Fightingatheist, I'm so dissapointed in you...

[Travis Retriever]

Gotta love these people.  Going on and on about how Shane spat on their holy grail when really all he did was point out that it's made of fool's gold.

Very well put as usual, Lord T Hawkeye.
I find that the holy grail of liberal statists would be socialized medicine.
While the holy grail of conservative statists would be the military.

[VectorM]

Why the fuck do all of these people bash Shane for that one joke at the beginning? "OMGZ he made a jouk, HE IS DA WRONG!!!"

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Why the fuck do all of these people bash Shane for that one joke at the beginning? "OMGZ he made a jouk, HE IS DA WRONG!!!"

It's an act of desperation.

[Virgil0211]

Goddammit! I started commenting again. Okay. Last time. I'm taking my break.... now.

[Travis Retriever]

Goddammit! I started commenting again. Okay. Last time. I'm taking my break.... now.

It's addictive, I know.

[MrBogosity]

Goddammit! I started commenting again. Okay. Last time. I'm taking my break.... now.

Oh, come on, just ONE more! You know you want to...

[Virgil0211]

Oh, come on, just ONE more! You know you want to...

Well, I tried commenting on MGK's video. I mean, I figured I at least owed him one ass-kicking from last time. But it wouldn't work. So I went to his profile page and tried the subscribe button.

"You may not subscribe to someone who has blocked you."

Class act, that MGK. I think the worst thing I said to him is that he might have a formal thought disorder (at least, that I can remember). Double standard, maybe?

[Travis Retriever]

Well, I tried commenting on MGK's video. I mean, I figured I at least owed him one ass-kicking from last time. But it wouldn't work. So I went to his profile page and tried the subscribe button.

"You may not subscribe to someone who has blocked you."

Class act, that MGK. I think the worst thing I said to him is that he might have a formal thought disorder (at least, that I can remember). Double standard, maybe?

But you can still reply to his comments he has left on other videos.
Like the ones he left on this video:
[yt]2AXM-nIXxlw[/yt]

[Virgil0211]

But you can still reply to his comments he has left on other videos.
Like the ones he left on this video:
[yt]2AXM-nIXxlw[/yt]

Just tried. It wouldn't let me.

Oh, well. He's been embarrassed enough, I guess. But how is his video staying up at 2.5 stars? Does he have sockpuppets or something?

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Here's a question the woos will never answer and we should keep pressing them until they give in: If free market health care couldn't possibly work, why not let us try it?  Why not allow people to completely opt out of socialized healthcare and do their own thing?  If they're right, then the whole thing will flop and us the skeptics will all end up looking like fools.  Surely the woos wouldn't want to pass up an opportunity like that.

It's just like that vid Phil Hellenes did on why creationists won't fabricate the evidence that would disprove evolution.  Because they know that the science works.  Because when someone is actively avoiding the cracks in the sidewalk, there's one thing you can be sure of: He knows the cracks are there.

[Virgil0211]

Here's a question the woos will never answer and we should keep pressing them until they give in: If free market health care couldn't possibly work, why not let us try it?  Why not allow people to completely opt out of socialized healthcare and do their own thing?  If they're right, then the whole thing will flop and us the skeptics will all end up looking like fools.  Surely the woos wouldn't want to pass up an opportunity like that.

Be careful how you word that. They may just turn around and say the same thing about us.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

How?  Their view is already the status quo.   Plus, since our view is not a system forced on the populace but rather a lack of such, this is equivalent to demanding proof of atheism.

[Virgil0211]

How?  Their view is already the status quo.   Plus, since our view is not a system forced on the populace but rather a lack of such, this is equivalent to demanding proof of atheism.

I didn't say they were right. Just that they would try using that against you.

Edit: Okay. That's it. Last one. I mean it this time.

[valvatica]

This is why I never was for Universal Health Care: Even if that side wanted to "try" it to prove the opposing side wrong, they can't genuinely try it on their own. They'd have to get taxes to do it. If they were able to raise money to do it, it would become Free Market care 

I was for the Public Option though, if you remember me saying. It looked like a good alternative because it was voluntary, could compete against expensive private health care and lower prices (even though it was by government). But I realized that if people didn't have to pay until/unless they got sick, how could it possibly stay alive without more government intervention? And since the idea revolves around people chipping in, pooling money together, and circumventing the need for collecting it through taxes entirely, why not just go the Free Market route?

[Virgil0211]

Dear god. When am I actually going to be able to stop doing this shit?

But thoughts on Dbrandow's latest posts.

His 'free because they're wealthy' concept: One, the freedom tends to precipitate the wealth more easily than vice versa, and I remember Milton Friedman saying somewhere that economic freedom can lead more readily to social freedom. The latter point is just an interesting factoid.

His 'they're wealthy because of an increase in energy consumption': I can take my car out of gear and gun the engine for 2 hours. I would not only have not done anything productive with the fuel I burned, but I would also have damaged my car's engine. Energy consumption isn't in and of itself conducive to wealth. It's what the energy is used for.

Secondly, you can't simply increase energy consumption. There has to be an increase in wealth for you to obtain the necessary resources to trade for the extra energy. People use more energy when they watch more television, travel more, etc, and businesses use energy to operate more machines, run factories, etc. Energy use would, as expected, increase when wealth increased because certain real goods (cars VS bicycles, televisions, air conditioning, etc) use more energy. However, this increase in energy consumption is a result of wealth rather than a contributing factor in it.

Edit: Okay. I swear. Last time.