If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube) Video Bill Maher: "If conservatives get to call universal healthcare 'socialized medicine,' then I get to call private for-profit healthcare 'soulless vampire bastards making money off human pain.'"   (youtube.com) divider line 608
    More: Video  
•       •       •

5201 clicks; posted to Video » on 25 Jul 2009 at 1:47 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



608 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-07-25 10:10:59 AM
Thanks subby. I do not have access to HBO. This was great!
 
2009-07-25 10:29:12 AM
That's exactly what it is.

Every farking problem right-wingers ascribe to universal health care can already be seen in our current system. Health care isn't one, but several massive bureaucracies. Those bureaucracies are full of people whose jobs are to find ways to deny claims. The purpose of these companies is to make money, and providing healthcare is just a minor aspect to that purpose, and is considered overhead that should be reduced whenever possible. They very concept of "preexisting conditions" is anathema to health care and prevents people from getting the care they need at prices anywhere near affordable. Our system, as it now, is a broken mess that doesn't even cover a significant fraction of the population.
 
2009-07-25 10:32:47 AM
Bloody William: Every farking problem right-wingers ascribe to universal health care can already be seen in our current system.

B-B-BUT FOREIGN RICH PEOPLE COME HERE FOR HEALTH CARE!!!
 
2009-07-25 10:56:29 AM
B-b-but Marx!
 
2009-07-25 10:57:47 AM
The US consumer subsidizes many of the socialized systems with them vampiring off of research and development. They are able to put cost limits on prescriptions for instance because they don't spend all the money on R&D and can rely on US consumers to foot the bills for that. When the US system no longer subsidizes it and provides advancements for it, socialized systems will suck more.

The US health care system has been the driving force behind human health care, and its advancement.

There is no free lunch.
 
2009-07-25 10:59:18 AM
How nice.... no one should ever be allowed to make a profit on someone else's misfortune.

I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

And if anyone thinks there won't be mass amounts of money made for a select few by universal healthcare plans, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
 
2009-07-25 11:01:34 AM
real shaman: Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

Should we privatize the military?
 
2009-07-25 11:05:01 AM
real shaman: Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

So we should turn the military into a for-profit, capitalist entity?
 
2009-07-25 11:06:41 AM
DamnYankees: real shaman: Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

So we should turn the military into a for-profit, capitalist entity?


It sort of is. Military industrial complex, ever heard of it? We were warned about it.
 
2009-07-25 11:11:42 AM
Hello you can call this what you would like to call it because the First Amendment of the Declaration of Constitution says this is okay to call things what you would like!
 
2009-07-25 11:16:27 AM
real shaman: Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

Which is exactly why the American healthcare system is the cheapest and most efficient and most effective healthcare system on the planet!

wait...
 
2009-07-25 11:24:48 AM
real shaman: How nice.... no one should ever be allowed to make a profit on someone else's misfortune.

I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

And if anyone thinks there won't be mass amounts of money made for a select few by universal healthcare plans, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.


I didn't realize that cars, perfect roofs, and short grass were a necessity. Cops, Firemen, and health care on the other hand.
 
2009-07-25 11:25:22 AM
real shaman: I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Car doesn't work? You're still alive.
Roof leaks? You're still alive.
Grass needs a mow? Hey, you're still alive, yeah?
Sick or dying? You're not living much longer.

Get where i'm going with this?

Having your health shouldn't be a farking luxury.
 
2009-07-25 11:26:49 AM
real shaman: I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Get off the couch and mow your own lawn, you lazy sack of blubber.
 
2009-07-25 11:34:04 AM
Seems like a fair argument.
 
2009-07-25 11:39:31 AM
real shaman: How nice.... no one should ever be allowed to make a profit on someone else's misfortune.

I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

And if anyone thinks there won't be mass amounts of money made for a select few by universal healthcare plans, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.


The markets are required only because of humanity's faults. And for this reason, I won't say that markets are not important. They seem to be the only way we can motivate our greedy animal selves to do anything, so for many advances in civilization we will depend on them for the foreseeable future.

However, the markets are not a God in spite of how many people seem to blindly worship them. They have their place. They do not have The Place. They are a tool. They are not divine.

The idea that the markets are inherently good and capable and the government inherently bad and incapable is not based on rational thought and critical reasoning. It is based on a blind ideology very similar to a religion.

And I still find it interesting that those who seem to be most opposed to insuring that universally every person has access to care are mostly those on the right who also claim to house the Christian community with Christian sensibilities. Where exactly do you think Christ might come down on this? On the side of the profit motive above the side of caring for people? Interesting that the "religious" right seems to be the most vocal advocate of social Darwinism.

