Anyone else a huge H3 fan going down a Sam Seder historical rabbit hole? I looked this interview up because I saw it referenced in comments in other TMR videos. Also was anyone else belatedly utterly heartbroken when they learned late that the amazing Michael Brooks passed away even though you just found out who he was and fell in love him? It’s so weird to be experiencing all of this outside of real time and I wish I was more aware of it sooner.

@zach-rac

2 жыл бұрын

I love Michael Brooks... I'm still mourning him tbh. He was one of the most intelligent, compassionate men I've ever heard and he is sorely missed. Glad we can still hear him through his old YT vids tho~

@imaadmian2752

2 жыл бұрын

Literally my situation right now, really regret not seeing Michael Brooks when he was alive

Sam Seder: "I've read multiple studies about the very subject we're talking about." Peter Schiff: "I've read a book by Murray Rothbard once. It didn't talk about this subject at all, but it did mention some hypotheticals about the cost of wooden chairs."

@NickBigsmoke

Жыл бұрын

healthcare premiums have gone up since this interview was recorded.

@coletrickle1775

Жыл бұрын

​@@NickBigsmoke And?

@rsr789

Жыл бұрын

@@NickBigsmoke EVERYTHING has gone up, it's called GREEDFLATION.

@stephenshuman1

2 күн бұрын

@@coletrickle1775and Sam Seder is wrong and Peter schiff is right

I'm binging Sam Seder videos finding these old ass videos. As a woman myself, I cannot even begin to describe how angry this guy made me. The way he talks about what women should/will do in this or that situation just pissed me off to no end. The inhumanity of his beliefs is astounding.

Neither of them took recognition of a key provision of Obamacare, which is that you can't discriminate based on genders or preexisting conditions. How many times did I hear whining about how men's plans have to cover birth control and mammograms, and women's plans have to cover prostate exams. So since the cost for men and women is being pooled and divided equally, your decision to add another man vs another woman is spread across the entire insurance company population, not your company individually.

Peter Schiff has an amazing capacity for stating a simplistic argument, listening to a clear refutation of the argument, then restating his original argument it as if it had not just been refuted.

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

Sam didn’t refute anything Peter said.

@CutThroatJuggalo

3 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

@@CutThroatJuggalo and premiums went up since then just like peter predicted.

@CutThroatJuggalo

3 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 there were multiple times in which Sam brought up SPECIFIC data proving Peter wrong and every time Peter responded with what basically amounts to, "nuh uh".

@CutThroatJuggalo

3 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 premiums were going up at a faster rate prior to the aca. Premiums were going to keep going up regardless and that wasn't exactly a secret.

Peter Schiff would cut his vocabulary in half if he stopped using the word "I".

@josephpeeler5434

4 жыл бұрын

Seder is economically illiterate. Contraceptive makers do not have to compete on price when a third party pays. Of course costs go up when consumer is removed from price.

@JS-mc3ik

3 жыл бұрын

Sam would cut his IQ in half if he lost a point

@alienboss7150

3 жыл бұрын

Sam would cut his vocabulary in half if he stopped using the word “uhh”

@ivandafoe5451

3 жыл бұрын

@@josephpeeler5434 Ass-backwards wrong. Buying in bulk lowers the cost per unit for almost everything. The consumer buying one of something pays pays more than if they could buy in bulk (which they can and do for many products). Producers are always willing to compete on pricing when dealing with customers making bulk purchases because both parties save money with such transactions.

@elijahrivera2858

3 жыл бұрын

@@ivandafoe5451 depends if you have enough raw materials to bulk buy and sell. You need mote capitalism for that. You actually helped make his point lol.

"that employer will still have to deduct a portion of cash to pay for such preventative care" Sure, at first. But in the long run it will cost him less, since preventative care will help the patient avoid future expensive procedures that will cost even more. That was Sam's point. So far I haven't heard a good enough refutation of this argument, and I wish I had.

@cointomato9768

Жыл бұрын

All evidence says other wise, if you payed attention, the reason sam got stumped during the talk about oil changes, is that insurance doesn't provide that because net profit isn't sufficient and people can change there oil and fix the problems themselves, the same as women can buy there own birth control

@rsr789

Жыл бұрын

@@cointomato9768 Car companies offer warranties. Many car companies offer complementary maintenance nowadays for a certain amount of time / miles. Why? Because it lessens the chance of them having to spend more money on larger warranty claims if the car is properly maintained...!

In Peter's mind, he has never been wrong about anything in his life.

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

At least Peter doesn’t divert from the topic with sneaky debate tactics.

@StoveToTheFace

2 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 I don't think you understand what sneaky is.

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

@@StoveToTheFace fine. Change sneaky to “dishonest”.

@StoveToTheFace

2 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 Now I don't think you know what dishonest means

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

@@StoveToTheFace at about 10:30 after talking about why car insurance companies don’t offer free oil changes for almost 2 minutes, Peter asked “then answer my question: why don’t insurance companies offer free oil changes”…… Sam answered with “..uhhh….car insurance?”. That’s dishonest and sneaky too.

I know this is an old video, but the assertion that a company would reduce a employee's salary by $1000/yr to offset a $500/yr premium increase feels like "saying the quiet part out loud" about capitalism.

@mootant I've often heard employers complaining about women having maternity leave which is disruptive and costly for the business. I'm sure in libertarian paradise they wouldn't to hire any women.

@philippegerondeau4351

2 жыл бұрын

Thats a clear example but you dont agree with Peter lolll

Peter: They're going to have less money because I'll make the decision to dock their pay.

@fadirached2386

3 жыл бұрын

Peter will have no choice because he needs to offset the increase of the premiums that he pays.

@hennap8204

3 жыл бұрын

@@fadirached2386 he will dock their pay so he can offset the increase of the premium he pays....in order to maintain his own level of wealth and hence own lifestyle. He'd rather dock their pay than let a greater portion of the company's profits go to the workers.

@fadirached2386

3 жыл бұрын

@@hennap8204 Of course! The CEO of a company has much more responsibility and hassle when compared to his/her employees. Peter's employees didn't take the risk of starting a company. Peter's employees didn't put in the 100 hour work weeks. Peter's employees didn't build a company from scratch. Of course Peter is not going to take a pay cut. Why should he? He's earned that money.

