« First « Previous Comments 81 - 120 of 276 Next » Last » Search these comments
Anyway, enough embarrassingly bad philosophy from me. How about I end the night making fun of MP? All in favor?
My God, would ya look at the size of that kid's head! It's the size of a planetoid and it has it's own weather system! It looks like an orange on a toothpick! I'm not kidding, that boy's head is like Sputnik: spherical but quite pointy at parts!
Aye, that was offsides, now wasn't it? He'll be crying himself to sleep tonight, on his huge pillow.
HEAD! PANTS! NOW!
prat
Yep praet. Yep.
Hey Randy H, I think you misunderstood me. I really, really mean . . .
"Hey Randy H, please point out my inconsistencies as you see them!"
I loathe my own inconsistencies. The ones that I can't find, they're the devils.
Sputnik: spherical but quite pointy at parts!
LOL :lol:
Prat, you are too funny.
_rolling on the floor_
GOod nite
Gah. Last post.
"However, if there is nothing in it for the citizens, they will NOT be virtuous."
Exactly the wrong attitude. By adopting it, you guarantee it will be true.
"Besides, who defines what is virtuous?"
Me, of course. _wink_
"How inclusive or exclusive is that definition?"
Well, people who think it's OK to plan weddings during college football season can pretty much kiss my ass.
"Is the definition in harmony with the society in which it has taken root?"
Most definitely, positively, absolutely no. What fun would it be if it was?
Cheers,
prat
Escape
Yup, I'm female. Is that relevant?
tsusiat
I took your posts out of moderation, for everyone else you can go back through the thread and read them.
Prat
Just look at the size of that noggin!
Peter P
I can't help but agree with you that there is probably no "correct" form of government/society. It's really about what works at any given time for any given people.
I do think that we as American's are influenced greatly by the views of our forefathers. The constitution was written with self-determination in mind, and I think it has been bred into us ever since. Obviously there are those in our society who take a different view on how much we should ask for from our government, but I am not sure that switiching to a socialist form of government is going to go over big anytime soon. But in the future... we'll see won't we?
SactoQT - "Escape - Yup, I’m female. Is that relevant?"
Only if you invite me out for drinks.
Obviously there are those in our society who take a different view on how much we should ask for from our government, but I am not sure that switiching to a socialist form of government is going to go over big anytime soon.
All I know is that education and democracy should work well together in creating whatever form of ideal government. Education is to be emphasized.
All I know is that education and democracy should work well together in creating whatever form of ideal government. Education is to be emphasized.
You're preaching to the choir here. Frankly any ideal government should emphasize education.
Escaped from DC, aren't you married as well? Don't your wife read this blog? :)
I'm not only a libertarian, I'm also a polygamist.
Tsusiat wrote . . .
"It’s easy to pull stuff off the internet from some right wing think tank."
I quote a Canadian Supreme Court decision from Summer 05 and you accuse me of cherry picking information?
You asked me what I meant by the U.S. subsidizing your medicine . . .
When Phizer develops a new drug that wouldn't exist without it's capitalist motivation, it sets a price of X$ in the U.S.. Because the Canadian government will only pay Phizer .6X for the drug, the net effect is the subsidation of Canadian drug costs by U.S. consumers. As the U.S. consumer has started getting drugs outside of the country, the U.S. drug companies have moved to stop the practice. Why? Because if we all get the drugs at Canada's subsidized rate, then Phizer doesnt' make [enough] money.
When the U.S. population gets tired of letting Phizer use U.S. dollars to pay for Canadian drug discounts, one of two things are going to happen . . .
1. The cost for drugs will be spread evenly, with Canada's costs going up and the U.S.'s going down; or
2. We'll stop selling to Canada.
Tsusiat, your response is telling. You discard all of the verifiable numbers I provided on Canadian health care and the Supreme Court decisions by guessing that I got them from a "right wing think tank." Does it matter where they came from? If a frog told me, would that make the numbers something other than what they are?
