# The Media Treatment of Rand Paul - Knee Jerk Reactionism by Mental Midgets **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 23, 2010, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445 "2010-05-23T08:12:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/221 "2010-05-25T02:22:39Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > You mean the state laws that require health insurance to be regulated by the state in which it is sold? (I thought you guys liked state rights). Or the non-existent Federal law that prohibits it? Regulation is regulation, no matter whether it is state or federal. Did you notice that all these other regulations I mentioned are state-based too? Why would I talk about them if I was against federal regulations but in favor of state regulations? Your attempt to group my positions with some “you guys” is a fallacy that should be transparent to everybody. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/222 "2010-05-25T02:32:43Z")
> [@erez](#): > > I indeed forgot to mention the huge distorting effect of these government-run plans have on private payers. Low Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates cause health care providers to shift the cost to those with private insurance. Thank you for helping me to make my point. Is it not clear to you that **Kimstu** was not referring to the United States? Please demonstrate how low Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates have the effect you claim in countries such as Canada, France, et al. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/223 "2010-05-25T02:39:23Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > The United States has the most expensive health care system in the world, and has worse results than _every other industrialized country_. The United State’s also has the most private enterprise involvement in health care of any industrialized country. But somehow these clowns think that by going even further down that road we will make it better. Very poor argument. There are much more important differences between the U.S. and other countries than the crippled private/public health care involvement when it comes to both costs and outcomes, such as obesity rates or the rates of violent death. However, I won’t bother to answer you further, since by calling your opponents names (“clowns”) you admit that you have no valid points to make and I expect moderators to make you unable to answer in this thread any longer. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/224 "2010-05-25T02:50:05Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Is it not clear to you that **Kimstu** was not referring to the United States? Please demonstrate how low Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates have the effect you claim in countries such as Canada, France, et al. I was obviously being facetious by jumping from his statement about “government-run healthcare systems” to the example of the government-run health system in the U.S. and its distorting effect on the private insurance. Sorry that you missed it. Did you notice that we were talking about whether the U.S. health care insurance industry is or is not a good example of the free market in action? It was Kimstu’s statement about health care in other countries that was irrelevant to this topic. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/225 "2010-05-25T02:54:38Z")
> [@erez](#): > > I was obviously being facetious by jumping from his statement about “government-run healthcare systems” to the example of the government-run health system in the U.S. and its distorting effect on the private insurance. Sorry that you missed it. No, I don’t believe that you were being facetious. In fact, I believe that you had to look up various words in your thesaurus in order to even find “facetious”. Nice try. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/226 "2010-05-25T02:59:34Z")
> [@erez](#): > > Regulation is regulation, no matter whether it is state or federal. Did you notice that all these other regulations I mentioned are state-based too? Why would I talk about them if I was against federal regulations but in favor of state regulations? Your attempt to group my positions with some “you guys” is a fallacy that should be transparent to everybody. That particular meme, of insurance companies not being able to sell across state lines, is repeated often in the right wing echo chamber. The wording makes it seem as though the Federal govt prohibits it. It’s another of a long line of conservative attempts to create confusion over healthcare. The OP in this thread keeps making the point that state and local regulation is better than Federal, yet you bring up an argument that was used by Republican who wanted the Federal govt to overrule states. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/227 "2010-05-25T03:03:11Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > No, I don’t believe that you were being facetious. In fact, I believe that you had to look up various words in your thesaurus in order to even find “facetious”. Nice try. Did it really hurt you so much that I pointed out how bad the example of health insurance was when it comes to deciding whether the free market works that you had to resort to personal attacks and failed to make any substantive point? Please let me know next time you decide to read a thread and I’ll make sure to avoid making any such hurtful statements. