Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber (MIT) admits it was intentionally mislabeled the “Affordable Care Act” because it wouldn’t have passed had they admitted it was a tax on the people holding the health insurance plans. It also would not have passed had they been transparent that healthy people would be...

322,780 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

Stefan.

210,938 görüntüleme • 21 gün önce

AOC has been sick for a while now. She sounds terrible. How many jabs did she get? She posted this video on Thursday talking about not having health insurance while she was a waitress because it was too expensive. AOC had access to Obamacare for years while she was a waitress. So why didn’t she take advantage of it? As a politician, AOC has strongly defended Obamacare. If Obamacare is so great, why wasn’t she on it when she was a waitress? The answer is AOC has been caught lying again. Either she’s lying about not having health insurance when she was a waitress or she’s lying about Obamacare being great. Both can’t be true. If Obamacare is great, then she lied about not being able to afford health insurance. If Obamacare sucks, then she lied about it being great. Here’s AOC’s new quote about not having health insurance (she says people she worked with didn’t have it either): “It really wasn’t that long ago that I didn’t have any health insurance at all when I was a waitress, and that I couldn’t afford health insurance so I just went without. And, frankly, no one I knew that I worked with had health insurance either because they couldn’t afford it either.” The truth likely is that AOC didn’t have health insurance until around when she got elected to Congress and that’s because Obamacare does suck. Which means the truth also is AOC has been lying to the American people for many years now about Obamacare being great. Now—how many jabs did AOC get and has she been getting boosters? Because she ain’t looking good. (aoc on TT)

Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸

466,128 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

I think the presenter is on to something big, but where I disagree with her is that she accuses African leaders and gives a subtle pass to African citizens. It is not true that African citizens were oblivious to what Trump or Epstein are. They knew, but they simply did not have the ability to think critically that when Trump talks about LGBT issues, it is not necessarily that he does not support them, but that he understood there is a group of foolish people out there who would buy into that rhetoric without interrogating why he was deploying it. Some of Trump’s best friends, like Peter Mandelson, are gay, yet some Africans were foolish enough to believe that Trump is anti-gay. He simply understood how human beings operate, that there are times when people fail to think, a tragic failure to think, and they just go with the flow. If you ask Africans today what they gained from the perceived homophobia that Trump projected, which we know was political theatre targeted at a particular audience, they will not be able to tell you. Trump might be many things to many people. I do not like him and everybody knows that, but the one thing I respect him for is that he understands his audience. He knows what to say when he is talking to foolish people. He knows what to say when he is talking to idiotic people. He knows what to say when he is talking to sycophants. He knows what to say when he is talking to people who do not understand the world of politics, and he gets away with it. And for that, I give it to him. He becomes a political superstar precisely because you then have black people in Africa supporting him. That in itself shows you the scale of political illiteracy that exists, where people rally behind rhetoric crafted to manipulate them, not to advance their interests.

Hopewell Chin’ono

20,339 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce