In reply to this comment by blankfist:
@chilaxe, I agree, they shouldn't cost society anything. But isn't that the problem with the leftist agenda? They want socialized medicine so they can then tell you what is good for you and force you to obey. There's no freedom in that. I can one day see a society where exercise is compulsory for all men and women, young and old. I believe Hitler wanted the same thing. There, I Godwined it..

My sense of libertarianism and the overall political picture is this:
Conservatives like order.
Liberals like a soft world.
Libertarians like meritocracy.

In that sense, libertarians' principle of "freedom" is a means to an end (meritocracy), not an end in itself.

Freedom as an absolute principle also seems to have some limitations... Based on my experience in the cognitive sciences, I'd say it's very clear that the masses don't have brains like you and I, and they need to be guided in the sense of not giving them easy access to things that are 100% bad for them and the world, like cigarettes.

Also, the more controlled society becomes, the more people get uncomfortable with it, so it doesn't seem like the modern world is very likely to experience a slippery slope 50 years down the road based on small increments of increased control that make sense in the present day.

>> ^NetRunner:

But here's the thing, unless you're prepared to tell doctors not to treat people with life-threatening illnesses if they can't immediately pay for their own care, you're going to wind up having your tax dollars going to cover the care of people who can't pay their medical bills when they have heart attacks or diabetic shocks (or end-stage lung cancer). Alternatively you're just going to make all healthcare more expensive so providers can cover losses.


Speculation and leading arguments. I'm not prepared to tell doctors anything, and neither should any one of us. I know we're all largely atheists on here, but the predominant number of hospitals tend to be created by churches. Why? Because as much as we may despise dogma, these followers do sometimes hold the belief of taking care of their fellowman. This includes people with life-threatening illnesses.

In fact, currently, hospices are free. When my grandmother passed away recently they didn't charge her a penny for their amazing services. They exist on charitable donations as far as I know.

It's been proven that government intervention in the medical industry has driven the cost of medical care up. By forcing hospitals to treat every person that comes into the hospital, people tend to use it as a welfare clinic and come in with hangnails and common colds. They can then refuse to pay for the service which drives the costs up. That's fact.

If you ordered food at a restaurant, then refused to pay, would it be fair for the government to stop that restaurant from refusing service to you?

>> ^blankfist:
I agree, they shouldn't cost society anything. But isn't that the problem with the leftist agenda? They want socialized medicine...

But here's the thing, unless you're prepared to tell doctors not to treat people with life-threatening illnesses if they can't immediately pay for their own care, you're going to wind up having your tax dollars going to cover the care of people who can't pay their medical bills when they have heart attacks or diabetic shocks (or end-stage lung cancer). Alternatively you're just going to make all healthcare more expensive so providers can cover losses.

The "leftist agenda" is to a) extend care to poor people before they get critically ill because it's morally right, and b) extend care to poor people before they get critically ill so they can have their illness treated more cheaply than last-ditch heroics when they reach final stages.

You may imagine that this will lead to people being put in jail for refusing to do their daily calisthenics, but the "leftist agenda" as far as it actually exists pretty much stops with "people who exercise should get a discount on their premiums" or maybe "health insurance plans should cover gym memberships for people who are overweight".

>> ^chilaxe:

If there's not the political will to end farm subsidies, it still seems rational to tax expensive drains on society like soft drinks, cigarettes, and the unnecessary use of transfats in restaurant food.
Just pointing out there are deeply rooted irrationalities in the system, like farm subsidies, doesn't seem like a good reason to not take positive action and make the world a better place.


A better place for whom? How do you know soft drinks don't contribute to people's happiness? Cigarettes are harmful to your health, but what about the social smokers that only have a smoke when they meet with friends for a drink? What about responsible people who choose to indulge? They should be punished?

To me, that's the kind of social engineering that simply does not work to cull and reduce certain behavior; it only serves to make people poorer. The tax, I'd argue, is the expensive drain on society.

I replied generically on the video, but as a reply to anything regarding cap & trade this reasoning doesn't track. Maybe it would sorta be appropriate as a response if what cap & trade consisted of was a flat tax on gasoline.

I'm also for repealing the subsidization of all dirty energy -- and the entire environmental movement would likely agree with me on that (even alleged fraud Al Gore!).

So here's the only real connection. In both cases we're talking about market externalities -- cases where market transactions between two entities cause harm (or benefit) to people not involved in the transaction. This is never desirable; you want prices to reflect the harm or benefit you're causing those other people, otherwise you open yourself up to malinvestment's ugly stepsister, malconsumption (and yes, I made that word up, but it is just like that other made-up Austrian word, only regarding consumption instead of investment).