@hennap8204

3 жыл бұрын

@@fadirached2386 but in response to a change in the law (or other such imposition) Peter isn't willing to share the burden of that imposition, he will saddle it onto the workers. Surely if he's going to cut their pay then he should cut his own level of wealth in an appropriate proportion as to cover the increase in premium. Seems fair to me - everyone taking a proportionate hit rather than just the workers. Of course it is in Peter's self interest to not take such a cut I'm not denying that. But if it's okay for him to act in his own self interest then it is okay for the workers to act in their self interest and (try to) saddle the cost onto him. OR it is okay for lawmakers to act in their self interest and offer benefits to the majority in order to win re-election. If you think it okay for Peter to act in his self interest then that goes for workers and lawmakers alike.

@elijahrivera2858

3 жыл бұрын

@@hennap8204 He's not cutting it from his pocket. He's cutting it from running his businesses. his own supply chain would reduce quality if products. Ruining everyone's savings, profits, and investments is incentivising more criminal activity, inflation and poverty. Soscialism doesn't work broski. Just accept it. Free market will help everyone's life go up steadily. You need to get rid of the patent industry or reduce it's power massively.

there's no reason for assuming wealth is a good measurement of judgement at ANY time

Peter Schiff in a nutshell: "I don't need data"

@pennyawful861

4 жыл бұрын

Yes basic math and logic doesn't require data. 2+2=4 doesn't require data.

@joshuaadkins7382

4 жыл бұрын

@@pennyawful861 2+2 is data tho.

@iu4743

4 жыл бұрын

Joshua Adkins 2+2 is math not data

@LordBoston123

3 жыл бұрын

well empiricism is insufficient in terms of economics, really

@laurendaryani4893

3 жыл бұрын

@beastmode23rd gaming What?

"make an eduacated choice on their own" The educated choice for companies in this situation is to get the cheap meds for their female employees because paying for medication is a lot easier than paying someone on leave from work for several months or trying to make up production loss due to PMS related pains slowing down female workers. The only way to insure NO loss of production is to only hire men. So you either have Sexism or varying degrees of production losses. Make an educated choice.

ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. (besides the fact that certain contraceptives are used to treat actual medical conditions, such as pcos...)

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

And yet, investing in prevention doesn’t make insurance companies money. It help patients pocketbooks. No doubt. But only if the patients actually do it. insurance companies don’t save at all. Because everybody is different. Nobody does preventative care that doesn’t want to do preventative care. If you are horrible at going to the gym and eating right, you won’t do it for free either.

@wvu05

Жыл бұрын

​@@firstlast9916 Insurance companies do save, because they don't have to pay for something much more expensive down the road. For example: if you pay $50/month for contraception, you'll save tens of thousands of dollars in not having to pay for childbirth at a hospital.

@firstlast9916

Жыл бұрын

@@wvu05 pretty sure insurance companies have accountants that crunch these numbers everyday to make sure the company doesn’t go bankrupt. Are you saying you know better than the people that do the actual calculations?

@wvu05

Жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 Last time I checked, Peter Thiel isn't an actuary. It doesn't take a PhD to figure out that not having to pay for a five-figure childbirth every couple of years and cover the extra children who are born costs a company a lot less than covering the pill.

@firstlast9916

Жыл бұрын

@@wvu05 so how are insurance companies still in business? If they don’t know how to compete in the insurance market because they don’t understand math, then they would all be bankrupt by now. Explain how they compete with insurance companies that know about this secret of yours.

I love how Schiff constantly says 'Let me finish' after *He's* interrupting Sam.

This didn't age well. Premiums won't go up 😂

@DiggsMixing-nx4zl

3 жыл бұрын

Sam said premiums would definitely go up but not for that reason. Are you guys all dense or are you under 16

Libertarians.... Before the ACA, any woman who had difficulty affording birth control almost certainly didn't have any insurance. So insurance companies didn't have to worry about them becoming pregnant because they weren't covered. Any woman who had insurance, either purchased themselves or provided by their employer, were also likely to be paid well enough to afford to purchase birth control themselves. So again, insurance companies didn't have to worry about them becoming unintentionally pregnant. Now, with the ACA, many women who can't otherwise afford birth control can now get insurance because the insurance is so heavily subsidized. So, while it wasn't in the insurance companies financial interests to cover birth control in the past, it is now. This isn't rocket science...

@silentotto5099

9 жыл бұрын

whyamimrpink78 "Due to the ACA rates are going up higher than expected.....as predicted." Considering that insurance rates are rising at a much slower rate after the implementation of the ACA, the only response that comment deserves is to call you a liar.

@silentotto5099

9 жыл бұрын

whyamimrpink78 "Please do some research on your own." I have. Overall, insurance rates are rising at a much slower rate than they have for decades. You're full of shit.

@davidgeorge4262

9 жыл бұрын

If you consider the deductibles that will be skyrocketing, then yes, your healthcare will be more expensive very. Fuck the ACA. You are simply going to pay more for healthcare.

@davidgeorge4262

9 жыл бұрын

The insurance companies have already sounded the alarm. Did none of you hear that the cost to insure the sickest of the sick is much more than anticipated? And who do you think will pay for them? Not sure about you but I was perfectly happy with my healthplan. If insuring the sickest of the sick was such an issue then rework Medicaid. There is a money grab on the ACA somewhere and that is what you all should be pissed about.

@silentotto5099

9 жыл бұрын

whyamimrpink78 "Before the ACA was even passed healthcare cost were steady." That comment is obvious proof that you don't know what the fuck you're on about. >Ignore

Djeez, this guy went mask off really quickly. The disgust for the working poor becomes palpable after 15 minutes.

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

How could the poor work if he doesn’t give them a job? The poor don’t employ the poor.

@IMatchoNation

3 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 I don't know, how much would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

@@IMatchoNation depends on how much the market pays the woodchuck. If chucked wood is cheap, he will probably produce as much as a McDonald’s employee does.

@IMatchoNation

3 жыл бұрын

@@firstlast9916 Well there you have it!

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

@@IMatchoNation exactly

hey mr seder I thought you said premiums wouldnt go up. I guess you were wrong.

