Steve Ballmer Drops Massive Data Dump on How Tax Dollars Are Spent

[mesyn191]

Dept of Agriculture gets funding (in large part to subsidize agriculture corporations) for this. It's in their interests to BS the public.

Hahahahah you don't even know how to critique a source properly!

The DoA gets its money from the Federal Govt. and the budget is set by Congress which is indeed subject to lobbying but only to direct money to enrich monied interests, they don't mess with the stats generally and when they do they do it by defunding the "offending" govt. organization.

You have to actually go into the stats and find errors or link to source that has done a good job of doing this otherwise you're just trying desperately to make stuff up.

 

[Morlock]

Don't play the goal post shifting game.

You can be starving and not actually die from it. People in Somalia do it all the time.

It's not shifting the goalposts to point out the scope of the problem. I presume your answer is, "not enough to make a persuasive point."

I already posted a link to a good source earlier. And I quoted tetris42's for you too. And you were the one who was saying starvation isn't a issue at all in the US. So put up or shut up.

I've said it twice, but you seem too dense to absorb it, so maybe three times is the charm; starvation or "food insecurity" is a problem in America only as the side effect of other problems, and throwing food at those primary problems won't solve them.

The hunger people in the United States isn't the same kind that those face in part of Africa where people will literally starve to death. It means you don't get enough of the food you need, which leads to malnutrition, not literally starving to death. I mean hell, you can take a look at here at deaths due to malnutrition:

Yes, malnutrition is an issue. But throwing money at that problem isn't going to help either. There's no way to force people to eat a healthy diet. All you can do is give them information, and hope they make good choices. Throwing food or money at them isn't going to help.

But it isn't every day that I hear people call Russia and China "progressive," so thanks for that.

 

[mesyn191]

And why do we have food deserts? Because the people living in them drive legitimate businesses away with the constant theft, violent crime, etc..

[citation needed]

Also generally the existence of food deserts is blamed on "redlining" (aka racism), lack of public transportation, and poverty. Crime doesn't even factor in to it. The wiki is actually a decent start on the subject if you care to learn.

 

[Morlock]

Hahahahah you don't even know how to critique a source properly!

The DoA gets its money from the Federal Govt. and the budget is set by Congress which is indeed subject to lobbying but only to direct money to enrich monied interests, they don't mess with the stats generally and when they do they do it by defunding the "offending" govt. organization.

You're young, I'm guessing.

Dept of Ag squawks about starvation, voters and donors get riled up and pressure their politicians, politicians increase funding to Dept of Ag (more funding = more power for the agency, which means more job security, better pay, more employees, more juice). That's the bureaucrat plan, anyway. This is news to you?

 

[mesyn191]

People in Somalia are more often than not fat from overeating; particularly the women.

Nope. More than half the country is starving right now.

That you can find pictures of fat Somali's doesn't disprove that fact at all.

You might as well argue that because there were plenty of rich people in the US during the Great Depression that there was no economic crisis back then.

In fact, morbid obesity is on a dramatic rise in Africa: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3721807/

2 different problems can and do often exist at the same time. HTH.

 

[Morlock]

[citation needed]

Also generally the existence of food deserts is blamed on "redlining" (aka racism), lack of public transportation, and poverty. Crime doesn't even factor in to it. The wiki is actually a decent start on the subject if you care to learn.

You mean FDR's redlining?

I know leftists like to blame all non-whites' problems on YT (thought we were talking about the poor, btw; are you saying there are no food deserts affecting whites, or are you saying that there are, and they're caused by racism, too?), but it doesn't take a genius to understand that enough crime can make business just not worth it. You do know there's a serious crime problem in the ghetto, right?

P.S., Wikipedia's thick with leftists.

I am curious to know how redlining, lack of public transportation, and poverty drive out supermarkets, but not fast food joints. Which would seem much less vulnerable to, say, shoplifting than a supermarket would

 

[Morlock]

Nope. More than half the country is starving right now.

That you can find pictures of fat Somali's doesn't disprove that fact at all.

If Somalia's like the rest of Africa, then the starvation there is primarily caused by overpopulation and insane breeding rates. You know, stuff leftists like to sweep under the rug.