One highly-regarded way to bring externalities under the auspices of market forces is to use Pigouvian taxes. Sometimes you get some centrally-planned tax rate (like all flat sin taxes), but ideally you want some sort of market-driven mechanism setting the size of the Pigouvian tax -- which is what cap and trade is all about.

Anyways, I'm just leading you to water (100% piss-free!), I don't really have much hope you'll drink.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
http://videosift.com/video/Penn-Teller-Bullshit-Soft-Drink-Tax

Up the butthole with this one, dear sir!

http://videosift.com/video/Penn-Teller-Bullshit-Soft-Drink-Tax

Up the butthole with this one, dear sir!

>> ^DonanFear:

It's really simple, locally grown is way better. Organic or non-organic doesn't matter.
Support your local farmer or grow your own stuff. If you go to the supermarket and buy "organic" stuff, you're just wasting your money.


exactly, the reason why people find organic food local sources easily is because unless they are selling that overpriced version (ie organic), they can't compete with the volume from BIG FARMING

Just read yogi's comments. You'll get a full dose of bullshit!>> ^blankfist:

I can't believe I'm missing a new season of Bullshit!

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
No. Anecdotes ≠ evidence.
http://www.everydayhealth.com/autoimmune-disord
ers/can-vaccines-cause-autoimmune-disorders.aspx
>> ^Yogi:
Can vaccines trigger autoimmune diseases? I think they can...you know why I think this? Cause I've seen it...


AHEM I think I've already said that I'm a doctor...not sure if you know what that means but it should completely end the argument right there. Sorry for the misunderstanding.


A doctor that doesn't understand the difference between penicillin and a vaccine is like a chef that doesn't understand the difference between a knife and a spatula.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
>> ^Yogi:
God you people really are a bunch of whiny bitches. Shut The Fuck Up. I don't care about your stupid little evidence and your stupid little posts. I was trying to start a debate and apparently I didn't do anything but unite everyone against me. Fuck off you self righteous assholes.

If you wanted a debate were you never actually loose to people who counter bullshit with actual facts and evidence, go visit the
http://videosift.com/video/Monty-Python-The-Argument-Clinic-Full-Versi
on">Argument Clinic.

Ok you didn't get it so I'll ask nicer. Please PLEASE Shut the Fuck up. I'm tired of you talking...please for me just shut up.


What a useless twat you must be, if you are "tired" of people on a public internet forum, then why the fuck would you keep reading it? Go do anything else then.

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:

>> ^Yogi:
God you people really are a bunch of whiny bitches. Shut The Fuck Up. I don't care about your stupid little evidence and your stupid little posts. I was trying to start a debate and apparently I didn't do anything but unite everyone against me. Fuck off you self righteous assholes.

If you wanted a debate were you never actually loose to people who counter bullshit with actual facts and evidence, go visit the
http://videosift.com/video/Monty-Python-The-Argument-Clinic-Full-Version">Argument Clinic.


Ok you didn't get it so I'll ask nicer. Please PLEASE Shut the Fuck up. I'm tired of you talking...please for me just shut up.

>> ^Yogi:

God you people really are a bunch of whiny bitches. Shut The Fuck Up. I don't care about your stupid little evidence and your stupid little posts. I was trying to start a debate and apparently I didn't do anything but unite everyone against me. Fuck off you self righteous assholes.

If you wanted a debate were you never actually loose to people who counter bullshit with actual facts and evidence, go visit the
http://videosift.com/video/Monty-Python-The-Argument-Clinic-Full-Version">Argument Clinic.

Telling that you respond to my tiny, eight word comment, and not to the excellent, more verbose comments of BRM and GSF.

You compared/related two completely different things. While new influenza vaccines are required every year because of new strains constantly evolving, the influenza vaccine doesn't cause these new strains. Yes, science can indeed come back to bite us in the ass, but, so far, vaccines haven't, certainly not in the way antibiotics have. P&T never claimed vaccines were perfect (in fact, no one had claimed it when you raised this red herring). They are simply espousing the ridiculousness of the anti-vaccine movement when taken against the incredible amount of good vaccines have done for mankind, even if the claims of said movement were true. They weren't defending a thesis. They were simply, and succinctly, making a "big picture" comparison of universally known vaccine benefits and claimed vaccine detriments.

BTW, has anybody heard anything new as far as this research is concerned? I damn near cried when I watched this talk. It just blew me away. Then, recently, I read this, which seemed to be something similar. Is quorum sensing just smell?>> ^Yogi:

I never said it was a vaccine. Did you see how I started a new sentence...and I put an "even" there after the ellipsis because it's a different subject related to the vaccine subject. In other words sometimes our science tends to come back and bite us in the ass.