@sovietsandvich8443

5 жыл бұрын

CuriousSavage of course he was wrong. Just like housing and college tuitions, the government drove up healthcare prices through subsidies.

@VitalVampyr

2 жыл бұрын

@@sovietsandvich8443 Healthcare prices were rising rapidly before the ACA, that was one of the main reasons healthcare reform was considered important. Housing and post-secondary education prices are driven up by lack of supply. Literally everyone needs a home so don't even try and argue that the lack of supply is due to subsidies driving up demand. Government subsidies are extremely effective in keeping the cost of food and fuel low.

@sovietsandvich8443

2 жыл бұрын

@@VitalVampyr healthcare was heavily regulated well before the ACA. Look at the cost of healthcare back to the 50s. The price skyrocketed after the government passed Medicare/Medicade and significant regulations in healthcare and medicine. Your argument about education and housing is not substantiated at all. The price of housing from 2000 to 2008 went up about 50%. The increase in adult population was much less. The reason why housing prices went up was because the government made it possible for people who shouldn’t have been buying houses to easily buy houses and participate in large capital gains. This was done through subsidized loans and low interest rates. Banks had to loan to more people to make money and many of the loans were guaranteed anyway. The initial increase in demand caused faster growth in housing, which made buying new real estate (especially with cheap money) very lucrative. This is how bubbles are formed. For education, it is true that the number of Americans going to college has more than doubled since the 80s, but remember that the number of colleges has increased by around 50% on that time and the existing colleges have significantly increased the number of acceptances each year. College tuition since the 80s has increased 1200% also. Even if no new colleges had opened, tuition has still outpaced the number of new college students significantly. The reason why college tuition is so high is because government floods the market with demand using guaranteed loans. Colleges can charge as much as they want because students can borrow as much as they need. And the market is unlikely to improve because of how uninformed and misled these 18 year olds are about the costs and importance of college.

@EricKoonitsky-bd3hl

3 ай бұрын

@elwoodwinn You thought wrong. Bad try though. 18:18

Peter Schiff was trying to say that the costs of contraception have to come from somewhere... either the insurance company has to raise costs to their customers or lower the wages of their workers... whatever it is, it ends up hurting hurting the little guy. Aside from a considerable wider range of people being affected negatively, certain women will have contraception (at a higher cost). Keep in mind, about 62% of women between ages of 15-44 are the only ones who use contraception, so all other women bare the costs as well. Although this goes against Seder's point, I have nothing against his intentions. It's the results of his "good" intentions that I have a beef with. Always remember, that nothing is free, somebody pays for it somehow. Anyone who tells you otherwise, either doesn't know that or is lying to you.

Just like Hayek another Austrian said "never be verified or falsified by reference to facts. All that we can and must verify is the presence of our assumptions in the particular case." Even quoting Peter Schiff said "I don't need data."

Someone want to link the study? I tried looking up the study and only found a citation of it that says it considers "direct and indirect costs" but doesn't go into detail about how these costs are measured. I want to peer review the study.

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

I wouldn’t be surprised if they deleted the study after it was peer reviewed. The reviews must have been really bad.

Damn that guys says 'I' a lot.

@mackhomie6

5 жыл бұрын

Kind of hypocritical of you. You couldn't even make it through a single sentence without using it.

@mackhomie6

4 жыл бұрын

@ThisIsMyRealName what the hell are you babbling about Edit: I was precise, and you don't know what hypocrisy is, evidently.

@ivandafoe5451

3 жыл бұрын

@@mackhomie6 Wrong...using it once as an example is not "a lot" now is it?

@ivandafoe5451

3 жыл бұрын

Narcissists tend to do that.

@b.g.8373

3 жыл бұрын

@@ivandafoe5451 why the hell are you asking me?

Lol this is the perfect libertarian “What if I decide to pay my employee less for birth control, doesn’t that hurt them?” Yes…if you are mean and do a mean thing to someone they are worse off

@kylemiller6560

Жыл бұрын

"Sam, Sam, Sam, Sam....so are you saying that if you kick me in the balls, then the insurance premiums will go up? I don't want that."

@HanginAndBanginBrother

10 ай бұрын

Literally "if i have to pay an extra $500 I'll just pay you $1000 less". Thanks for taking the mask off bud

What a fantastic debate. You conducted yourself with class and distinction and I hope you have more such debates in future. I'm a Libertarian.

In fact, there are numerous studies that show preventive care does not lower long-term costs for insurers. Why? Because, to quote Peter Orszag of the Obama Administration, "healthcare costs are extraordinarily concentrated. If you rank Medicare beneficiaries by their cost, the top 25% of beneficiaries account for 80% of the total cost." In other words, the large majority of people aren't going to be sick, so all those annual preventive tests are money down the drain.

If a business doesnt want to provide health insurance that provides birth control, thats not discrimination or a civil rights violation in the constitution.

Well it's almost been 5 years, is Shiff gonna provide any data to back up the assertions he made in this video that he said he'd bet Sam money on? Or is he just gonna talk on platitudes again with no evidence against Sam's 2 studies

@AfrikaanPrincess

8 жыл бұрын

look it up yourself lazy shit head

@avenuePad

7 жыл бұрын

The Cheeseman Why should we have to scour the internet for some libertarian nonsense that doesn't exist?

@billdipperly6079

6 жыл бұрын

Uh did you not notice Obamacare premium's sky rocketing and abortions rising? Have you been living under a rock?

@ivandafoe5451

3 жыл бұрын

@@billdipperly6079 It wasn't the ACA that raised the premiums, it was the HMOs who took advantage of the flaws in the ACA. Most abortions happen because the mothers can't afford to raise children in this awful economy.

@mattleofric1766

3 жыл бұрын

@@ivandafoe5451 "Which took advantage of the flaws" 😑 Really? That's the same as saying the ACA caused prices to rise but with extra steps. At the end of the day THE ACA CAUSED PRICES TO RISE. I like how you leftards debunk yourselves.

Sam's arguments did not age well in terms of premiums not going up. It's 2019 and every democratic candidate for president with the exception of one is saying Obama care sucks

@lukekastel4443

5 жыл бұрын

Sam said that the premiums would be going up. What are you talking about?

@notthatperson8179

4 жыл бұрын

Also the Republicans sabotaged health insurance co-op backstop funding.