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/228 "2010-05-25T03:09:56Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I agree. I disagree with Rand Paul on this issue. I do think he needs to take this position to get elected. Its the smart choice for this election. What a load of tripe. You go on and on how Rand Paul isn’t a Washington politician, he’s a great statesman, etc. and then you actually ENDORSE him lying about his political positions in order to get elected! What a crock! > [@](#): > > I don’t think he supports prayer in public schools. He supports, as do many libertarians, school choice and private schools as an option for education, as well as reduced federal involvement and more local control of education. HE SAID THAT HE SUPPORTS SCHOOL PRAYER. He said it. It’s on his website. He said it! What on earth makes you think that he is such a liar as to go around saying that he believes things he doesn’t believe! You can’t just go around making up people’s positions, and thinking, “Oh, I don’t think he meant that… but he REALLY meant it when he said this other thing!” Fine, if you want to play this silly game, I don’t think Rand Paul wants us to be on the gold standard. It’s just something he says to get elected. He also hates Austrians and their economics. He just thinks there’s a bunch of money is catering to extremist Tea Party members. Now prove me wrong! > [@](#): > > By the way, no one is going to touch Roe V Wade, so don’t lose any sleep over that. HE SAID HE WANTS TO OVERTURN ROE VS WADE BY ALL STRATEGIES HE HAS AT HIS DISPOSAL! Sorry for yelling, but you are arguing things that are completely disconnected with reality. Which, ironically, is exactly what the Dr. Pauls seem to do when they talk about national policy. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/229 "2010-05-25T03:27:12Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Your account will likely be suspended from the board if you make another post like this or your previous one. When the OP gets banned, for his benefit I recommend he [go here,](http://www.prisonplanet.com/) where his political canons will be indiscriminately accepted and praised, though he likely already knows that. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/230 "2010-05-25T03:30:40Z")
> [@erez](#): > > Did you notice that we were talking about whether the U.S. health care insurance industry is or is not a good example of the free market in action? It was Kimstu’s statement about health care in other countries that was irrelevant to this topic. Actually, it wasn’t irrelevant at all. If your point is that the flaws in the US public-private-insurer-patchwork system were due to too much government involvement, then the fact that many other countries’ systems with even MORE government involvement work much better than ours pretty much demolishes your point. > [@erez](#): > > Why don’t you answer this simple question: do you disagree that the health insurance industry was one of the most regulated industries out there? Indeed I don’t. However, the problem with it wasn’t that it was heavily regulated, but that it wasn’t heavily regulated enough. We insisted on maintaining too much market freedom in an aspect of our society that simply doesn’t function well as a free market. The trouble with libertarians is that they refuse to recognize that market mechanisms don’t work equally well at providing **all** kinds of goods and services. Sure, if society wants a new kind of mass-produced entertainment widget, market mechanisms are stunningly good at providing them through the magic of supply and demand. Same with lawn care services, cheap lettuce, baby rompers, and a cornucopia of other goodies. The invisible hand of the profit-seeking market provides them all: yay markets! But if a society wants good public health at a reasonable cost, the profit-seeking market mechanisms are not efficient at providing it. It is much easier for individual insurers to profit via counterproductive shortcuts like cherry-picking the lowest-risk customers, rejecting customers who are already sick, using loopholes to deny coverage for claims, and seeking lawsuit opportunities to recover claim payments via damages awarded for negligence. The private insurance industry cares jack shit about whether Americans in general have good public health or decent health care coverage. And the invisible hand isn’t effective enough in this case to make it worth while for them to care. Public health is a social good that is riddled with positive externalities, meaning that lots of its benefits are disseminated in ways that can’t be captured for a fee. Therefore, reasonably priced universal and effective health care is not intrinsically a profit-making business. Other countries have figured this out, and have shifted the main burden of health care coverage provision to the non-market mechanisms that are best able to handle it, leaving markets free to concentrate on the widget-type enterprises that they’re so good at. Our libertarian market-fundamentalists, though, with their blind conviction that markets can do no wrong, will simply never admit that there’s any such thing as a market failure or any area where government intervention is the solution rather than the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/231 "2010-05-25T03:42:29Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Any true education reform starts with local control, school choice through vouchers, breaking up the teachers union, and allowing the freedom to teach a variety of topics unburdened by governmental interference. Break up the teachers union, did you say? All those free, responsible people who have joined together to negotiate and sign contracts? Your reasoning astounds me. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/232 "2010-05-25T03:47:46Z")
I’m amused how you came in here and demanded we read and take into account everything you have to say but don’t offer us the same luxury. you said > [@jrodefeld](#): > > You’d vote for a libertarian in the House but against one in the Senate? Whats the difference? By the way Rand Paul and Jim Bunning are quite different in their beliefs. Don’t conflate the two. > > The fact that you can’t stand 1/100th of the Senate being a libertarian voice implies that you resent intellectual debate in government. A voice for fiscal sanity, balanced budgets, transparency, the Constitution, and against wars in 1% of the Senate is too much for you. I’d already stated I was not interested in putting someone who represents fringe views in the senate. The senate can easily be help up by a single person who wishes to have their views heard. I’d be OK with it in the house because each person is only allotted limited time to do so. Personally I’d rather the senate be bland moderates who simply check the House’s work to make sure the majority is not unfairly treating the smaller states. I would rather all law be made in the house by majority rule. I don’t get my way, I accept that. Unlike you I don’t consider those who disagree with that, mental midgets or accuse them of resenting intellectual debate. I’d prefer the House be representative of all