MovieChat Forums > degree7 > Replies
degree7's Replies
<blockquote>Are you seriously this ignorant or just putting way too much effort into trolling? What propaganda outfit fed you that lie?</blockquote>
No it's true, plenty of Jews think Israel is simply a bad idea. Just like most people thought apartheid was a terrible idea.
<blockquote>not because their system is worth emulating.</blockquote>
What's that? Capitalism?
<blockquote>You do know what "per capita" means, don't you?</blockquote>
I guess you don't know "overtake" means. And yeah, their population IS the reason they will overtake the US. Good job. <b>slow clap</b>
<blockquote>Yes we would. It might cost slightly more, but without the US R&D it wouldn't exist at all.</blockquote>
The US as we know it wouldn't exist at all without other economies to trade with. Seems all your replies return to this circular reasoning.
<blockquote>It's not fine in Venezuela, North Korea, or lots of other socialist leaning places around the world</blockquote>
Ah the old knee jerk manta. "b-b-b-but what about Venezuela," and honestly no one cares about North Korea other than slight amusement at their antics.
<blockquote> Off topic but Yemen was torn apart by Islamists</blockquote>
Yeah, Saudi Arabia. Your "ally"
<blockquote>some of the worst ones Iranian backed.</blockquote>
Hardly, they receive more a cheering from the sidelines. Lmao
<blockquote>blame the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia for everything</blockquote>
It's beautiful you can admit to the Axis of Evil
<blockquote>Wrong, at least not US intervention. You've been misled</blockquote>
No you.
<blockquote>You mean the US extending its nuclear umbrella protection to Western Europe and other allies around the world?</blockquote>
None of that would matter without nukes. The US is not responsible for world peace, nuclear fission is.
<blockquote>Studies show Americans are screened at vastly high rates for cancers and other afflictions, which is the only form of real "preventative" care I've heard cited.</blockquote>
Buddy, there's a whole bunch of easily preventable conditions like heart disease, cancer, chronic lower respiratory diseases, accidents from unintentional injuries, stroke, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, and influenza that are wasted with treatment.
<blockquote>Hey, you're the one arguing for massive expansions of government control</blockquote>
Lol what? How?
<blockquote>What cracks?</blockquote>
The fact that 40% of Americans didn't qualify because they rose above the poverty line, and it the ACA (it's proper name btw) didn't factor in underlying costs.
<blockquote>The tiny percentage of the truly involuntarily uninsured could have been taken care of with tweaks rather than flipping the entire system over</blockquote>
I mean, I guess we agree then? When you gonna realize both parties are the problem man?
[quote]That nonsense statement is too far gone to even be untrue.[/quote]
I know it's difficult to accept, but your entire existence has been a lie.
[i]No, I said the government regulations are a destructive intervention. Context clues.[/i]
I think you just had cognitive dissonance when you wrote that sentence and were trying to drop me a hint.
<blockquote>No, if you're arguing the government should run healthcare because it's supposedly "a basic human right" (whatever that even means to a Marxist), then your same logic applies even more to food, since that's even more fundamental to human survival. You already basically agreed with that above, attacking the free market's impact on food production and distribution.</blockquote>
I'm trying to analyze this comment but I can't even begin to understand what you're saying or implying here. Apparently I don't respect human rights(?), and then you draw a massive strawman that I never made. It's so fallacious it's funny. Start over with this paragraph, it's a mess.
<blockquote>It's a point worth making because it's easier to see the catastrophic impact socialism has on food,</blockquote>
Bruh, the food production line is fine. You're more likely to be impacted by food shortages if you're living in Yemen being bombed by Saudi jetfighters dropping bombs made in the USA. It's also hilariously ironic you calling me dated, your brain seems to be permanently stuck in 1985.
<blockquote>Oh wow, you really hate Jews don't you? Are you a European anti-Semite? Islamist socialist? Arab nationalist? Iranian propagandist? I'm just curious</blockquote>
Nah, actually a Jew said this to me once. In fact, most Jews despise Israel.
<blockquote>It's not even close. Chinese people are dirt poor compared to Americans</blockquote>
They own 34% of the global economy. With that many people they will soon surpass the US GDP.
<blockquote>It’s the leader in R&D. There’s a difference between inventing the drugs and where you end up manufacturing them later (cheap labor).</blockquote>
Yeah but without that "cheap labour" we wouldn't have it in the first place. It's a yin/yang situation. The US is the largest importer of drugs in the world.
<blockquote>The rest of your post is a bunch of non sequiturs and random false claims that read like garbled propaganda. Maybe something got lost in translation, but they merit no response.</blockquote>
You seem awfully infatuated with me. What other gossip do you have?
[quote]Uh...except I don't.[/quote]
Are you sure? Seems we agree on some things here.
<blockquote>When America withdraws from the world we get the ISIS caliphate, Syrian civil war, worst refugee crisis since WW2, Taliban, Al Qaeda</blockquote>
Other way around brother. Military intervention has caused most of these problems. Besides, I thought Trump was trying to be an "isolationist." Not that the US ever really was.