@johnberk9315

3 жыл бұрын

1. Sam says single payer would be better. 2. Premiums increased slower than they would've without Obama care 3. TRUMP eliminating the individual mandate accelerated rises in premiums.

@ivandafoe5451

3 жыл бұрын

@@johnberk9315 The ACA was not single payer. It allowed greater access to health insurance by reducing qualification denials but made the colossal mistake of leaving the HMOs as the price-gouging middlemen. Eliminating the individual mandate without initiating a single-payer system forced everyone who now had to have insurance into the predatory clutches of the HMOs, who of course took advantage of the situation to price-gouge even more.

@johnberk9315

3 жыл бұрын

@@ivandafoe5451 i didn't say it was?

10 years later, birth control is still $600-900 a month

@NickBigsmoke

Жыл бұрын

premiums are higher though

@rsr789

Жыл бұрын

Because the GQP hate women (both the male and female members of the GQP).

@bereal6590

9 ай бұрын

That is a ridiculous amount of money! How poorer Americans cope I don't know. Your right wingers keep you oppressed, it's awful

If he was shown supporting data he most likely would have disregarded it altogether.

Here, in the future, we can see the evolution of how these conservative radio guys argue. At least then, the results of a study made him pause for a minute but since he’s a sophist, the axioms he’s picked and the way he understands them make that conflicting information unusable and he ignores the study. Now a guy like him would be perfectly comfortable calling anybody who quotes such a study a fool. And all his listeners both then and now would consider his argument simple common sense.

@brianremington6049

4 жыл бұрын

I think it’s a defense mechanism. If it’s difficult for you to deal with complex stuff, you can avoid feeling bad about it by believing everything is very simple - economics 101 - and you can use your assumptions to understand anything.

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

The study doesn’t exist anymore. It was peer reviewed and discredited. No company makes money on preventative care. Individuals benefit from preventative care. But companies providing free preventative care is money down the drain. If you have bad health habits, you won’t care if prevention is going to help you. You can’t force free stuff down peoples throats.

If you wish to see a system that really works you should look at Finland for the road to success. They're operating their schools under some very strict non-consumer based forms where the individual choice isn't close to the second spot over priorities. They've increased teachers salaries and they've given them a longer education and providing further educations to keep them updated on the latest in academia. They've put down some pretty harsh rules of requirements for the teachers.

This is like the essence of libertarian thinking: research says something government mandated saves money, they say "that shouldn't happen because 'marginalism' and 'classical economics' and 'supply and demand' and 'blah blah' and this and that". Well, if your "theory" doesn't bear out in reality or make any good predictions, who gives a fuck about your theory of what "should" happen.

@oscarg8449

2 жыл бұрын

Or maybe you should question those researchers if they don’t have a rationale for their findings. The essence of statists is to manipulate data and clutch on to that as much as possible until someone calls them on their bullshit. Then they desperately try to manifacture some «new»(read old lies packaged differently), and the cycle repeats itself, all because of some people who either haven’t read history properly or are not willing to accept that the government is useless when it comes to figuring out what’s best for people. The latter are usually a bunch of jealous powerhungry narcissists.

@cjdabes

2 жыл бұрын

@@oscarg8449 Alternatively, maybe the libertarians making these positive assertions should try producing some actual evidence for anything they say, rather than just saying "my intuition says X can't be the case" when someone produces evidence that X is the case. This is why people who think like American libertarians are as scientifically illiterate as creationists.

@oscarg8449

2 жыл бұрын

@@cjdabes We see the «great» outcomes of mmt on the economy today. The US is broke. Europe has a stagnating economy, although in better shape than the US. Japan has been a disaster the last decades. Economy is growing at a shocking 2% if we’re lucky. The rich are getting very rich through cheap money flooding into the stock market. I think you will find that those who have actually read up on history are the libertarians. I don’t mind data, but I have a problem with stupid people trying to comprehend what the data actually means. A little question for you. How can we best stimulate economic growth in your view?

@cjdabes

2 жыл бұрын

@@oscarg8449 What's with the 《》 symbols you're using? Is this the new iteration of the (((echoes)))? People give way too much weight to written history and overplay its ability to inform how a modern world should be organized. However, my earlier statements had nothing to do with my policy positions and were merely commentary on what I think is observable - namely, libertarian ideas are purely ideological and not at all driven by any regard for data. You may want to reflexively accuse people who censure the American strain of pro-capitalist libertarianism of being "statists", but you ironically reveal your ignorance of historical schools of thought. In actuality, most anti-capitalist perspectives have spawned from anti-state philosophies ranging from the radically pro-society mutualism of Kropotkin to the radically anti-society egoism of Max Stirner. If you're looking for an actually radically liberating conception of the world, I recommend opening Stirner's "The Unique and Its Property" (Wolfi Landstreicher translation) and giving it a read; I'd recommend it all, but feel free to skip over the section "Part 1: Humanity" if you just want the good stuff.

He understood the housing crisis when everyone else laughed at him. You really have no clue what you're talking about.

@Lightningkuriboh

3 жыл бұрын

Nah

5 years on and Peter Schiff was proven wrong on every single point he said, not just the points Sam brought up, that is unbelievable how shockingly bad he sounds. My God this schiff guy was all about the feels over facts.

@robinsss

5 жыл бұрын

the Hobby lobby company beat the federal gov't in court so what do you mean?

@robinsss

5 жыл бұрын

by the way, Peter asked where is the authorization for the government to force a company to offer healthcare Sam said the civil rights act...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….how about a constitutional authorization

@MrMattieRich that's the difference in our understanding though, my avocation is that health insurance companies should INCLUDE covering contraception in their packages- that's not getting something for free that's just demanding a sensible level of accountability from the devi- I mean health insurance companies.

Where is the empirical evidence that employers will be cutting salaries to employees because the price of medical insurance will go up. In fact, if that were the case, nobody would get a raise because it costs more.

9:50 Sam says it's definitely $500 per year for birth control. Anyone can, without a prescription, go down to walmart and get the pill for $10 for a 1 month supply. Over the course of a year, that's $120 ... WITHOUT INSURANCE. On an insurance plan, it's probably half that cost with copay. There is absolutely NO reason to force people to offer free birth control.

