<https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/52155-americans-set-to-get-standardiseduniversal-healthcare/page/12/#comment-972931>
<http://schema.org/text>
"nonsense.  his claim is that he knows enough to determine the value of another's labor - that is arrogance.  my claim is that nobody knows, and only the market can adjust for that. \n  \nwhen someone comes up with a legitimate way for socialist programs to adjust for demand, i will listen.  i'd like an original thought, actually, not just the same tired compassion arguments \"oh, my, it's the right thing to do\" or the crap utopian ideals that so many often spout.  not one thing in here cited by theseus is more than the same socialist disproved idea.  it cannot work, and will not work.  not only is history on my side with this one, but so is theory. \n  \n\nhopefully it is not keynesian macroeconomics.  if so, i'm sorry.  he's yet another economist that does not understand the basic concept of demand.  so much so that he actually denied the work that earned him a nobel after the depression and horrible economy through the war failed to prove his theories correct.  look up stagflation, an economic quagmire of the 70s brought on by keynsian economic theory (and the reason chicagoan* economists became popular till recently: apparently we forgot our previous lessons).  in keynes' defense, it is actually difficult to understand what it is that he was actually saying anyway.  as one poster i read once said \"keynes was not a good expositor of his own views.\" \n  \nyou'll note, awesomeness, that nobody ever addresses my actual complaints.  the closest so far is theseus posting the per capita expenditures in response to me saying our healthcare is not the most expensive (which was a strawman).  nobody can address the demand problem - who knows how much something is worth until the market decides?  what is a tomato \"worth?\"  it is worth whatever somebody is willing to pay for it.  theseus talks about liberty, yet cannot come up with a good argument how forcing me to pay for someone else does not violate my right to liberty.  ultimately, he will be forced to redefine liberty, to a notion that defines the state as an arbiter of what is \"fair\" (or moral), to accomodate his viewpoint.  theseus mentions the right to life, yet cannot explain how that translates to the right to force someone else to keep you alive.  a right to the pursuit of happiness becomes a right to happiness - yet what about my happiness when the government steals from me to pay for another?   \n  \nsocialist ideals are exactly that: ideals that can only be implemented in an ideal, not real, society.  as long as there is free will, such a construct will not (and can not) exist.  until then, those that believe in socialism, or believe that socialist systems can work, must somehow get over the contradictions necessary for its/their implementation.   \n  \ntaks \n  \n*technically, i subscribe to the austrian school of thought, not milton friedman's chicago school of thought - though there are many similarities, the differences only seem to lie in monetary policy, which is rather huge.  this would include, btw, ludwig von mises, murray n. rothbard, and more recently, george reisman. \n"
<https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/52155-americans-set-to-get-standardiseduniversal-healthcare/page/12/>