I don’t argue with them. I simply ask them questions that they can’t answer, questions like “Can you give me an example of where a monopoly has provided better service at lower cost than a fully competitive health care market?” Or, “Can you name a single country that has a higher opinion of the United States today than they did six years ago?” When faced with questions like that, liberals discover that they don’t know jack. I then follow it with something like, “Since it is clear you weren’t able to think up these opinions all on your own, where did you really get them from?”
Tried that on a couple of young Obamabots in the 2008 election. I asked them to name a successful, efficent government run agency. Their answer...USPS.
Pointing out how much money it was losing they said the problem was taxes that were too low and unfair competition from the private sector.
Good points,
I do the same thing.. I ask them questions that force them to defend their positions, e.g., “Given the fact the U.S. government is clearly unable to provide medical services to those we’re all told are the country’s finest... what data convinces you such a system can successfully deliver those services under a single-payer approach to 315 million people?”
I have yet to get an answer other than babbling about “corporations,” “greed,” “inequality,” etc.
Same here. If they dare to being up a subject, I first ask them what they know about it. In all cases, they are grossly under-informed or not at all engaged in the topic. It then becomes easy pickins’. But I do not waste much time with this maroons.