"Look at how Keynesian economics screwed us in 08, and how we're getting worse despite their many witchdoctor cures over the past three years (not to mention the economic devastation in Europe)!" Keynesian economics has been abandoned since 1970s recession with new economic policy for Europe & USA of neoliberal economic policy with advent Reagan & Thatcher.

@cvargggg5921

3 жыл бұрын

We still do monetarism in a way. It's saddening and unfortunate that libertarians (austrians) and keynesians won't unite to see who's the real demon (Milton Friedman).

@JB27888

3 жыл бұрын

@@cvargggg5921 We have heavily pursued Keynesian economics since the early 2000s...and it clearly hasn't worked well!

@cvargggg5921

3 жыл бұрын

@@JB27888 We clearly haven't. We don't even follow all the policies that Keynes even wanted unless you wanna call fiscal policy in-itself a inherently Keynesian policy.

@JB27888

3 жыл бұрын

@@cvargggg5921 1) stop liking your own comments 2) injecting $10 trillion into the economy through monetary and fiscal stimulus in 1 year is New Keynesian economics.

@cvargggg5921

3 жыл бұрын

@@JB27888 No it isn't, lol. 1. I can if I want in this liberal hellhole 2. Keynes never asked for monetary stimulus nor fiscal stimulus during peace time.

Sam Seder thinks your auto insurance premiums would go down if they paid for your oil changes. After all, preventative maintenance saves money, so why wouldn't insurance companies pay for them? Hilarious.

@SJSharksChoke

10 жыл бұрын

LMAO. He got absolutely destroyed when he brought up preventative maintenance and car insurance.

let me ask you something, when someone asks you "how are you doing?" do have have to allege they are attacking and ask 20 questions before you figure out they really just wanted to know how you were doing?

Why the hell should insurance companies be involved in the birth control business? Birth control is a lifestyle choice, not a health issue.

I'd be that mad at the world if my name was Peter, too.

@julianjanssen5499

3 жыл бұрын

Well, he is a dick.

sams all like erhhh uhhhh ahhhh urhhh ahhh.

@mchevre

8 жыл бұрын

LOL he was... he's much more natural on his own show. I think he was nervous here.

@mchevre

7 жыл бұрын

***** The thing is, Sam isn't an economist. Most right-wing fiscal conservatives (of the not-libertarian type) are very well versed in classical liberal economic theory. So the problem for someone like Sam Seder is that without a very strong background in economics, its hard to debate the finer points. Also, Sam has a tendency to challenge classical liberal economic arguments with basic Keynesian arguments, which is fine I suppose, but right-wingers are very well prepared to demolish Keynesian arguments - it's pretty much their raison d'être. If Sam came prepared with solid Marxian counterarguments, he might hold up. But he normally doesn't go there. (Note that Marxian, as opposed to Marxist, indicates the use of Marx's critique of capitalism without necessarily subscribing to Marx's theses on socialism/communism.)

All of these people who cite "basic econ" should've probably at least audited an advanced econ class

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

Do they teach “free stuff is free” in advanced econ?

Peter Schiff’s schtick hasn’t changed, all he does is talk over everyone no matter what show he appears.

@axelhenriksen129

2 жыл бұрын

99% of interactions include talking over people. Seder talked over Schiff just as many times.

@sspbrazil

2 жыл бұрын

@@axelhenriksen129 Schiff talks over EVERYONE! He enjoys hearing the sound of his own bullshit.

16:42 best debate I've ever heard.

@salmonvariety5896

3 жыл бұрын

Haha, I agree. I'm seven years too late.

it's impossible how ignorant one man can be about economics! "if it's more expensive to hire women than men would you say this would negatively affect the chances of women getting hired?" "no because there has been no study about that..." okay so you just don't use your brain then? just leave it up to the studies to tell you what to think is this guy for real?!

@democrazy69

9 жыл бұрын

People's brains used to believe blood letting cured diseases. Scientific studies disproved that notion. Should we ignore those studies and believe in blood letting again?

@djsae

9 жыл бұрын

Sotai You're talking about studies actually done. We're talking about studies not yet done. Not all studies need to be done. I don't need to study how many gun shots I can take to the abdomen before I feel pain. I'm pretty sure of the result.

@democrazy69

9 жыл бұрын

djsae "those studies aren't done yet" "those studies don't need to be done" cool story brah

Does sam not understand that corporations are profit seeking entities. If providing free birth control increased profits why would a person in business for profit not act in a manner to increase his net profits. And sam was INCORRECT as clearly predicted premiums went up.

The most telling statement out of Schiffs mouth at 21:46 "I don't need data"

@JohnSmith-ts3pj

10 жыл бұрын

It's true, he doesn't need that particular data, because all he needs to know is that insurance companies will charge him more for contraceptive care. Whether or not the insurance companies will save money is irrelevant; what matters is whether the insurance companies THINK that providing contraception will save them money, and they thought that it would not. Peter Schiff does not control the insurance rates.

@NicholasWongCQ

9 жыл бұрын

jesushatesyoutoo sometimes common sense is all that's needed.

"WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO PAY?!" I'll never understand this mindset.

@BarrySlisk

5 жыл бұрын

That's because you want others to pay.

@d3l3tes00n

5 жыл бұрын

@@BarrySlisk I think it's crazy that we don't want to take care of each other.

@BarrySlisk

5 жыл бұрын

@@d3l3tes00n People should take care of themselves if possible. If not why are you so sure people will not help?

@d3l3tes00n

5 жыл бұрын

@@BarrySlisk Humans didn't get this far by people only focusing on themselves. Americans have an issue with selfishness.

@BarrySlisk

5 жыл бұрын

@@d3l3tes00n Actually we did. The welfare state is relatively new. Before the 60's people where pretty much on their own even in Europe.

It's been five years!

@CPUGaming

5 жыл бұрын

Check your math lol

5 жыл бұрын

And the funny thing is that Sam was right lol

@GrahamBarth

4 жыл бұрын

What a surprise!

@integral3452

4 жыл бұрын

@@westg463 watch again.

@Fragenzeichenplatte

3 жыл бұрын

@@westg463 STD rates didn't go up. Unwanted pregnancies didn't go up. Cost of all contraceptives didn't go up.