There are certain aspects of humanity which the markets should not be allowed to dominate. The military. The police. Whether or not people have access to life saving care. Education.

And note that I said dominate. If people want to pay more for their private health care, more power to them. If they want to pay for private education, fine. However, all people should have access to healthcare regardless of their financial standing in society without the threat that a trip to the hospital for care will result in the complete impoverishment of them and their family not just for now but well into the future (credit rating crashes, loss of home, etc...).

Whether someone lives or dies and whether life saving care crushes a family financially is slightly different than getting a car repaired.

Family values, my ass.
 
2009-07-25 11:50:24 AM
The market is not perfect.

You fix the areas where the market fails to properly, in the least intrusive way possible.

An example is pollution, where costs are placed on others who are not a party to the transaction. You fix that, in the least obtrusive way possible.

You don't destroy the market.
 
2009-07-25 11:54:31 AM
arkansas: You don't destroy the market.

Which is why it isn't being destroyed. There is just a new competitor.
 
2009-07-25 12:16:04 PM
arkansas: You don't destroy the market.

Some things really shouldn't be determined by the market. Healthcare is one of those.
 
2009-07-25 12:38:06 PM
shivashakti: arkansas: You don't destroy the market.

Some things really shouldn't be determined by the market. Healthcare is one of those.


Exactly - some commodities should not be commodities. Health and education are the two that come to mind, because unhealthy or undereducated populations are a greater burden on society than paying the cost of their care/schooling.
 
2009-07-25 12:53:53 PM
Remember how great of a job FEMA did managing the Hurricane Katrina disaster? How well did the government respond to the AIDS crisis back in the 1980s? Those government workers sure were on the ball, weren't they?

Now, think about the last time you had to deal with some government bureaucrat. Do you really want someone like that in charge of your health and well being?

Do Democrats believe that they're in some sort of "Thousand Year Reign" and there's absolutely no possibility that somewhere down the line we'll elect a clone of Bush or Cheney? Can you imagine how health care would suffer with those tools in charge?

And don't dare compare other nations' government run health care with what me might possibly end up with. Those countries aren't run by American bureaucrats.

Just think, in another four to eight years, we may all have PalinCare®.
 
2009-07-25 01:04:20 PM
GAT_00: There is just a new competitor.

exactly.... medical costs are approximately 20% of the GNP. The US government wants that and the profits it generates. How dare this be left in private enterprise hands.

I should also add that no one's cost for care or insurance will ever go down once the US government gets control of it.
 
2009-07-25 01:29:59 PM
The military isn't actualy a government run beaurocracy, so that's a pretty shiatty comparison there folks.

The truth about health care is that is already is socialized. It's a bunch of people pooling their resources and working towards a common goal. A socialized entity does not need to be endorsed by a government. Think hippie communes. (yeahy some of you are going to whine and cry and call me names and says that OI'm wrong so here's a preemptive fark you)

Anyway perhaps the big reason hospitals charge $20 for that tylenol instead of $1 isn't because because of "administrative costs" but because of the other 19 people who didn't have health insurance to pay for theirs. The hospital just passes the cost along.

So the argument about having your tax dollars go to pay for others blah blah blah is tiotaly invalid because that's what your insurance dollars are already doing.

I'm not going to pretend to have the answer, I think there should be a government run plan that you could choose to enroll in (no p[lan is going to be mandatory and private insurance isn't going away so get that stick out of your ass too) if your employers private choice costs too much or covers things you don't really need.

i187.photobucket.com
 
2009-07-25 01:32:20 PM
Food should be free too.
 
2009-07-25 01:32:43 PM
real shaman: How nice.... no one should ever be allowed to make a profit on someone else's misfortune.

I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

And if anyone thinks there won't be mass amounts of money made for a select few by universal healthcare plans, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.


I believe Maher's larger point was that the hyperbole is a bit over the top.
 
2009-07-25 01:34:50 PM
Obama is going to give me a new car too! just throwing that net, calm down
 
2009-07-25 01:34:57 PM
PacManDreaming: Remember how great of a job FEMA did managing the Hurricane Katrina disaster? How well did the government respond to the AIDS crisis back in the 1980s? Those government workers sure were on the ball, weren't they?

Now, think about the last time you had to deal with some government bureaucrat. Do you really want someone like that in charge of your health and well being?

Do Democrats believe that they're in some sort of "Thousand Year Reign" and there's absolutely no possibility that somewhere down the line we'll elect a clone of Bush or Cheney? Can you imagine how health care would suffer with those tools in charge?