 

[mesyn191]

It's not shifting the goalposts to point out the scope of the problem.

Nope. Death and starvation are 2 different things. You know this which is why you're trying to downplay this by suddenly trying to make it about "people starving to death in the US".

I've said it twice, but you seem too dense to absorb it,

You can repeat something that is wrong thousands of times and it still won't become correct. You have to actually prove what you're saying is true. If you knew what you were talking about I'm pretty sure you would've done so already.

But throwing money at that problem isn't going to help either.

Anti starvation programs like SNAP the US do exactly this with a high degree of success.

 

[Morlock]

Anti starvation programs like SNAP the US do exactly this with a high degree of success.

Which is why we don't have a starvation problem.

 

[Morlock]

Nope. Death and starvation are 2 different things. You know this which is why you're trying to downplay this by suddenly trying to make it about "people starving to death in the US".

So you're saying that a country with 100k deaths in a year due to starvation doesn't have a bigger starvation problem than a country that lost 10 people to starvation. K.

 

[mesyn191]

You mean FDR's redlining?

Any sort of racist policies or programs by FDR are so far removed in the past that they're not even a factor in this discussion.

P.S., Wikipedia's thick with leftists.

Bias based on facts is perfectly acceptable. And the wiki links to plenty of outside sources. If you want a non-wiki source then here you go.

I am curious to know how redlining, lack of public transportation, and poverty drive out supermarkets, but not fast food joints.

Fast food doesn't really compete with supermarkets, they're serving different needs. Redlining reinforces poverty and lack of transportation won't drive out supermarkets but does deny the poor access to them.

Which would seem much less vulnerable to, say, shoplifting than a supermarket would

What they seem and what they are are 2 different things. Post some proof that theft in poor areas pushes supermarkets out of business or at least deters them from going into business in those areas enough so as to cause food deserts to form.

 

[tetris42]

In fact, it boggles the mind the ghetto poor people I see lined up at crazy expensive KFC and Dominos and the like, when I couldn't even afford to eat like that all the time without redoing my whole budget.

Poor people spend their money on dumb shit, save nothing, etc. I've seen this up close aplenty.

You know, if you make no distinction between SOME poor people acting like shiftless parasites who can't handle money to save their life and ALL acting that way, then advocate all policy around that, well what can I say, there's really no logical argument to be made to the contrary if those are your assumed truths.

It kind of reminds me of people who complain about welfare parasites who contribute nothing to society, thinking the entire system should be scrapped, not realizing (or better yet, CHOOSING not to realize) that those are the minority, with the reality being that the majority of welfare recipients are already working and have jobs.

 

[mesyn191]

Which is why we don't have a starvation problem.

A program can be highly successful and still not completely eliminate a given problem. HTH

So you're saying that a country with 100k deaths in a year due to starvation doesn't have a bigger starvation problem than a country that lost 10 people to starvation. K.

Nope.

Work on your strawmen attacks better.

Or post some evidence to prove anything you were saying earlier. I'm pretty sure you can't or you would've already.

 

[Morlock]

Wow, the power of the educated guess:

https://www.populationpyramid.net/somalia

Somalia population in selected years:

1950: 2.2m
1960: 2.7m
1970: 3.4m
1980: 6m
1990: 6.3m
2000: 7.3m
2010: 9.5m
2017: 11m

Maybe Somali women need to stop having so many babies they can't feed? Maybe Somalis should start using birth control after their 2nd child? Maybe Somalis should take the carrying capacity of their country better into account? Maybe the west should stop enabling this insanity (another educated guess; the ramp-up started after the green revolution, and western tendency to enable via aid?).

Leftists tend not to countenance the possibility that they're enabling overpopulation and starvation.

 

[DejaWiz]

Don't be facetious.

Nearly the entire rest of the entire world uses govt. ran healthcare and it doesn't even come close to resembling slavery for healthcare workers or doctors there. They do tend to get paid less but that isn't slavery. And they generally pay about half the price for similar quality healthcare vs the US.

Then why is it that a lot of Canadians jump over the border to utilize the superior healthcare of the U.S.?

Simple answer: socialized healthcare is inferior and treatment is exponentially slower.

 

[Morlock]

Nope.