<blockquote>Overall the period of US superpower dominance since WW2 has been the most peaceful among major powers since the ancient Pax Romana</blockquote>
I guess the threat of mutually assured destruction can do that.
<blockquote>But then you want a totalitarian power to dominate the world, so you and I have different interests.</blockquote>
They already do dominate. The New World Order has basically been upon us for a while now.
<blockquote>One narrow item we might agree on, though it's a slanted tax structure that pushed people onto employment healthcare</blockquote>
Well I have more to say about the tax structure needing reformation, but I guess I could always PM you that.
<blockquote>Obamacare robbed patients, doctors, and insurance companies of choice through a mountain of rigid, poorly conceived regulations, diminishing market flexibility</blockquote>
The ACA was a clear example of putting the cart before the horse. The main reason was that the healthcare system is more geared towards spending on chronic illnesses than preventative care, and wastes money as a result. Also some 40% Americans didn't even qualify for it and just fell through the cracks.
[quote]It sounds like you’re just posting a hodgepodge of random Marxist propaganda, some of it dated[/quote]
It's sad you're too blissfully unaware that Marxism is just an advanced form of capitalism.
>>>That government regulations are a problem, lol<<<
You agreed that private insurance companies are destructive intervention. I was just commending you for admitting it.
<blockquote>but apparently you do feel food production should be nationalized.</blockquote>
That's a false equivalence. I mean, that is the worst strawman I've ever seen. You've got to try harder than that. I pretty much stopped reading the paragraph after that.
<blockquote>so there's a mountain range of empirical historical evidence screaming that you're wrong.</blockquote>
What the blue f-k does this have to do with universal healthcare? And you're acting like only "Communist" countries have committed genocide (disregarding the fact that equating Marxism/Communism to Stalinism or Maoism is truly brainlet logic).
<blockquote>More like government regulations stifling innovation</blockquote>
I'm curious to know exactly how (I mean, that's only because of big money and neoliberal ideology utterly ruining the democracy) when the unchecked private market is the main reason for the majority of the problems we're seeing in the news.
<blockquote>That free loading off the US I mentioned.</blockquote>
That's hardly free loading, it's called the supply chain and division of labor. In fact, the US isn't even the largest exporter of pharmaceuticals.
<blockquote>Despite that Americans have vastly more access to pharmaceuticals than Canadians or those other countries you mentioned.</blockquote>
LoL, most can't even afford insulin. The US is approaching third rate banana republic.
<blockquote>Without the US and Israel driving up the world’s standard of living other nations would be even poorer than they are.</blockquote>
Lmao, Israel isn't even top ten. If anything they're a money drain on the US economy, and just a huge hemorrhoid on the region. Anyway, China outranks the US by a large margin (oh nooo, here come those Commies), and global growth is slowing down anyway. Not surprising considering the US bullies other countries over price regulations, and throws up tariffs like no tomorrow. And all the debt. I guess the US doesn't REALLY appreciate the free market after all.
[quote]You feel defense spending hurts national security?!? We'll have to agree to disagree.[/quote]
Let's agree that you agree with me. It's quite obvious that paying for bases on every corner of the globe just contributes to political instability across the world and makes the USA more enemies in the long run. Why else do you think the worst attack after Pearl Harbour occured on American soil? Not to mention the military industrial complex leading the US into inopportune and bungled conflicts that overall make the country and the world less safe.
>>>Sure, it's the government. But you didn't contradict what I said.<<<
I didn't need to. I'm just reinforcing my point. Quite simple really.
>>>The problems in our healthcare system are mostly caused by the government intervention we already have.<<<
Absolutely. Congress being lobbied by insurance and pharmaceutical interest groups to further turn the healthcare system into just another money-making scam. I mean, when you have people who can't qualify for coverage because they're unemployed, don't qualify for medicare/medicare, and slip through the cracks because they can't afford to see a doctor, and 44 million uninsured you know there is something wrong. That's what happens when you have employer-dictated healthcare.
>>>Obamacare in particular was terrible<<<
Probably because the ACA was weak-sauce, and was actively dismantled by Republicans at every turn. But that's beside the point....
[quote]How about the food business?[/quote]
Health is a basic human right and shouldn't be determined based upon your income. But while we're on the subject, there's a lot of problems with the food industry as well (such as contributing to pollution, overfishing, worker exploitation, and waste production). The free market isn't a solution for everything.
<blockquote>Profit motive drives innovation and productivity</blockquote>
Well arguably there hasn't been as much innovation as their could be with this economic model, not least because of Big Pharma abusing the patent system, stifling competition, and advocating profit over people's health or welfare.
<blockquote>new drugs and the key medical innovations of the past several decades</blockquote>
Maybe ages ago, sure. But the neoliberal mindset does not favour innovation, because there is not much profit in it. The majority of the benefits go to consumers, not the producers. Not to mention that inequality slows down productivity.