And don't dare compare other nations' government run health care with what me might possibly end up with. Those countries aren't run by American bureaucrats.

Just think, in another four to eight years, we may all have PalinCare®.


FEMA had been deliberately hobbled as it was folded into another organization. You got me on the AIDS crisis, but still, nothing short of rolling into San Fransisco with guns in 1982 and forcing people to stop having sex was going to mitigate that disaster.

As for not comparing foreign nations' reasonably successful care because they aren't run by American desk jockeys, well, that's not much of an argument. While one doesn't need to look far to see failures of bureaucracy, one also needn't look far for reasonable success. The post office. The military. Parks and Recreation...this is a seriously long list. While not perfect, I have absolutely no reason to believe that the fed can manage to be more of a blood-sucking bane to sick Americans than the current crop of private insurers out to screw over as many people as they can as profit motivations dictate. Frankly, I'd prefer to let an entity whose sole motive wasn't greed have a hand at things.

Sorry, but if our current system weren't so wrought with bullshiat, I might actually share the concerns of having the government getting into the health insurance business.
 
2009-07-25 01:41:41 PM
Bloody William: hey very concept of "preexisting conditions" is anathema to health care and prevents people from getting the care they need at prices anywhere near affordable.

This is SO true.

I just traded in my pickup truck for a new Dodge Charger R/T, and the insurance on it is costing me $6,200 a year!

Now granted, I've completely totaled every car I've ever owned, including 3 in the last 2 years. But this is ridiculous! These insurance companies act like I'm going to end up costing them money! All I want to do is drive a car that I am surely going to wreck by the end of the year, and when that happens, I want them to pay for the repairs. Why should that cost over $500 a month?

I'm sure health insurance works the same way, but I wouldn't know because I'm unemployed. I sure hope democrats provide me with free healthcare, because this car stuff is killing me!
 
2009-07-25 01:51:47 PM
No one should make money off of anything. It's not fair to those who have to pay. Go into work and tell your boss you are tired of being a souless vampire and want to stop getting a paycheck and you will work for free.
 
2009-07-25 01:52:05 PM
What's the number one healthcare issue for Republicans?

Tort reform. Huh.
 
2009-07-25 01:55:00 PM
shivashakti: Some things really shouldn't be determined by the market. Healthcare is one of those.

THIS
 
2009-07-25 01:55:56 PM
PacManDreaming: Remember how great of a job FEMA did managing the Hurricane Katrina disaster? How well did the government respond to the AIDS crisis back in the 1980s? Those government workers sure were on the ball, weren't they?

Now, think about the last time you had to deal with some government bureaucrat. Do you really want someone like that in charge of your health and well being?

Do Democrats believe that they're in some sort of "Thousand Year Reign" and there's absolutely no possibility that somewhere down the line we'll elect a clone of Bush or Cheney? Can you imagine how health care would suffer with those tools in charge?

And don't dare compare other nations' government run health care with what me might possibly end up with. Those countries aren't run by American bureaucrats.

Just think, in another four to eight years, we may all have PalinCare®.


US public universities? I know the anti-intellectual wing of the right is not impressed with universities, but the US university system is widely recognized as the best in the world, including many of our public universities. I work for one of them, and I can tell you that it is full of very hard working public "bureaucrats" many of whom work their asses off all year long for very little pay. As a result, we have over four thousand of those foreigners coming to campus each year and paying tens of thousands of dollars each for our "education care." Isn't that one of the right's arguments for leaving US health care the way it is? "It's so good, rich foreigners come HERE for their care." Well, I can tell you that every year 500,000 (many of them quite well off) foreigners come to the US each year to consume US education, and very many of those are attending our public universities.

And my last dealing with a government employee where I was the one needing service was at the Social Security office, and I was amazed at how quick and efficient they were in getting done what I needed done. Before that it was the Post Office, and they seemed to be quick, efficient, and friendly enough. So, that argument of yours falls flat on its face in my case.
 
2009-07-25 01:56:31 PM
img1.fark.net
 
2009-07-25 01:57:19 PM
real shaman: Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

Should we militarize privacy?
 
2009-07-25 01:58:03 PM
WorldCitizen: real shaman: How nice.... no one should ever be allowed to make a profit on someone else's misfortune.

I guess that should include car mechanics and body shops and roof repairmen and it wasn't my fault my grass grew... why should I have to pay someone to cut it????

Capitalism has it flaws, but it is far better than government run anything...

