The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:40 pm

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:24 pmWhat point are you trying to make by posting those videos?

You asked for evidence of unserved populations, significant populations.

Well, while every individual is significant, if you believe the videos you posted demonstrate that the number of "unserved populations" of any city in which universal health is available, is proportionally significant, you will have to explain why.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:14 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:40 pm

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:24 pmWhat point are you trying to make by posting those videos?

You asked for evidence of unserved populations, significant populations.

Well, while every individual is significant, if you believe the videos you posted demonstrate that the number of "unserved populations" of any city in which universal health is available, is proportionally significant, you will have to explain why.

He believes it's better to leave the wealthy their wealth so that they will "invest" it in for-profit enterprises, and some will trickle down to those who lack any healthcare at all. It's all the fault of "socialists". The world would be a better place if there were no "socialists," only private individuals investing their wealth in for-profit enterprises. The desire of the few to become rich makes everyone else richer, too. "Socialism" is a failure. He's said it repeatedly. Therefore, it must be true. We should all just agree and dismantle universal healthcare. That's the only way to get healthcare to people who have no healthcare at all.

Who knows. Maybe he's right. Those of us who are 'socialists" are scum who envy the wealthy. We're all in it for ourselves so we can get some of the wealth of the wealthy. There's no way to disprove his assertion. Therefore, perhaps we should just abolish universal healthcare.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:14 am ...you will have to explain why.

"Have to"? Umm...no, no, I don't.

People will already know, if they want to know. There's enough evidence there.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:36 am

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:14 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:40 pm
You asked for evidence of unserved populations, significant populations.

Well, while every individual is significant, if you believe the videos you posted demonstrate that the number of "unserved populations" of any city in which universal health is available, is proportionally significant, you will have to explain why.

He believes it's better to leave the wealthy their wealth so that they will "invest" it in for-profit enterprises,...

Don't be silly, Gary. I've said none of this. Seriously, dude...you need to focus.

What I have said is that universal free health care is certainly a desirable dream...but it's a dream nobody has figured out how to make work yet. There is no easy solution to public health care. That's just reality.

But if you think you've got one, propose it.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:55 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:36 am

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:14 am Well, while every individual is significant, if you believe the videos you posted demonstrate that the number of "unserved populations" of any city in which universal health is available, is proportionally significant, you will have to explain why.

He believes it's better to leave the wealthy their wealth so that they will "invest" it in for-profit enterprises,...

Don't be silly, Gary. I've said none of this. Seriously, dude...you need to focus.

What I have said is that universal free health care is certainly a desirable dream...but it's a dream nobody has figured out how to make work yet. There is no easy solution to public health care. That's just reality.

But if you think you've got one, propose it.

So it's not your intent to abolish universal healthcare, is that correct? If so, then that's fine. You seem to think that it's a terrible thing. So I thought maybe you wanted to do away with it.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 2:35 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:55 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:36 am

He believes it's better to leave the wealthy their wealth so that they will "invest" it in for-profit enterprises,...

Don't be silly, Gary. I've said none of this. Seriously, dude...you need to focus.

What I have said is that universal free health care is certainly a desirable dream...but it's a dream nobody has figured out how to make work yet. There is no easy solution to public health care. That's just reality.

But if you think you've got one, propose it.

So it's not your intent to abolish universal healthcare, is that correct?

Nobody's got actual universal health care. So I can't "abolish" it. It doesn't yet exist. It's a Socialist fantasy, not a reality.

But the existing attempts have proved all economically impractical. They don't end up serving everybody, they don't issue in the newest technology or the best doctors, nurses and technicians, and they suck the capital out of a whole bunch of other social-welfare aspirations, and leave them underfunded, too.

Have you got a solution?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 2:43 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 2:35 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:55 am
Don't be silly, Gary. I've said none of this. Seriously, dude...you need to focus.

What I have said is that universal free health care is certainly a desirable dream...but it's a dream nobody has figured out how to make work yet. There is no easy solution to public health care. That's just reality.

But if you think you've got one, propose it.

So it's not your intent to abolish universal healthcare, is that correct?

Nobody's got actual universal health care. So I can't "abolish" it. It doesn't yet exist. It's a Socialist fantasy, not a reality.

But the existing attempts have proved all economically impractical. They don't end up serving everybody, they don't issue in the newest technology or the best doctors, nurses and technicians, and they suck the capital out of a whole bunch of other social-welfare aspirations, and leave them underfunded, too.

Have you got a solution?

Yes. It's called be thankful you have universal healthcare. It's what you tell me.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 2:35 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:55 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:36 am

He believes it's better to leave the wealthy their wealth so that they will "invest" it in for-profit enterprises,...

Don't be silly, Gary. I've said none of this. Seriously, dude...you need to focus.