views in America including fringe elements provided their numbers are only proportionately represented. If you actually think Libertarianism represents 50 percent of any given state feel free to put up a candidate. I think the Paul’s even disagree with you as they both run on the Republican ticket. You’ve turned around and implied I was somehow against fiscal sanity, balanced budgets, transparency, the constitution and for wars. Do you think its impossible for someone other then Rand Paul to hold those positions? You’ve said I resent intellectual debate? Mind explaining yourself? Then you said [QUOTE=jrodefeld] When people say that Rand Paul is stupid or ignorant not only is it an insult to him, it is an insult to his father, an insult to me, and an insult to all the great libertarian thinkers throughout the centuries. [/QUOTE] my response being [QUOTE=boytyperanma] Well if those are the rules we have to play by, consider yourself insulted. [/QUOTE] I didn’t specify stupid and I don’t believe either of the Paul’s are are stupid. Both are fairly intelligent in my opinion. So why am I limited to answering this question that asserts a position I did not take? What would lead you to believe I was saying anything about Ron Paul, why would I have to provide examples for him as well? [QUOTE=jrodefeld] Well, why don’t you explain why Ron Paul and Rand Paul are “stupid”? Thats what you said. Now its time for you to back it up. [/QUOTE] How about you not put words in my mouth. Is it unacceptable to believe Rand Paul ignorant? Even you have stated he is naive. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/233 "2010-05-25T04:02:51Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Is it unacceptable to believe Rand Paul ignorant? Even you have stated he is naive. Oh! Oh! See! More liberal gotchas! It’s like a fucking _epidemic_ of exactitude with you people! LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/234 "2010-05-25T04:15:36Z")
In post #157 I asked: [QUOTE=Czarcasm] Do you think it is possible for others to think these arguments through, understand them, and still disagree with them? [/QUOTE] . Will you please answer this question, **jrodefeld**? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/235 "2010-05-25T04:24:27Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > In post #157 I asked:. > Will you please answer this question, **jrodefeld**? He seems to be a couple pages behind. The last linked quote I can find him responding to goes all the way back to post #80. He might not see those mod warnings until Thursday. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/236 "2010-05-25T04:51:11Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > This is a very poor example. Banning Interracial marriage was always unconstitutional. This is untrue. Interracial marriage was not unconstitutional until the body whose job it was to make that determination said it was unconstitutional. Not a second before. > [@](#): > > That was an example of oppressive government laws like Jim Crow. _Dred Scott v. Sanford_ would like to have a word with you… > [@](#): > > Government should protect every bodies rights equally. Any violence against anyone should be prosecuted. Any discrepancy in any laws in the way they treated minorities should be eliminated (many still exist unfortunately). All public discrimination should end. Institutionalized racism should be eliminated. I don’t know who would disagree with that. But I do disagree that these goals would be achieved nearly as quickly under Libertarian rule, however. > [@](#): > > It is the same with private property. If you make the claim that all business should not be allowed to discriminate, what is to stop the government from making similar laws regarding your home? Nice slipperly slope you have there. Mind if I borrow it next winter? Should make for great snowboarding… > [@](#): > > How many racists do you think there are in this country? I would guess no more than 5% of the population. It is a generational thing as well. People under forty I think are almost completely non racist. There are pockets of lingering bigotry in this nation, but they are dieing out as they should. The notion that without laws people even today wouldn’t be repulsed by “Whites Only” signs on businesses is ludicrous. Of course they would. Even if we are to assume you’re correct, that racism and sexism and homophobia and all the other ills of a prejudiced society are all minor, the evidence shows that we got that way over a lot of time and through the efforts of leaders and courts who fought it, not who sat by and merely hoped a day of enlightenment would arrive. Incidentally, I disagree with your premise in the first place. I don’t know what percentage of racists there are but I do know is all it takes is a few of them to stiffle the rights of many. In fact, it only takes one of them to kill someone because of their race or sexual orientation or gender. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/237 "2010-05-25T04:55:28Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Actually, it wasn’t irrelevant at all. If your point is that the flaws in the US public-private-insurer-patchwork system were due to too much government involvement, then the fact that many other countries’ systems with even MORE government involvement work much better than ours pretty much demolishes your point. No. For this to be true, I would have to claim that the private industry completely crippled by government regulations (health care insurers) is always better than a government-run system. I don’t claim this, as it is quite obvious that over-regulation with a good mixture of lobbying can create a horrible system. In addition, such a cross-country comparison is invalid unless you control for a lot of other factors (such as obesity rates that I mentioned). Health insurance is just one part of a very complex system, so singling it out as a source of all problems with the U.S. health care system is not convincing. > [@Kimstu](#): > > Indeed I don’t. However, the problem with it wasn’t that it was heavily regulated, but that it wasn’t heavily regulated enough. We insisted on maintaining too much market freedom in an aspect of our society that simply doesn’t function well as a free market. This is just your opinion without