Part 3 of 4 Now there's a whole plethora of insurance jargon I could go into but for all intents and purposes, it all really just boils down to risk. The bigger the risk group is, the lower adverse selection is, which in turn lowers risk to the insurer, which then allows actuaries for insurers to lower premium payments for customers. (continued)

i have no idea...but why were they talking about $500/year, and then Seder said around $900 ?? they were talking about birth control....

HOLY SHIT, SAM. THE DEMAND CURVE IS DOWNWARD SLOPING!! YOU DONT NEED DATA TO KNOW 2+2=4

@RayLRhodes

3 жыл бұрын

2+2=4 is definitionally true. Schiff made a claim, so it's on him to prove it.

Thank you for proceeding to teach a Financial Management major basic economics. I meant explain how Sam Seder doesn't know anything about Supply and Demand or basic economics.

@blamtasticful

4 жыл бұрын

Yes because if you don't require a company to provide a service they definitely won't try and cut costs anyways. Lol what a dumb philosophy.

So essentially the worker is asking for a raise (in form of health benefit) and to not lose that worker he accepts. But if every woman in his company did that he would have to fire a couple, and would be more hesitent to accepting woman.

30,000k for vaginal birth (No complications) and 50,000 for a C-Section ( No complications). Prenatal care is always covered, average 2,000 ( No complications)

No, Dude, you're not going to *have* to cut their pay, you're going to *choose* to cut their pay. In lieu of something like, let's say, increasing productivity for example. There's a difference. And let's keep it real...You're only gonna cut their pay because your fee-fees are hurt, and you wanna lash out.

Wow, this is brutal. Hope Seder recover from this cause he was DEMOLISHED in this debate.

Is it possible that providing free contraception to adults doesn't significantly reduce pregnancy rates? You seem to assume that there are droves of working adults who can't afford contraception so they go without and are getting pregnant on accident driving up the cost of premiums. Imagine a world where people actually valued birth control enough to pay for it themselves.

The point about government spending after WW2 is that Keynesians predicted an economic bust because the spending was decreasing so rapidly, but what really happened was an economic boom.

Sam you had a few good points, but peter makes a lot more sense. Making it free would take all competition out of the market, and big pharma could charge whatever they feel like. That's why I've seen receipts on base for a $35 bolt that I could have gotten at lowes for $0.50. I think your hearts in the right place Sam but you haven't seen true government in action. It's cumbersome, expensive, and ineffective.

@DMAN123223

10 жыл бұрын

The affordable care act addresses costs as part of an agreement between government and healthcare companies. By expanding healthcare to more of the population, this increases the pool of customers health companies receive thus making them profitable while still keeping prices relatively low. So no they couldn't charge what they feel like because they would be breaking the deal they get.

Sam Seder got absolutely DESTROYED by Schiff, especially when it came to preventative car maintenance like oil changes lowering insurance rates. Sam really embarrassed himself in this debate.

@daveg4327

10 жыл бұрын

I'm glad he posted a video, since it clearly showed him befuddled and confused, and didn't know exactly how to respond. Unless you count logical fallacy in defense of women a legitimate argument (I would name them but there are too many)

The same logic Peter Schiff is using: Why should I pay for vision? Glasses cost money! "Yes, Peter, but if you have workers who can see with corrective lenses, they'll be better able to perform their jobs."

however, the fact remains most births take place in a hospital for a reason: birth can be dangerous without correct procedures and knowledge, making birth a medical issue, not a lifestyle choice.

Peter Schiff said more access to birth control would lead to higher unwanted pregnancy rates. His further arguments are invalid. The End.

@miketheman12100

10 жыл бұрын

lmao, how? Wouldn't that easy access allow people to be less conscious with there decision in having unprotected sex? Unprotected sex >>> pregnancy?

@WhiteFireEyes

10 жыл бұрын

You don't seem to understand that people have a personal incentive not to get pregnant, therefor the price of the BIRTH CONTROL is not determinant in the thought process as to whether or not to actually use it. If you think women would neglect to take birth control pills just because they didn't pay for it directly then you have issues.

@miketheman12100

10 жыл бұрын

My sister managed to and she was on birth control. I'm just saying if there's more incentive for carefree sex its more possible to become pregnant.

@WhiteFireEyes

10 жыл бұрын

If she forgot her birth control that probably meant she wasn't that concerned about avoiding the pregnancy. There is no need for further incentive to have sex, the act of sex is enough incentive by itself. Planning for this reality is the reason behind making birth control readily available.

@miketheman12100

10 жыл бұрын

people can make it readily available to themselves with out forcing others to pay for it. They are responsible for their sexual lifestyle.

11:20, lol, Sam got owned on his silly car insurance analogy. I'm not too sure why he's proud of this video.

@WhiteFireEyes

10 жыл бұрын

Peter Shiff said more access to birth control would lead to higher unwanted pregnancy rates. His further arguments are invalid. The End.

@FishboneMash

10 жыл бұрын

Tyllor Parker That was a weird assertion by Schiff, but it obviously doesn't invalidate the rest of what he's saying. Is that really how you think when you hear a debate? If I was like you, then I would stop listening after the very first argument by Seder. My god, I don't think I've ever heard thinking more wishful; the government has to force companies to cut their costs? Sure, he can assert that the employers are religious and that's why they can accept the "cost" of not providing free contraceptives (assuming that the provision really reduces costs, which it doesn't). But then any employer who is not religious will be at a competetive advantage, and the religious firms will be whipped by the stock market until they cut their crap and start providing the stuff. The fact that it doesn't happen should make him question whether it really reduces cost...

@WhiteFireEyes

10 жыл бұрын

Fishbone Mash You don't seem to understand that he said that particular phrase as if he knew exactly what he is talking about and as if the correlation was directly obvious to everyone else. But considering it is a direct contradiction of REALITY, yes that does call into question any of his further arguments. More contraception equals more unwanted pregnancies? Just think about it for a short time and you'll realize you are absolutely wrong and shouldn't bother me with critiquing my assertions unless you can prove he isn't full of crap.