Work on your strawmen attacks better.

K, so you're not willing to say that a country with 100k starvation deaths in a year has a worse starvation problem than a country with 10 starvation deaths in a year.

 

[Morlock]

A program can be highly successful and still not completely eliminate a given problem.

Completely eliminating a problem tends to run into diminishing returns.

 

[Ducman69]

Nope. More than half the country is starving right now.

Nope, its fabricated to continue the billions of dollars of aid the government is demanding, and manufactures famines by isolating displaced migrants in camps. That's why they don't ask for food and water, they want money. You'll notice also a lack of picture of starving individuals, which would certainly increase donations and be useful to gain sympathy, because people don't like donating money for food to fat people. It doesn't play. What they do sometimes show are people that appear malnourished but are actually suffering from diseases like AIDS which are rampant in Africa.

Estimates show the continent is receiving on average $135 billion annually, far more than sufficient to feed and clothe the entire population, and the World Health Organization warns that Africans are eating far too much on average and recommends a "fat tax" against sugar drinks and other unhealthy food: http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/13/who-worries-africans-are-getting-too-fat

South-Africa has been hit hardest by overeating for many many years now: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/21/obesity-africas-new-crisis

 

[mesyn191]

Wow, the power of the educated guess:

If you'd read the article I'd posted you'd know the current famine is due to drought and not over population. If you're not going to read links then maybe don't post at all?

 

[Morlock]

Yeah, a drought in an arid country, who could've seen that coming? Tell me genius, would they be better able to feed their population through a drought with 3m people to feed, or with 11m? Do you even know what carrying capacity is?

 

[mesyn191]

Then why is it that a lot of Canadians jump over the border to utilize the superior healthcare of the U.S.?

Some of them its a emergency issue, some because they're rich and can afford it. I'd point out that tons of Americans buy Canadian drugs and head overseas to get cheaper medical operations than they possibly can in the US. Google medical tourism which has been a thing for years and is only increasing.

Simple answer: socialized healthcare is inferior and treatment is exponentially slower.

Nope..

Wait times for non-emergency care are generally higher, but not exponentially so, and over all care quality is about the same.

 

[tybert7]

Yup, they sure do. No tax exists that the poor pay in a greater amount than the rich. Period. That was my statement. That statement is a fact.

Fine. I didn't say they shouldn't, because of problems within the capitalist system. But my point, the only point I ever made, is how can someone paying virtually nothing be mad at people for "not paying enough" that are paying so drastically much more than they are? Even a flat tax would already cause someone that is successful and hard working to have a far greater burden in supporting society than someone that is a failure and lazy.

And yes, most would argue that while free market capitalism is generally good at moving resources to what is most in demand, that contribution and compensation are often divorced. Everyone would do no work or the least stressful, safest, fewest hours, and most laid back fun jobs possible if there were no carrot that said, "Hey, if instead of drinking or playing video games tonight, you study another chapter of ITIL so you can get your certification" or "Hey, if you put in the extra hours and really kick ass at work, you can push for that promotion"... but we have CEOs where the carrot is $5 million cash bonus on top of stock option worth tens of millions on top of all expenses paid and massive per diems and so forth, because of social networks and scratch my back scratch your back deals between elites, when a carrot of say even just $500K salary would otherwise have no problem finding a person willing to take on the role.

Of course most are, through a series of poor life choices that leads to long-term failure, and their spending is typically reigned in only by limits to what funds they have to play with by and large due to lack of savings and poor credit. I wasn't born yesterday, so don't blow smoke up my butt. Just look at what happens when you give your average poor person a large sum of money. They don't grow it or invest it, and are generally poor again in no time. The root cause is typically a lack of self-control and inability to delay satisfaction. That's why they haven't developed a useful skillset most of the time as well, because it means delaying satisfaction to better themselves (starting in grade school).

It is well known that virtue-signaling liberals like to make things up on the internet without attempting to support them, by claiming its "well known", and like to pretend to be selfless while in action rather than words are exceedingly selfish and look down upon or are at least dismissive towards altruistic team-based behavior such as nationalism and patriotism where the needs of the individual are outweighed by the needs of the team.