<blockquote>Prop up socialist systems</blockquote>
So... Canada? Denmark? Germany? Their healthcare systems are arguably superior to the US. Just look at how Germany has handled this crisis.
<blockquote>Imagine how much more advanced we might be if most of Europe and the rest of the world weren't largely free loading off Americans</blockquote>
Yes, the world would probably be much more advanced if the IMF and World Bank weren't strangling developing economies, and the US stopped propping up authoritarian regimes like Israel and Saudi Arabia, but that's beside the point. The US borrows most of their money from China anyway.
<blockquote>Yes there is</blockquote>
Not really.
<blockquote>"Private" insurance companies operate within hedgerows of society-skewing government regulations, some of that destructive intervention I've been talking about.</blockquote>
Well I'm glad you saw the light and agree with my main point.
[quote]First of all, the article cites Robert Pollin as the the lead author. He is a known leftist economist, which is an immediate red flag to biased reporting.[/quote]
You don't have to take his word for it. There was also a study done by Yale University that reached the same conclusion. [url]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext#%20[/url]
----- And how is he going to pay for it? ------
Same way we managed to pay for two multi-trillion dollar wars. It would also be less expensive than the current model.
----- when businesses lay people off because they are now overstaffed?-----
Oof, this comment didn't age well, LOL
----- It would place government regulators in the role of administrator, destroying both consumer and provider choice, ------
How exactly? All it would do is remove unnecessary bureaucratic machinery and price-gouging. Private insurance companies are one of the main reasons the healthcare system is so inefficient.
----- the for profit system ------
Healthcare shouldn't be a business.
----- by going down the socialist road some------
There's nothing "socialist" about it.
[quote] In addition to funding cutting edge technological R&D that helps keep us and our allies ahead, America pays extra to enhance troop safety and living quality, so those simplistic bumper-sticker talking points are misleading garbage.[/quote]
Oh please. Defense spending is clearly unaffordable and actually decrease national security rather than the opposite. The cost of upkeep is tremendous and comes right out of taxpayer wallets. Money that could be used for things like education, healthcare, public infrastructure, etc.
----- but not only is the military more able than the civilian government to cut through red tape and get important things done when needed------
The military is notoriously inefficient. The Pentagon has even managed to misplace trillions of dollars. That's right, they just lost it.
---- Getting that inefficient government involved in all those other spheres of daily life is the problem. -----
No more inefficient than the broken healthcare system. Besides, are you talking about the Federal government or state governments?
Man of Steel is one of the top ten worst movie-going experiences of my life.
[quote] He would demand someone come pick it up from him at the door. [/quote]
You mean drive right up to the main entrance where Hammond and the others would be watching? Also, traveling through the park in the middle of a hurricane would be impossible for someone who doesn’t know how to get around. That would be a terrible plan. Nedry was obviously making a hand off at the dock.
————-In fact, he would NOT casually give a can of millions of dollars to a random guy. He would never let that can out of his sight, until he is safely off the island with a bag of money on his lap. ————-
He wasn’t “some guy,” he was obviously working for Biosyn, and Dodgeson had already mentioned his man would be at the dock. Besides which, Nedry had already received $750,000 upfront, he had no reason to believe he would be shorted the rest.
————- If Nedry was there the whole night, and was gonna be able to leave the next day, he could have just taken the can tomorrow, when it's all shiny and dandy. ————-
Or, ya know, he didn’t do that because Hammond would potentially find the embryos before then, plus the canister was only designed to hold the embryos for 46 hours, plus he wasn’t expecting the tropical storm to hit and Dodgeson’s guy to leave early.
————-No, he only had one chance to reach the embryos and then split. That was why he was rushing and begging at a tropical storm. Anything else only makes sense for an imbecile like you.————-
That’s a really dumb theory. If Nedry just left the island without restoring power then he would be responsible for countless deaths, a lot more than just theft. Also Hammond would immediately know it was him who stole the embryos. The reason he was rushing through the storm was to get back to the control room in the timeframe to restore power. Also because the guy was leaving the dock early. Also did I mention THIS WAS ALREADY EXPLAINED IN THE FKING BOOK AS WHAT HAPPENED.
My point is that Salvation didn’t feel connected to the other films, it felt inconsistent with what was portrayed. The imagery of the future war and the terminator models was like from Transformers mixed with Mad Max. It had none of the cyberpunk aesthetic the other films had. That’s why it was really a soft reboot. Also Christian Bale looked/sounded nothing like Nick Stahl or Edward Furlong. Salvation was a reboot meant to be the start of a new Terminator trilogy, which is what all reboots want to do.
well, I try to be modest, but... you’re right
It’s not a sequel to T3, it’s a prequel. Although really it’s just a reboot disguised as one.
they’re all dogshit
14) Trapped
Sure is nice of them to send our own money back to us.