What I have said is that universal free health care is certainly a desirable dream...but it's a dream nobody has figured out how to make work yet. There is no easy solution to public health care. That's just reality.

But if you think you've got one, propose it.

Gary, let me help you with the proposal.

The "easy" solution to public health care would be for all humans to realize that we are all in this together,...

(oh geez, I'm having a "High School Musical" moment)

...and rather than wasting trillions of dollars on wars and destruction, we instead could use that money for the well-being and advancement of all of humanity.

Now of course I didn't say it would be doable, no, I'm just saying that ^^^that^^^ would be the "easy" (or at least the most practical) solution to universal public health care.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to the "Rainlit Canals of Bellario Laguna" which, in my opinion, is perhaps the most beautiful and appealing world ever created in an AI generated video.

They probably even have universal public health care there. Check it out...

https://youtu.be/F64sKMuaxEE?si=JNdqroJVOLo4zkE-
_______

seeds wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 3:56 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 2:35 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:55 am
Don't be silly, Gary. I've said none of this. Seriously, dude...you need to focus.

What I have said is that universal free health care is certainly a desirable dream...but it's a dream nobody has figured out how to make work yet. There is no easy solution to public health care. That's just reality.

But if you think you've got one, propose it.

Gary, let me help you with the proposal.

The "easy" solution to public health care would be for all humans to realize that we are all in this together,...

(oh geez, I'm having a "High School Musical" moment)

...and rather than wasting trillions of dollars on wars and destruction, we instead could use that money for the well-being and advancement of all of humanity.

Now of course I didn't say it would be doable, no, I'm just saying that ^^^that^^^ would be the "easy" (or at least the most practical) solution to universal public health care.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to the "Rainlit Canals of Bellario Laguna" which, in my opinion, is perhaps the most beautiful and appealing world ever created in an AI generated video.

They probably even have universal public health care there. Check it out...

https://youtu.be/F64sKMuaxEE?si=JNdqroJVOLo4zkE-
_______

I would think it's doable. Unless, of course, people really want to have wars and destruction so badly that they would rather pay for that than universal healthcare.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:07 am I would think it's doable.

How? Where's the money coming from?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:07 am ...I would think it's doable. Unless, of course, people really want to have wars and destruction so badly that they would rather pay for that than universal healthcare.

cuts down on the queue to the doctor doesn't it?

-Imp

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:28 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:07 am I would think it's doable.

How? Where's the money coming from?

From not buying bombs and weapons of destruction. Are you that illiterate?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:39 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:28 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 4:07 am I would think it's doable.

How? Where's the money coming from?

From not buying bombs and weapons of destruction.

Good luck with that plan. Let me know when somebody's willing to do it.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:52 am

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:14 am ...you will have to explain why.

"Have to"? Umm...no, no, I don't.

People will already know, if they want to know. There's enough evidence there.

Indeed. Anyone who can do basic maths will see straight away that the less than 1500 people sleeping rough in London on any given night, who are not "unserved" anyway, nor the "estimated 1,446 people [who] sleep rough or stay in encampments" in Toronto per night do not constitute

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:40 pm...significant populations.

in cities of 9 million and 3 million respectively.
It is telling that you put it like this:

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2026 12:52 amPeople will already know, if they want to know.

Firstly, it calls into question the epistemological knot of how you might know something that just isn't true. It is fair to say though, that people will believe what they want to believe, I've said so myself on many occasions. Perhaps more than any other contributor, it applies to you. You believe what you want, which is your prerogative, but if you believe your shrill hysterics are going to change anyone's fact based beliefs, you are on a hiding to nothing.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2026 8:10 pm...watch some news.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1wA7a8KiEw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEt1oV6lO6k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pG-YQrZQNDQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoAzzgh ... FMUzzJRh6L

Since none of the above make any reference to London, nor Toronto, let's look at the cities featured.
We can ignore the first video, because it is some redneck bitching about California, which does not provide universal healthcare. Of the others:
Representing Canada:

Kitchener. Population: 320 000
"Rough Sleepers / Unsheltered: The number of people sleeping rough or in encampments was 412 during the most recent comprehensive city-specific data." 0.12875% of the population.

Making the case for Australia:

Sydney. Population: 5 000 000
"In the Inner-city/CBD of Sydney specifically, the count recorded 296 rough sleepers." 0.00592% Of the population.

And finally, standing in for the United Kingdom:

Bristol. Population: 500 000
"Rough Sleepers: An estimated 98 to 100 individuals sleep rough on any given night, making Bristol one of the UK cities with the highest concentrations of rough sleepers." 0.02% of the population.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Jun 24, 2026 11:10 pmSo my question to you is, where is the additional money going to come from?

It's not additional money, but if it were, petty cash would cover it.