any evidence to support it. I disagree, as it is clear that it was very heavily regulated compared to most other industries. > [@Kimstu](#): > > The trouble with libertarians is that they refuse to recognize that market mechanisms don’t work equally well at providing **all** kinds of goods and services. Sure, if society wants a new kind of mass-produced entertainment widget, market mechanisms are stunningly good at providing them through the magic of supply and demand. Same with lawn care services, cheap lettuce, baby rompers, and a cornucopia of other goodies. The invisible hand of the profit-seeking market provides them all: yay markets! I’m glad that you concur that the free market does work in these and many other examples. The trouble with statists is that they create a crippled industry and base their recommendations for all other industries based on how this crippled industry performed. > [@Kimstu](#): > > But if a society wants good public health at a reasonable cost, the profit-seeking market mechanisms are not efficient at providing it. It is much easier for individual insurers to profit via counterproductive shortcuts like cherry-picking the lowest-risk customers, rejecting customers who are already sick, using loopholes to deny coverage for claims, and seeking lawsuit opportunities to recover claim payments via damages awarded for negligence. I think the biggest difference we have is that you seem to think that the reason insurance exists is to fulfill some public health goals that you have. That’s not the idea of insurance. You want to mold it into such a thing (ex. by preventing insurers from “cherry-picking the lowest-risk customers”) through countless laws and then you wonder why you created a monstrosity. Simplistic solutions can create unintended consequences. For example, we know that price controls in Europe are the key to its drug innovation lag vs. the U.S. ([Price controls seen as key to Europe's drug innovation lag | Nature Reviews Drug Discovery](http://www.nature.com/nrd/journal/v6/n4/full/nrd2293.html)). Do you think people creating new regulations affecting drug makers know how it will affect the drug discovery rate? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/238 "2010-05-25T05:33:38Z")
> [@erez](#): > > The trouble with statists is that they create a crippled industry and base their recommendations for all other industries based on how this crippled industry performed. But nobody actually **is** “basing their recommendations for all other industries based on how this crippled industry performed”. Nobody wants, say, the widget-making industry to have its customer-service policies regulated the way that health insurance policies need to be. > [@erez](#): > > I’m glad that you concur that the free market does work in these and many other examples. Sure, any rational person recognizes that. Rational people also recognize, however, that there are many situations in which “the free market” **doesn’t** work well. That’s the “market failure” problem I was talking about. (You do know what market failure is, right?) > [@erez](#): > > I think the biggest difference we have is that you seem to think that the reason insurance exists is to fulfill some public health goals that you have. That’s not the idea of insurance. It’s not the reason that insurance exists from the **insurer** ’s point of view, but it’s definitely the reason that insurance exists from the **concerned citizen** ’s point of view. Ultimately, companies are entitled to exist because they benefit people, not vice versa. If a company wants to earn a profit, it can do so by providing any one of the myriad goods and services for which market structures do work efficiently and don’t undermine society’s goals for public health. We as citizens are not automatically obligated to turn every single function of our society over to the market just because somebody could successfully make a profit out of some function by fucking it up for the rest of us. Let the markets concentrate on serving those societal functions where they can make a profit **without** fucking up our society in the process. > [@erez](#): > > For example, we know that price controls in Europe are the key to its drug innovation lag vs. the U.S. Heh. Your link points out that what makes the US a more attractive market for drug trials is that the drug companies can charge consumers lots more for their drugs here. So we get our drugs approved faster than the Europeans do, because we’re willing to pay an arm and a leg more for them than the Europeans are. Well, that’s a not-unreasonable tradeoff from both sides of the issue, but it sure doesn’t add up to an unqualified endorsement of unregulated drug prices. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/239 "2010-05-25T05:51:12Z")
> [@erez](#): > > I think the biggest difference we have is that you seem to think that the reason insurance exists is to fulfill some public health goals that you have. That’s not the idea of insurance. Don’t you see, **Kimstu**? The primary purpose of the health care system isn’t to provide health care to individuals, but to earn as much money as possible for the stockholders of the insurance companies! By using government coercion to force health care businesses to serve the needs of the patients you’re DESTROYING a powerful engine of wealth creation for the stockholders. You need to get your priorities straight! ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445/240 "2010-05-25T06:01:48Z")
> [@erez](#): > > The trouble with statists is that they create a crippled industry and base their recommendations for all other industries based on how this crippled industry performed. The trouble with libertarians is that no amount of freedom from regulations is enough. No matter how few regulations there are or how loose they are, if a company or market does something stupid or evil, it’s never because the regulations were too permissive. No failure is ever laid at the feet of the Almighty Free Market, because it’s never free enough. The supremacy of the market is a matter of faith for them, and any failure of the market is because it’s No True Free Market. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-media-treatment-of-rand-paul-knee-jerk-reactionism-by-mental-midgets/540445.md?page=13)