@FishboneMash

10 жыл бұрын

Tyllor Parker To be honest, I think that the publicity Schiff got around the start of the current recession went to his head, so now he'll occasionally spout weird arguments like that without even thinking about it, just to strengthen his case (which in this case obviously failed). But still. He made a bunch of other arguments, all of which were reasonable and correct. What about them? And furthermore, Seder either lies or is just wrong about the cost of birth control. Check any website; if you steer clear of the brand name pills, a year's worth of generic pills will cost you a couple hundred bucks. You have to buy the really expensive pills to get anywhere close to 900 dollars.

@WhiteFireEyes

10 жыл бұрын

Peter Schiff thinks the dissatisfied employees can manage to change jobs like a well organized game of musical chairs, if they don't like the insurance options provided currently. Peter Schiff thinks the direct comparison of auto insurance and health insurance somehow invalidates Sam Seder's argument about preventative medicine. The difference being quite obvious considering that auto insurance has the concept of being at fault. Health insurance doesn't have that concept in it and so the direct comparison between auto companies offering oil changes and health companies offering preventative medicine is nonsensical. Peter Schiff thinks the women of this country are idiots. Apparently it's either the pill or condoms and women would be neglectful of their entire future in the act of neglecting their birth control pills because they didn't actually pay anything "out of pocket". Also apparently the minute cost of subsidizing a woman's ACCESS to birth control is a deciding factor in whether or not to hire individuals who are on average more productive and intelligent than their male counterparts? The added value to hiring females more than makes up for any added insurance costs.

Peter Schiff has a point. If oil change decreases the cost of car insurance, then why don't they offer it for free.

@marshallkobe

3 жыл бұрын

Sounds like shifty has given you a business model. Run with it! Anyway car insurance doesn’t cover breakdowns, it covers accidents involving other people or entities.

@kimmydaisymaltese1111

3 жыл бұрын

@@marshallkobe - but if oil change/ brake fluid change prevented car accidents, the car insurance would jump at the opportunity.

@firstlast9916

2 жыл бұрын

@@marshallkobe you missed the point. Why aren’t car insurance companies offering free oil changes if it would save them money? Are car insurance companies not interest in more money?

@coletrickle1775

Жыл бұрын

It doesn't, it just shows he is a moron willing to make shit up.

@coletrickle1775

Жыл бұрын

​@@firstlast9916 Insurance companies save no money if you get oil changes or not. They only care if you hit things with your car. If your car is broken down and can't hit things, they save money. You should all immediately stop talking about cars like you know anything about the industry. You clearly do not. I'm a master ASE certified tech, 30 years working and building race cars. I know this shit, and you say laughably stupid things about auto insurance.

There is no Nobel prize in math.

Sam, you should do another debate with Mr. Schiff. You got absolutely destroyed, but it was quite entertaining. Cheers.

I think Peter clearly won this debate. The point about car insurance and oil change is telling, if it was really saving money for insurance companies then they would do it by themselves. And if they are not then another insurance company could just offer the benefit for a profit (and undercut their competition) rather than forcing them to do it. If society is going to give free birth control let's not lie to ourselves and pretend that we are saving money, we are just doing it because we want to, not because it saves money. I'm fine if they would frame the argument like that, but trying to prove that it isn't going to cost money is weak.

Supply and demand has been proven as fact. Saying supply and demand is theory, is like saying gravity is theory.

First of all, how can it be universally true that it doesn't pay off to provide contraceptives? Someone employing a 60 year old librarian would probably not see any return on providing contraceptives because 60 year old librarians usually don't get knocked up, whereas some chick at McDonald's has a higher risk of getting pregnant. Given that this statement is true, how can you say that it is universally profitable to provide contraceptives?

watching Sam destroying libertarians is my new favourite activity on youtube :D

@dtho6231

3 жыл бұрын

He was dead wrong here. He said premiums wouldn't go up.......LMAO.

@SchiwiM

3 жыл бұрын

@@dtho6231 Sam is still more right than any libertarian.

@cvargggg5921

3 жыл бұрын

@@SchiwiM I found better arguments on /pol/ against libertarians but Seder did a decent job.

@JS-mc3ik

3 жыл бұрын

Destroy who? Leftists don’t even understand supply and demand😂 this vid did not age well for comrade sam

@StoveToTheFace

2 жыл бұрын

@@dtho6231 🤦‍♂️ seriously? They went up because we don't have M4A. I'm no fan of Obama but the costs went up with Trump. Libertarians don't understand the need for government they are the worst of both the left and the right. They are basically old teenagers that never grew up.

This is what you get when you have a legit entrepreneurial business owner vs. a clown who lives in fantasyland. There is never a free lunch. And those young, enthusiastic supporters of Obamacare are currently finding that out the hard way... and I don't think they're too happy about it.

@smaakjeks

5 жыл бұрын

The best countries in the world to live in have universal healthcare. They don't rely on lunch being free, and they exist outside fantasy land; right here, in the real world.

@Tiiimo7

5 жыл бұрын

...they're both entrepreneurs...

@smaakjeks

5 жыл бұрын

@Tiago Cabrita If you could stop lying, that would be nice.

@smaakjeks

5 жыл бұрын

@Tiago Cabrita Do I need more what? "Rad" slogans from 90's after school specials? No thanks, I'm all stocked up. There are no countries on this Earth where you are arrested for misgendering someone. No one in the history of the world has ever been arrested for it. If you respond to this post here, you will not be able to provide a name of someone who was arrested for it. What you'll do instead will be tedious I'm sure.

@smaakjeks

5 жыл бұрын

@Tiago Cabrita Though this seems like a harsh reaction, she did not merely misgender someone. Also, the UK has strict anti-defamation/discrimination laws in general; not merely about gender. People are getting arrested for defamation or discrimination. Maybe that's what you meant. Or maybe you don't know what you're talking about. I hope you have better examples, and examples from every country run on progressive policies.

Employers should not be able to control their employees' sex lives or medical decisions. One of the reasons to require insurance companies to cover birth control is that it prevents the employer from making that decision for the worker.

@firstlast9916

3 жыл бұрын

Employers decide whether women use birth control? Didn’t know that. Do they also decide if women eat sandwiches and pizza?

I am not understanding Seder argument. The insurance company would have offered the free birth control for all institutions that was not against the use of it for religious reasons. They did not offer it for free to all other intuitions because it drive up the cost. They also would have raised the cost on the religious institution that refused the free birth control.

