Why do Leftists think Health care for all and Free college is not equality of outcome

[Gouky]

Hello,

I have been watching this video criticizing Jordan Peterson.
Claiming that Health care for all and Free collage is not equality of outcome somehow.
If one guy exercises and eats correctly vs other guy that is a pig and a slob (not even mentioning unemployed and homeless), yet both are paying the same amount in taxes for health insurance, somehow is not equality of outcome, yet both of them make completely different choices ...

Or One guy studies and has predisposition for academic studies and gets scholarship vs the guy that is basically retard.
Why both should be able to go to college on tax payers dime?

[breadisfunny]

i don't think i quite understand the question.

[D3thray]

Because going to college doesn’t guarantee an outcome question mark? Regardless it’s the scarcity that gives the college degree it’s value economically speaking. If everyone gets one it has less economic value.

[NineSpine]

Hello,

I have been watching this video criticizing Jordan Peterson.
Claiming that Health care for all and Free collage is not equality of outcome somehow.
If one guy exercises and eats correctly vs other guy that is a pig and a slob (not even mentioning unemployed and homeless), yet both are paying the same amount in taxes for health insurance, somehow is not equality of outcome, yet both of them make completely different choices ...

Or One guy studies and has predisposition for academic studies and gets scholarship vs the guy that is basically retard.
Why both should be able to go to college on tax payers dime?

I'm an employer. One of my workers is a health nut. One of my workers is pretty badly out of shape. Know how much each of them pay for their health insurance through my company? The exact same, and I pay the exact same for the employer contribution for each of them. So, the problem you are describing is not government. You have a problem with how insurance works generally, which demonstrates a pretty profound level of ignorance on this topic.

The situation you describe with scholarships is not how the real world actually works. In reality, the D- student whose mommy and daddy have a lot of money goes to the nice school, especially if either mommy or daddy are alumni, and the guy who worked his ass off usually ends up at community college because that is all he can afford.

- - - Updated - - -

Because going to college doesn’t guarantee an outcome question mark? Regardless it’s the scarcity that gives the college degree it’s value economically speaking. If everyone gets one it has less economic value.

That only speaks to the individual value. The value of an educated populace to the society collectively is immeasurable.

[Nihilist74]

I consider myself a left-winger. I believe that children and teenagers should be extensively tested throughout their development for their strengths and weakness. If someone tests strong for trades like plumbing, automechanics, electrician work or other similar trades, they should be offered a free education on trade schools. After they graduate, i beleive they should serve society in this capacity for a short term of service and then be allowed to go into the free market. I believe the samething should be done with people in academics.
We will soon be approaching an age where we have machines and AI that are performing most menial jobs. Our children will need a lot of specialized training to fit niches in society.
As far as healthcare is concerned, I believe we should have a single-payer system like a tax. Everyone pays into it and everyone is covered.

Sanders' last 'Medicare for all' plan cost nearly $1.4 trillion
https://money.cnn.com/2017/09/12/new...all/index.html

That $3.2 trillion represents the combined amount spent on health care by all players, including the federal government, individuals, businesses, and state and local governments. Total U.S. health spending reached nearly $10,000 per person last year, up 5% from the prior year.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/02/news...ing/index.html

We don't believe in giving things away for free. We believe in "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

[Gouky]

I'm an employer. One of my workers is a health nut. One of my workers is pretty badly out of shape. Know how much each of them pay for their health insurance through my company? The exact same, and I pay the exact same for the employer contribution for each of them. So, the problem you are describing is not government. You have a problem with how insurance works generally, which demonstrates a pretty profound level of ignorance on this topic.

The situation you describe with scholarships is not how the real world actually works. In reality, the D- student whose mommy and daddy have a lot of money goes to the nice school, especially if either mommy or daddy are alumni, and the guy who worked his ass off usually ends up at community college because that is all he can afford.

- - - Updated - - -



That only speaks to the individual value. The value of an educated populace to the society collectively is immeasurable.

The healthcare situation you described is corporate insurance where they calculate the average.
And if I am not mistaken they only cover certain amount in healthcare costs.
And again how is it not equality of outcome again?

[D3thray]

That only speaks to the individual value. The value of an educated populace to the society collectively is immeasurable.

Oh sure but you’ll have a hard time convincing that D- student that even with that college degree he’s still got to be a ditch digger because the world still needs ditch diggers.

[Deleted]

Uhm... You do know that logic spreads across the entire taxation spectrum then? A poor person and a billionaire gets to drive on the same road, they'll recieve the same welfare (if their situations are equal), they'll have to stand as long time in queue at the DMV, you still only get one vote, and the list goes on and on, basically every single aspect of taxation you'll find that you get equal outcome.

Now, even with that, something like free college you're still required to have an average that is enough to seek in, and if spaces are filled out, then that average gets higher. So no you can't just sleep in class, and get to study as a doctor.

[PC2]

@Gouky, "equality of outcome" is typically constrained to mean outcome of career and compensation level.