I think the biggest problem with so many people posting in this thread, is that they are arguing with an idea in their head rather than actual statements posted here, and THAT is what I find annoying. I can tell you aren't really talking to me, you're talking out loud to regurgitate an argument you've probably had with others in the past against talking points that were never brought up here in the first place, by already objectifying me as some "typical Libertarian monolith statue" and thus can project arguments onto me I've never even touched upon.

Now to get back at the only point I ever made in this thread, lets say that we have Joe Blow who is fourth generation inbred with a mother that smoked and drank alcohol during his pregnancy and frankly he's an ugly crippled idiot. Its not his fault he's a useless dumbass, but he is, and everyone else's quality of life is worse because of his existence and lets say there's nothing he can do about that. Does he, morally and logically, have a valid argument when he is a massive net-tax leach on society and contributes almost nothing in taxes, when he stands up on a pedestal and proclaims "Derp, here I am payin' so much taxes as a percent of my non-existent income, based on me bein' a retard, when Mitt Romney aint doin' SHIIIIEEEEEEEET", when in fact Mitt Romney is a massive net tax contributor that is paying far more than his fair share into the collective tax pool.

My point is that no, Joe Blow needs to sit down and STFU and be grateful that the government is redistributing wealth to him, and he can say "thank you" and go back to having sex with his cousin.

People paying nothing and getting benefits from society have much less standing to complain, but people paying higher tax rates from labor than others who sit on their ass and collect investment income have every right to feel raw about that. I even extend this to things like inheritance. If you worked hard and through your expertise and knowledge earned a million dollars, you are taxed at a substantial rate compared to someone who gained a million dollars for what exactly? Being born. But conservatives love to champion the sacred right of income transfers from inheritance, the mother of all unearned income, to be completely exempt from taxation with no caps. It essentially privileges income via blood and birth over and above actual productive activity, things that actually improve lives and create things and support people in society.


And your focus on delayed gratification constant shifting of the narrative towards an internal locus of control highlights how incomplete a picture of the world conservatives have. The left pays too much attention to external loci of control, but there needs to be a better balance to take in an accurate picture of reality.

YES, delayed gratification is important, most people have heard of the marshmallow experiment where the children that were able to hold out on eating the instant reward for 15 minutes to gain two marshmallows later on were found to be more prosperous in later life. Purely a function of an internal locus of control affecting the trajectory of a life in a thousand compounding choices one makes across the decades.

But where does that greater capacity to delay come from? If it's purely nurture, then we need to forcefully make sure all children have this capacity, if it has a large portion controlled by nature, we are back to square one. I do not know the answer to this, but I suspect that some substantial portion of peoples likeliness to delay gratification is based on nature, their wiring.

Listen to this talk about social mobility.



The key takeaway? Lineage is the key predictive variable. Lineage is not earned. When they do adoption studies, where infants are raised by adoptive parents, presumably with the same nurture as the biological children born to those parents, the adoptive children track more closely to their own biological parents. Twins separated at birth have similarities that go far beyond what nurture can explain.

This is the world we live in, and in that world, it makes sense to temper your self righteous sense of superiority towards all your "lessers" who just did not delay as much gratification as you, or did not work as hard as you. This is an incredibly difficult task for a conservative minded person, because so much of their thought process is based on an internal model, and that BLINDS them to the very real external fields that influence outcomes. And no, I'm not talking about the common false positives of the far left about rampant racism or sexism being the driver. The irony of all of that talk, is that the more fair and just and non racist and sexist a society becomes, the more the differences in outcomes will be based on the differences between individuals and not on society. But not all of those differences are under their control. Long term, they may be. I want us to study all of this so we can reshape nature to our will, but this attitude of contempt for people that are seen as "parasites" and leeches needs to stop.

 

[mesyn191]

Nope, its fabricated

[citation needed]

That's why they don't ask for food and water, they want money.

The article I linked gives multiple examples of the exact opposite happening.