So peter Schiff destroyed him with... Basic economics? Sam is a joke.

@frankpontone2139

4 жыл бұрын

Sexual Schiff defeated Sexual Seder.

@xy-rv5yo

4 жыл бұрын

Frank Pontone what?

Poor people are just people who haven't worked hard enough or are smart enough to earn a livable wage. = Libertardian mindset.

@mgrayp22

10 жыл бұрын

Rich people only got to where they are by oppressing poor people. = Progressive Mindset.

@jesushatesyoutoo

10 жыл бұрын

Marcus Pettit Really, then why are so many of the top richest people in America Progressive? Gates, Jobs, Buffet, etc.

@johnydiala2492

10 жыл бұрын

Marcus Pettit Many, but not all. The Walton family, for example, do definitely oppress poor people. Bill Gates, on the other hand, is much more generous. I just believe that wealthy people shouldn't be allowed to drive around in their Ferraris while the rest of us struggle. Is it theft? Sure. In my view, however, letting millions of people go without food, water, housing, and adequate healthcare is a much larger moral crime than "stealing" 5 million dollars from a person already making 10 million.

@mgrayp22

10 жыл бұрын

How does the Walton family oppress poor people? They provide affordable goods to millions of people. They employ more people in the US than anyone else. How is that oppressing them? Do you think people who own sweatshops in third world countries are oppressing the people they employ? Your approach to fixing poverty is to steal from the rich and give to poor. You aren't addressing the underlying problem. You should consider another approach - provide the means for the poor, the opportunity to create wealth and prosperity for themselves and their families. You know the saying: you can give a guy a fish and feed him for a day, or teach him how to fish and feed him for a lifetime.

@johnydiala2492

10 жыл бұрын

Marcus Pettit Yes, I do support stealing from the rich to give to the poor. You know why? Because as bad as theft is, it's not nearly as bad as letting your fellow human being die on the street. I'll admit, Wal-Mart has cheap stuff. However, those cheap goods are only necessary for other poor people. Middle class people can usually buy their products from small businesses. Ideally, poor people would not exist; however, in capitalism they are here to stay, and the cycle of poverty continues. In theory, your ideas are interesting. In reality, though, "giving people the opportunity" to leave poverty doesn't work. Tell that to people living in slums in India; tax cuts and less regulation aren't helping them. Expanding on your analogy, it's futile to teach a poor person how to fish because the rich already have large, expensive machines to fish for them, thus claiming almost all of the fish in the river for themselves.

What makes you say that?

guys sam isn't saying that cost isn't a factor when hiring women, he's saying that it is actually cheaper in the long run to provide birth control (he cited 2 studies). he isn't very clear, but no he isn't ignoring basic economics.

When uhhh it's uhhh after uhhh every uhhh word uhhh. The thoughts lose cohesiveness. Uhhh!

Sam responding to if women buying their own birth control will respond to incentives such as lower price, "I, I, suppose its possible, I mean, I haven't seen the data on it." This is one of the problems Sam has is that he needs to "see the data" on whether people will respond to incentives. Later, Sam asks for data again about the cost of hiring women. Again Peter is correct in saying that "I don't need data - its supply and demand." If the price of hiring women is higher, then there will be less demand for women workers than there otherwise would have been. This is not subject to data analysis, it is a fact of supply and demand. It's convenient for Sam to "need to see the data" in these debates because then you have to come prepared with piles of analysis and research in order to convince him, and he has piles of his own research as well as a little army of researchers to help him during the debate. The fact is, despite Sam's claims, that supply and demand is a logical formula to follow. Peter is correct when he says, "alright give them the facts, don't force them to do something." He is correct when he suggests that if doing something lowers costs, then companies will do this. You do not need to force them to do so. Sam interrupts far more in this debate than he does in any other debate I've seen. This is indicative of how he was feeling the debate was going, I think.

Does Sedar have a business like Peter Schiff and employ 100 employees like Peter Schiff does? Also, Sedar isn't very professional in letting Peter Schiff speak. Peter gave Sammy all the time he wanted to speak his point but when it was Peter's turn, Sammy keeps butting in. You're a class act Sammy!

this terrific explanation takes into account approximately 0.0015% of the actual situation at hand. Thanks! :)

Sam, You're too cool to understand basic Economics

@oscarg8449

Жыл бұрын

@Frank McGovern We see the successes of modern monetary theory right now

Sam is a saint sometimes

The fact that historical evidence shows that higher taxes for the wealthy DON'T hurt economic growth. Also, liberal economic policies for the US have historically been MUCH better for our economy than conservative/republican economic policies. Stock market return, job growth, economic growth, spending growth. All better.

The four basic laws of supply and demand are[1] If demand increases and supply remains unchanged, a shortage altogether, thus leads to a higher equilibrium price If demand decreases and supply remains unchanged, a surplus altogether, thus leads to a lower equilibrium price. If demand remains unchanged and supply increases, a surplus altogether, thus leads to a lower equilibrium price If demand remains unchanged and supply decreases, a shortage altogether, thus leads to a higher equilibrium price

Yeah. "Reason". SMH. Man, I used to drink libertarian kool aid as well but even I recall Libertarians sharper than this tool.

6 years later, Peter's predictions were all wrong because they were baseless.

@tjti2631

5 жыл бұрын

How ?

@robinsss

5 жыл бұрын

but Hobby Lobby beat the gov't on this one

What's your point here? What does "corporate propaganda" have anything to do with this discussion?

Lol Seder said "the preponderance of the evidence is that your premiums are not going to go up."

You can almost feel the thoughts formimg in his head, through the tried and true progressive mantra of "uhhhh."

"I DON'T NEED DATA" - Peter Schiff. Market THEORY trumps real FACTS(?). Libertarians in a nutshell.

Also as he stated premiums shouldnt go up so its still the same cost as it is now. Peter just denied the evidence and made things up

"And from whom did they get their funding? Yeah, that's right, the government! This arrangement has rarely changed." For democracy to work it needs educated population. Has government done bad? Yes. Has government done good? Yes. At the "we the people" must protest when government does wrong like with Iraq War, julian assange, etc & continue to give it props when it does good.