And if anyone thinks there won't be mass amounts of money made for a select few by universal healthcare plans, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

The markets are required only because of humanity's faults. And for this reason, I won't say that markets are not important. They seem to be the only way we can motivate our greedy animal selves to do anything, so for many advances in civilization we will depend on them for the foreseeable future.

However, the markets are not a God in spite of how many people seem to blindly worship them. They have their place. They do not have The Place. They are a tool. They are not divine.

The idea that the markets are inherently good and capable and the government inherently bad and incapable is not based on rational thought and critical reasoning. It is based on a blind ideology very similar to a religion.

And I still find it interesting that those who seem to be most opposed to insuring that universally every person has access to care are mostly those on the right who also claim to house the Christian community with Christian sensibilities. Where exactly do you think Christ might come down on this? On the side of the profit motive above the side of caring for people? Interesting that the "religious" right seems to be the most vocal advocate of social Darwinism.

There are certain aspects of humanity which the markets should not be allowed to dominate. The military. The police. Whether or not people have access to life saving care. Education.

And note that I said dominate. If people want to pay more for their private health care, more power to them. If they want to pay for private education, fine. However, all people should have access to healthcare regardless of their financial standing in society without the threat that a trip to the hospital for care will result in the complete impoverishment of them and their family not just for now but well into the future (credit rating crashes, loss of home, etc...).

Whether someone lives or dies and whether life saving care crushes a family financially is slightly different than getting a car repaired.

Family values, my ass.


The thing you need to understand about religious people is that they don't give a fark about anybody not in their church, except as someone to demonize or rip off. Once you know this, their behavior makes perfect sense.
 
2009-07-25 01:58:04 PM
That guy is still alive?
 
2009-07-25 01:58:18 PM
arkansas: The US consumer subsidizes many of the socialized systems with them vampiring off of research and development. They are able to put cost limits on prescriptions for instance because they don't spend all the money on R&D and can rely on US consumers to foot the bills for that. When the US system no longer subsidizes it and provides advancements for it, socialized systems will suck more.

The US health care system has been the driving force behind human health care, and its advancement.

There is no free lunch.


This. Even though there are very large problems with the current system, it is not ALL bad. Anybody who argues that ANYTHING is ALL bad is probably not seeing the whole picture.
 
2009-07-25 01:59:13 PM
DKinMN: This. Even though there are very large problems with the current system, it is not ALL bad. Anybody who argues that ANYTHING is ALL bad is probably not seeing the whole picture.

So you like arguing with imaginary people?
 
2009-07-25 01:59:23 PM
arkansas: The US consumer subsidizes many of the socialized systems with them vampiring off of research and development. They are able to put cost limits on prescriptions for instance because they don't spend all the money on R&D and can rely on US consumers to foot the bills for that. When the US system no longer subsidizes it and provides advancements for it, socialized systems will suck more.

I don't give a fark about what foreigners gain from our crooked system. How in hell is this a useful argument for americans that don't have access to health care?

The US health care system has been the driving force behind human health care, and its advancement.

There is no free lunch.


They spend more on marketing than they do on R&D. Plus there are many successful pharma companies that aren't US based.
 
2009-07-25 01:59:24 PM
I don't get the conservative approach to this. How is it a bad thing when the majority of your population is healthy? What the fark is wrong with socialism anyhow. We just applied it to the banks, mortgage companies, and car companies and not one farking republican asshole said boo. So, instead we're trying to make a better country that's more in tune with the rest of the civilized world and to make our people healthy and therefore more productive. And it's a bad thing? Farking conservatives are brainless shiat for brains money grubbing morons.
 
2009-07-25 01:59:36 PM
I really have no problem with universal health care. Just take out that ridiculous individual mandate. Make the money some other way. The mandate will just be a hardship on the middle and lower class. Especially if you lose your job or the cost of this thing is not fixed at 2500. I can see it getting screwed up and the fee jumps to 10,000 instead of 2500 and below. Unfortunately that possibility is not worst case scenario but a distinct possibility.
 
2009-07-25 02:00:11 PM
cretinbob: The military isn't actualy a government run beaurocracy, so that's a pretty shiatty comparison there folks.

1. We pay their salaries
2. Viet Nam
3. Bay of Pigs
4. Ellion Gonzales
5. Iraq
6. Afghanistan
7. NORAD
8. Unused F22's
9. Inability to catch Bin Laden
10. We're still in Germany
11. We're still in Japan
12. All with more funding than the postal service, public education, welfare, medicaid, and US road ways combined.