You'll notice also a lack of picture of starving individuals,

Hahahah you didn't even click the link at all did you? This is the 1st picture you'll see if you load the page: http://imgur.com/a/DQepv

Identify the AIDS for me in that picture please. Where exactly do you see it and how would it differ at all from systems of extreme hunger? Such as say not really eating much for 10 days as the article itself notes directly below the pic.

http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/13/who-worries-africans-are-getting-too-fat https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/21/obesity-africas-new-crisis

The contintent could be getting trillions per year in monetary aid and there would still be huge numbers of starving people. It could also, for instance, have the highest concentration of fat people in the world and still also have the highest concentration of starving people too.

Again 2 different problems, neither rule out the other.

 

[mesyn191]

Yeah, a drought in an arid country, who could've seen that coming?

This drought is exceptional. Can you predict exceptional droughts? As far as I know no one can.

Completely eliminating a problem tends to run into diminishing returns.

You can have diminishing returns but still also be successful or even eliminate a given issue at the same time so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here at all. One doesn't preclude the other.

Dept of Ag squawks about starvation, voters and donors get riled up and pressure their politicians, politicians increase funding to Dept of Ag (more funding = more power for the agency, which means more job security, better pay, more employees, more juice).

The exact opposite has been happening.

Agriculture leaders including lawmakers from President Donald Trump's Republican Party on Thursday criticized his planned 21 percent cut to discretionary spending at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), saying it could take a toll on the rural communities that helped elect him last November.

Trump has proposed slashing the USDA's discretionary budget by $4.7 billion to $17.9 billion by halting funding for rural clean water initiatives and rural business services, reducing some USDA statistical services and cutting county-level staff. The president has already vowed to alter trade deals that have largely boosted farm incomes and targeted health care policies that have particularly benefited the rural poor.

"America's farmers and ranchers are struggling, and we need to be extremely careful not to exacerbate these conditions," said House Agriculture Committee Chairman Michael Conaway. Farm incomes are down 50 percent from four years ago, he added.

You don't know a single thing about this subject at all, you're just knee jerking out contrarian posts at this point.

 

[IcePickFreak]

I compiled data on tax discussions!

When you use the tax law's to your advantage to get out of paying taxes, you're:
A) a genius because you're taking advantage of the system laid out before you.
B) an idiot for taking advantage of the system laid out before you.

If you get any hand-outs from government programs you're:
A) an idiot for taking advantage of the system laid out before you.
B) a genius because you're taking advantage of the system laid out before you.


Not surprisingly, it's "don't hate the player, hate the game" only when it's to your advantage.

 

[DejaWiz]

Some of them its a emergency issue, some because they're rich and can afford it. I'd point out that tons of Americans buy Canadian drugs and head overseas to get cheaper medical operations than they possibly can in the US. Google medical tourism which has been a thing for years and is only increasing.


Nope..

Wait times for non-emergency care are generally higher, but not exponentially so, and over all care quality is about the same.

It is exponentially longer. Data is compiled from the Fraser Institute in Canada.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blog...ada-healthcare-is-inferior-to-american-system

 

[Ducman69]

Hahahah you didn't even click the link at all did you? This is the 1st picture you'll see if you load the page: http://imgur.com/a/DQepv

Yes, thank you. Exactly my point, they have thousands of people literally dying of starvation, and can't be bothered to take a picture of that? And somehow she's starving, but her children are not?

You don't think a holocaust type scene of crowds of ribs showing would garner more support and would be on every television set around the world, and yet somehow that doesn't exist, and the migrant camp pictures that do exist show mostly fat women with 7-10 children in tow with a father that left for Europe (I couldn't afford to care for 7-10 children on MY salary)? And yes, that particular woman probably has AIDS or some other disease which can cause you to waste away.

Somali camp:

 

[mesyn191]

It is exponentially longer. Data is compiled from the Fraser Institute in Canada.

The article I linked used data from the same Institute.

I'd also point out that it says outcomes are similar or better to the US medical system.

And that Canada is far from the only country with socialized healthcare. There are others that are even better than them. Since you were criticizing ALL socialized medical care its up to you to show they're all somehow worse and/or more expensive than the US's system. Good luck with that.

 

[Morlock]

But conservatives love to champion the sacred right of income transfers from inheritance, the mother of all unearned income, to be completely exempt from taxation with no caps. It essentially privileges income via blood and birth over and above actual productive activity, things that actually improve lives and create things and support people in society.

