waste it on shit we dont need to (like the military)... there is good reason people are appalled by the democrats abusive spending and ever increasing taxes.

If the democrats actually **cut** spending (and there is more than enough to cut, like the military)and started spending our money responsibly there would be far less resistance to social programs.

@louiscouture @ew

@freemo @lfrffs @louiscouture I live in an area with a privately funded fire department.

@freemo @louiscouture @ew that is what I am trying to explain. It’s insane to privatize social programs because of the fear of socialism or authoritarianism.

@lfrffs

Depends on the service. Some services dont make sense being privatized, but the vast majority do. It is healthy to have a fear of socialism and authoritarianism to the point that you want to lean towards privatization (which more oftne than not works better) but at the same time you dont want to be so extreme that you push to privatize things (like prisons) that dont really make sense to be privatized (in the case of prisons because it gives legal authority to subjugate inmates which is already legally messy)

@louiscouture @ew

@freemo @louiscouture @ew I agree. I’m speaking in context of me living in the United States where healthcare is privatized and doesn’t make sense for anyone. Why? The fear of socialism, the fear of becoming ‘venezuela’ (which we created the downfall of). Even the process of filing taxes is privatized and lobbied to keep it that way. The IRS wanted to create a system to make it easy and free for us to file taxes but intuit and other organizations lobbied and lobbied and now we have to pay a middle man to pay the government. Where in all of this does the private citizen benefit.

@lfrffs @freemo @louiscouture you are making a lot of assumptions. medical costs are dirt cheap in mexico. healthcare is ridiculously high in the US due to dumb regulations.

@ew @freemo @louiscouture really? It’s not because of a for profit system. If it wasn’t for affordable care act people with preexisting conditions wouldn’t even qualify for insurance. Insurance here practically would be survival of the fittest, maximizing profits only covering those who don’t need it at all

@lfrffs @freemo @louiscouture you live in a bubble. you're basically just regurgitating talking points that I've heard before without researching into the right libertarian takes.

@ew @freemo @louiscouture educate me on the dumb regulations

@lfrffs @freemo @louiscouture well for one, people want insurance companies to take on customers with pre-existing conditions to pay for their medical costs. that's complete non-sense. insurance makes a profit by utilizing risk assessment. so you want government to pay insurance companies to pay for their customers regardless of risk? that's retarded and roundabout. that lets medical companies jack up the price because they know the insurance companies have to pay for it, now everyone needs insurance to pay for the artificially high medical costs. you are literally just making things more expensive and giving money to corporations while taking money away from citizens.

@ew @freemo @louiscouture Hospitals are already charging hundreds of dollars for the most basic things from acetaminophen to band-aids, regardless of insurance status. Medical companies are already doing what you described! People getting covid test are getting bills, some for up to $2,000. You just made me realize maybe fully public is the way to go. Why would I want a private company to be responsible for paving potholes when they’ll just use the cheapest most capital saving method to do it so they can line their pockets and have to come back and redo it. Sure the potholes are gone, but they’ll have an incentive to leave the road banged up just enough to where we have to plead with them to come back more often. Giving everyone health insurance overall leads to healthier people and lower claims. Mexico which you claimed has lower drug prices, has public healthcare… why do we still go there to get our drugs? Its nonsensical to put the health of the people in the hands of companies who respond only to shareholders. Public healthcare is meant to be an investment not some financial game.

@lfrffs @freemo @louiscouture well atleast you're being more realistic now, even though you're a stupid leftist authoritarian.

@lfrffs

As someone who lived in the USA, as well as many other countries with public health care, as well as a data scientist who spent a lot of time researching it I can say pretty confidently that the last thing you should want is public health care.. not that what we have is ideal either, it needs to be fixed too, but the healthcare they have in canada and europe is pretty horrific and not really a step forward

The thing is, once you create a state run monopoly and eliminate choice and flexibility, quality goes down as there is no market pressure. healthcare doesnt work as a completely public system, but it also doesnt work as a completely free market privatized system either.. IMO the solutions for healthcare lie in co-op healthcare.

@louiscouture @ew

@freemo @louiscouture @ew i think we can agree on having public options available next to privatization. Even our weather service is tax funded but is repackaged and sold again to us through weather subscription. Look up why the NWS doesn’t have an app. Devil’s advocate, what happens when in a co-op system the private sector can no longer compete with the public option? Should there be a fear that the government can heavily subsidize healthcare to the point that private companies can’t afford to compete with the premiums.

@lfrffs

if you have a public option that means people are forced to pay for it if they use it or not, so no, there should not be a public option of any kind.. there **should** be welfare that provides the welfare recpients with a budget they can use to buy the health insurance of their choosing to ensure those who cant afford it can still get health insurance. But no public health insurane is a utter failure by its very nature and should not be an option. If i dont want to use the public option istill have to pay taxes on it, so your basically telling people "you have to buy our insurance, but your free to not use it", that doesnt work.

@louiscouture @ew

@lfrffs

keep in mind co-ops are neither privatized or public, not in the typical sense... they are customer owned entities, so the people being insured by any particular co-op are the owners of that co-op. So you get supply demand pressures but eliminate the greed aspect

@louiscouture @ew

@freemo @ew @louiscouture the united states’ today is socialist. It always has been. The difference is it’s the corporations who benefit from it not the people.

@ew @freemo the way i see it is : up and down : social issues, left and right : economic issues

@louiscouture @freemo far left economics is communism which is just state monopoly capitalism, aka top left. far right economics is free market capitalism aka no intervention by the state, libertarianism.

@ew @louiscouture @freemo all of this is spook talk.

@Atlas_Khan @freemo @louiscouture true but don't be a faggot.