I enthusiastically await your rebuttal list proving that ANY of the aforementioned "commie programs" is anywhere NEAR as inefficient of a bloated, paycheck collecting bureaucracy as the military.
 
2009-07-25 02:00:35 PM
JacksBlack: Bloody William: hey very concept of "preexisting conditions" is anathema to health care and prevents people from getting the care they need at prices anywhere near affordable.

This is SO true.

I just traded in my pickup truck for a new Dodge Charger R/T, and the insurance on it is costing me $6,200 a year!

Now granted, I've completely totaled every car I've ever owned, including 3 in the last 2 years. But this is ridiculous! These insurance companies act like I'm going to end up costing them money! All I want to do is drive a car that I am surely going to wreck by the end of the year, and when that happens, I want them to pay for the repairs. Why should that cost over $500 a month?


And since you can't insure your car, you are going to suffer and die of a perfectly treatable illness, bringing sadness and pain upon friends, family, and loved ones.

Analogies to healthcare don't really hold up when you consider the results.
 
2009-07-25 02:00:48 PM
cretinbob: The military isn't actualy a government run beaurocracy, so that's a pretty shiatty comparison there folks.

BWAHAHAHAH!

You haven't seen bureaucratic red tape until you've seen a surly, disgruntled SPC working in finance.
 
2009-07-25 02:00:50 PM
i don't like him very much, but he consistently cuts through the bullshiat. he should be broadcast in prime time instead of relegated to pay cable.
 
2009-07-25 02:02:44 PM
PacManDreaming: Remember how great of a job FEMA did managing the Hurricane Katrina disaster? How well did the government respond to the AIDS crisis back in the 1980s? Those government workers sure were on the ball, weren't they?


You mean after the Bush administration slashed the budget and FEMA organisation and put a guy who ran horse shows in charge of it? The same thing happened during the 1992 hurricane Andrew in Florida. Then when it was properly organised and fixed, it was considered by the end of 1993 as the most well organised department in the federal government and did very well in the mass flooding of the Mississippi River. If you are going to butcher FEMA, don't biatch when they can't do the job.

The 1980s AIDS crisis is even more deplorable. You had orders from the top to ignore it since it is only that disease queers get and good honest folks wouldn't catch it and since small Government Reaganomics was in charge it no surprise it didn't get looked at till years later.

Really all you did was biatch about people who run a governement on the premise that government is evil and should be dismantled so it can't be involved and then biatch about it not being involved when there is a crisis. It reminds of the farmers in Nebraska and the Dakotas who laughed at the New Orleans victims saying city folks just can't take care of themselves and they would need no Government help. Then when it snows several feet, they begged for helicopter delivery of foodstock and heating supplies.
 
2009-07-25 02:03:23 PM
DKinMN: arkansas:

This. Even though there are very large problems with the current system, it is not ALL bad. Anybody who argues that ANYTHING is ALL bad is probably not seeing the whole picture.


I totally agree that it's not all bad. There are definitely good things going on in the US with health care. But I would also say that anyone who argues that ANYTHING is ALL bad with government involvement in health care is probably not seeing the whole picture.
 
2009-07-25 02:03:33 PM
PacManDreaming: Remember how great of a job FEMA did managing the Hurricane Katrina disaster? How well did the government respond to the AIDS crisis back in the 1980s? Those government workers sure were on the ball, weren't they?

Now, think about the last time you had to deal with some government bureaucrat. Do you really want someone like that in charge of your health and well being?

Do Democrats believe that they're in some sort of "Thousand Year Reign" and there's absolutely no possibility that somewhere down the line we'll elect a clone of Bush or Cheney? Can you imagine how health care would suffer with those tools in charge?

And don't dare compare other nations' government run health care with what me might possibly end up with. Those countries aren't run by American bureaucrats.

Just think, in another four to eight years, we may all have PalinCare®.


You're right. We shouldn't let the government do too much now, because if Republicans ever take control of the government again, they will puposely make it fail just to prove their beliefs.
 
2009-07-25 02:04:16 PM
The current system: people pay money to insurance companies, and when they get sick, the insurance companies look for ways NOT to provide the service they've been paid for.

This is the system that has to go.
 
2009-07-25 02:07:35 PM
PacManDreaming: Remember how great of a job FEMA did managing the Hurricane Katrina disaster? How well did the government respond to the AIDS crisis back in the 1980s?

You mean the government doesn't work well when it's run by people who're ideologically opposed to the idea that government can work?

Well, in that case, the solution's easy. Don't elect people to government office when they don't believe in government. Problem solved!
 
Displayed 50 of 608 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report