I think people should have the right to pass their patrimony on to their descendants (or whomever) without being taxed a second time. I mean, they were taxed on all of it already, right? People passing their productivity on to the next generation is how societies progress, taxing them again on top of all the previous taxation seems like a step backwards to me.

The key takeaway? Lineage is the key predictive variable. Lineage is not earned.

Sure, it's granted. So what? I don't see the problem with people passing the fruits of their productivity on to their descendants. Encourages productivity.

You can have diminishing returns but still also be successful or even eliminate a given issue at the same time so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here at all. One doesn't preclude the other.

Sure, you could devote all the resources of the planet to feeding that last 1%. Doesn't mean we should.

The exact opposite has been happening.

Genius, the exact opposite would be the bureaucrats at the Dept of Ag asking for a lower budget.

 

[mesyn191]

Exactly my point

That is litterally the exact opposite of what you were claiming. Good job on a shameless refusal of facts I guess.

they have thousands of people literally dying of starvation, and can't be bothered to take a picture of that?

I like how it was before "why can't they show pictures of starving individuals?!?!" and now its "where is the pictures of thousands of Somali's starving?!!?".

You can type "somalia famine 2017" into google and get as many pics of starving stick kids and emaciated adults if you want man. As well as the UN advisory info. and even the US military's accounts of the famine if you want (they care cuz' lots of starving desperate people = terrorist recruitment fodder).

Its all on you at this post proof to show that famine doesn't exist there.

You don't think a holocaust type scene of crowds of ribs showing would garner more support and would be on every television set around the world

Because if its not being blasted on the media 24/7 its not true? I thought types like you didn't trust MSM right?

And yes, that particular woman probably has AIDS or some other disease which can cause you to waste away.

Starving can also cause you to waste away and is far more likely a cause given the widespread famine there.

Why don't you link to a quality article that shows how you can diagnose AIDS based on emaciation alone much less a pic over the internet?

Somali camp:

Because if they're not all starving emaciated stick people than none of the can possibly be right?

 

[Morlock]

P.S., Mesyn, the hostile edits (leaving out qualifying statements, etc.) make you look weak. And dishonest.

 

[mesyn191]

without being taxed a second time. I mean, they were taxed on all of it already, right?

The rich frequently evade taxes though. As has been pointed out earlier in thread they litterally have trillions hidden away. Also the whole double taxation thing is mostly a strawman.

taxing them again on top of all the previous taxation seems like a step backwards to me.

The tax money would get spent on society. It doesn't disappear in to a hole. Money spent on improving society is what is beneficial. Money that just goes towards a bigger Gigayacht does hardly anyone anywhere any good. Certainly not in the US. Most of them get built over seas anyways these days.

Encourages productivity.

LOL according to you and others in thread giving people money they didn't work for was bad since it supposedly encouraged sloth or <insert bad ethical or social issue here>.

Sure, you could devote all the resources of the planet to feeding that last 1%.

Why do you think it'd require all the resources of the planet? SNAP feeds a person for a month for about $125 FWIW. Obviously nowhere near all the resources of the planet are required.

Genius, the exact opposite would be the bureaucrats at the Dept of Ag asking for a lower budget.

LOL the DoA is getting cut despite vehement protests by both small farmers and industry who are requesting more money not less. You're terrible at this.

edit:

P.S., Mesyn, the hostile edits (leaving out qualifying statements, etc.) make you look weak. And dishonest.

Virtually none of my edits have been hostile and I've been labeling all my edits too so again reality is the exact opposite of what you say it is.

 

[Ducman69]

That is litterally the exact opposite of what you were claiming. Good job on a shameless refusal of facts I guess.

The irony here is palpable. I said that they don't have pics of starving people, and added very clearly that the few pictures they have are of random individuals that generally are diseased. A picture of a large crowd where some are fat wouldn't fit the narrative, right? Prove me wrong, if there are thousands of people dying of starvation, then how can you fathom that no reporter thought it would be a good idea to take a picture of that, and how are there so many fat women in these camps while others die of starvation... that doesn't make sense, right? It makes a lot more sense that most are fat and some are very skinny because the random skinny individuals are diseased. Its called "AIDS wasting syndrome", and no matter how much food is available, you rapidly lose weight.