[Machismo]

It's not equality of outcome, it's a socialist form of equality of opportunity.

Now, I could see it as an attempt to push equality of outcome, by affording opportunities that may not have been available... but that is a bit of a stretch.

A better example of "equality of outcome" would be the Electoral College, or hiring quotas for specific races, ethnicities, or genders.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Free collage isn’t because you can go in and fail. You get an equal opportunity to try but not an equal outcome. Same thing they health care you get the opportunity to get help but not the same end result of that help.

[Heladys]

Because neither is equality of outcome.

How is this a difficult concept for you, OP?

[NineSpine]

The healthcare situation you described is corporate insurance where they calculate the average.
And if I am not mistaken they only cover certain amount in healthcare costs.
And again how is it not equality of outcome again?

Because the healthy guy is still likely to live longer and the unhealthy guy is still likely to have more medical problems. Or do you think that because they pay the same for healthcare, they are both going to have the exact same health problems and live the same number of years?

The situation I described is how health insurance works. Individuals buying health insurance doesn't really work. There is an economic phenomenon called the insurance death spiral that happens when health insurance is purchased individually, so all functional systems end up working around people who purchase as groups. Even when insurance is private, people have to purchase in groups or the system falls apart.

So, again, your criticism is of INSURANCE, not of government.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh sure but you’ll have a hard time convincing that D- student that even with that college degree he’s still got to be a ditch digger because the world still needs ditch diggers.

He won't have to be a ditch digger. With his D- college degree and his family having money, he is going to have an office job at a minimum.

[Eveningforest]

What's this whole argument again about we don't know what extreme left is? Of course we do. If you acknowledge the Nazi party on the right, then Stalin and Mao are the obvious opposites of the spectrum.
For a self proclaimed centrist guy, Peterson surely loves to criticize the left 99.9% of the time.

[cubby]

Hello,

I have been watching this video criticizing Jordan Peterson.
Claiming that Health care for all and Free collage is not equality of outcome somehow.
If one guy exercises and eats correctly vs other guy that is a pig and a slob (not even mentioning unemployed and homeless), yet both are paying the same amount in taxes for health insurance, somehow is not equality of outcome, yet both of them make completely different choices ...

Or One guy studies and has predisposition for academic studies and gets scholarship vs the guy that is basically retard.
Why both should be able to go to college on tax payers dime?

Equality of outcome isn't the issue. The issue is a modern society providing for the basic necessities of it's citizenry. Don't look at is the person who makes perfect choices compared with the person who makes the worst. Look at it from the perspective of people who don't have the opportunity to make good choices, but want to be healthy, etc.

[Gouky]

Because neither is equality of outcome.

How is this a difficult concept for you, OP?

Well if you understand what those words mean, not what you want them to mean.
If you actually understand what those words mean, both concepts are actually results of personal decisions and shouldn't have the same results.

For example how can you clam to be for equality of opportunity and be pro abortion? ... again if you understand that words have actual meaning and not mean what you want them to mean, only in examples you like.

[Gouky]

Equality of outcome isn't the issue. The issue is a modern society providing for the basic necessities of it's citizenry. Don't look at is the person who makes perfect choices compared with the person who makes the worst. Look at it from the perspective of people who don't have the opportunity to make good choices, but want to be healthy, etc.

Well this argument only makes sense if you think people can't make rational choices or learn from mistakes of others.
What is the exact bases of Fascist ideology.

[D3thray]

He won't have to be a ditch digger. With his D- college degree and his family having money, he is going to have an office job at a minimum.

But I was talking about a hypothetical world where everyone has a college degree. He’s still a ditch digger.

[Gouky]

Because the healthy guy is still likely to live longer and the unhealthy guy is still likely to have more medical problems. Or do you think that because they pay the same for healthcare, they are both going to have the exact same health problems and live the same number of years?

The situation I described is how health insurance works. Individuals buying health insurance doesn't really work. There is an economic phenomenon called the insurance death spiral that happens when health insurance is purchased individually, so all functional systems end up working around people who purchase as groups. Even when insurance is private, people have to purchase in groups or the system falls apart.

So, again, your criticism is of INSURANCE, not of government.

Again, the situation you described is a result of majority of people making horrible choices.
Here is a small fact for you. 80% of diseases are personal choice related.
Yet 20% have to pay more money for other 80% ... again how is this not equality of outcome?
And the only reason Private health insurance can't function because 80% always go to cry for goverment regulations and demand coverage for pre existing conditions ect.

[cubby]

Well this argument only makes sense if you think people can't make rational choices or learn from mistakes of others.

People are born into situations that are horrible, and can't be changed. So offering basic care and education will fix that problem going forward. You're assuming people will have the opportunity to make good choices, and that everyone who can, does. That's not humanity - sorry to disappoint.

And programs that provide equal everything for everyone will be inherently "unfair" if it look at it from what is put in and taken out individually. You have to look at societal programs as how they benefit the society as a whole. People are healthier. Live longer. Better educated. Everyone wants that.