And yes, there is an AIDS epidemic in most of Africa, which is often passed on to babies from the infected mother.

Of course people that are displaced by war and moving from one location to another will need food and water brought to them, and often corrupt politicians and military forces are intentionally withholding vast stockpiles of supplies provided by Western civilization in the constant unending stream of foreign aid that is dumped on the continent consistently for the last hundred years.

In any case, I'm glad you're not disputing that there is an obesity epidemic in most of Africa and that the stereotype of overweight Somali women is earned.

 

[Pusher of Buttons]

You should all be happy to know your tax dollars are NOT being used to air condition my building right now. Hope you're all happy in my discomfort.

 

[mesyn191]

I said that they don't have pics of starving people,

This part is correct. And when I linked to one you suddenly switched goal posts to "where are the pics of thousands of starving Somali's!?!?" which is facetious.

Cuz' if you don't see em' then they can't exist right? Despite multiple reports to the contrary?

A picture of a large crowd where some are fat wouldn't fit the narrative, right?

So if I found a pic of a single rich person, or even several of them, during the Great Depression era would you also consider that to disprove the economic effects of the Great Depression since that didn't "fit the narrative"? After all if there was 1 rich person then how could anyone be poor back then right?

Prove me wrong,

I've already linked 2 stories on the subject and you can google more any time you want. Just because they don't have the pics you want doesn't make them untrue. Proving a negative is a logical fallacy BTW.

And yes, the AIDS epidemic, which is often passed on to babies from the infected mother.

Ah so have you diagnosed the kids too from that pic alone? You should publish you method in a paper, patent it, and then sell it. You'd be rich if it works at all.

In any case, I'm glad you're not disputing that there is an obesity epidemic in most of Africa and that the stereotype of overweight Somali women is earned.

That people can be fat doesn't mean there can't also be starving people in the same country, as I've said multiple times now and which you've still yet to disprove.

 

[Pusher of Buttons]

"Fat" and "starving" are not mutually exclusive. Cheap food is chock full of carbs and fat and limited protein and nutrients. There are plenty of poor people who are overweight but nutritionally starved.

I mean, freaking ricketts is making a comeback

 

[DejaWiz]

The article I linked used data from the same Institute.

I'd also point out that it says outcomes are similar or better to the US medical system.

And that Canada is far from the only country with socialized healthcare. There are others that are even better than them. Since you were criticizing ALL socialized medical care its up to you to show they're all somehow worse and/or more expensive than the US's system. Good luck with that.

No luck required. The fact that they are predatory in nature by confiscating a huge portion of everyone's income via absurdly high taxes in conjunction with those very long wait times equates to a shitty and inferior system. This isn't rocket science.

 

[mesyn191]

The fact that they are predatory in nature by confiscating a huge portion of everyone's income via absurdly high taxes in conjunction with those very long wait times equates to a shitty and inferior system.

Those "absurdly high taxes" result in costs that work out to about half of what the US spends on healthcare so if that counts as predatory in your book then I guess the US's system would be what? Fiendishly corrupt? Mindblowingly evil??

I hear they tend to have less paper work too. Just show proof of citizenship and you're fine as far as payment at point of service goes.

 

[Ducman69]

"Fat" and "starving" are not mutually exclusive.

Yes they are. You can't be fat and starving. You can be fat and have specific nutritional deficiencies, but generic multivitamins taken once a week is very cheap. They make generics for dirt (a hundred weeks worth for about $5). But our poor are not starving, and they need to eat less and spend less money on processed food and eat lesser quantity and cheaper unprocessed food which is already highly subsidized.

 

[Pusher of Buttons]

Yes they are. You can't be fat and starving. You can be fat and have specific nutritional deficiencies, but generic multivitamins taken once a week is very cheap. They make generics for dirt (a hundred weeks worth for about $5). But our poor are not starving, and they need to eat less and spend less money on processed food and eat lesser quantity and cheaper unprocessed food which is already highly subsidized.

Man you are out of touch with what being poor is like lol

Box of mac and cheese will feed your family calories for a buck. You find me what ghetto bodega sells all this subsidized organic produce you speak of. Aren't many Whole Foods where broke ass people are.