Here are some more numbers.
After you read them Tsusiat, post some more U.S. numbers of your own, and then ask all of the Americans on this blog if they want to switch to your system.
By the way, if you think any of these numbers are wrong, please do tell.
in 2003 the average Canadian waited more than four months for treatment by a specialist once the referral was made by a general practitioner.
A simple MRI requires, on average, a three-month wait in Canada.
10,000 breast cancer patients who had to wait an average of eight weeks for post-operative radiation treatments over the past seven years have brought a class action suit against Quebec's hospitals.
Terry Salo, a Canadian resident of Victoria, British Columbia, availed himself of hip replacement in Madras, India after waiting more than a year for the "free" service in his home province.
Prior to the Supreme Court Decision in June . . .
"Canada is the only nation other than Cuba and North Korea that bans private health insurance"
That's some fine company you keep there Tsusiat.
Canadians wait an average of 17.9 weeks for surgery and other therapeutic treatments (that's about 4.5 months).The waits would be even longer if Canadians didn't have access to the U.S. as a medical-care safety valve.
This is the same court that last year unanimously declared gay marriage constitutional.
And of course, Tsusiat, let's not forget that the very rich in Canada have a very good solution to your system - they come here! Isn't that great? The rich use the U.S. system, the well-off negotiate the system in Canada, and the poor canadians get screwed.
And all for about 50% of tax revenue.
Not too shabby sir.
Now, any Americans want to swap systems?
Women with breast cancer in the family?
Anybody want to put their kids in this system?
I have no more experience or knowledge about economics than the classes I had in college, and I do remember that Keynes was the source of most of our education on the subject. It's good to read so many posts by people who are so well read and can offer different viewpoints. I really do check in on the blog to read other opinions and learn about the economy. How lucky for me that this site attracts so many who can intelligently discuss some fairly esoteric theories.
Randy H
I inadvertantly deleted one of your posts. It was the one where you reprinted what the troll wrote, and as I was scrolling through I mistook it for one of his posts and didn't realize it was yours until I hit delete. Sorry.
This is interesting:
So we have Evolution and Intelligent Design. Why do they want to stop children from learning an alternative theory?
Better yet, subject both theories to Darwinism and we shall have a winner: Intelligent Evolution perhaps?
So I think the current PC craze of diversity is nonsense and I have heard it SO many times repeated by supposedly intelligent people, yet I have never heard their logical reasons.
You are probably right. Diversity for the sake of diversity is perhaps questionable.
On the other hand, what do you think about "economic-driven diversity" mentioned by Randy?
Peter P
You know, in a way that has always bugged me too. Why do we only have to teach one theory? Why can't we simply say "some people believe____ and others believe_____?"
The polygamist reference is a joke Peter, remember you asked him if he was married?
This is one of those academic phrases that I have to try to imagine what it means.
I take it as: diversity as a result of free market interactions. This is to be contrasted with diversity being a policy goal.
Randy, please correct me if I have mistaken.
Peter P - I agree. Other than evolution, all I see is creation. I love evolution. I love the retinal cells being backwards. I love all of it. Darwin and evolution is why I got into biology. But why block the other thought? You don't need to bring a bible in. Of course, I think it would be a short lesson.
Me, I'd give about 12 months on evolution, diversity, genes, physiology, ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny, and all that jazz. Then, on the last day, I'd say, oh yeah kids, by the way, we can neve know for sure if all of this stuff just sprang out of nothing or if a creator set it up. So be good to your neighbor just in case.
Stanman - I'm not really a polygamist. That's mostly because the government would jail me and my wife would flog me. Other than those two things, I have no problem with it.
SactoQt -
We should still get together for a drink. No woman, other than my wife, who ever fell for me didn't hate me first.
Well, I'll say this about Mormons . . .
I've met about a dozen or so, and they've all been wonderful, warm, hardworking family people. I don't want to tar them all with that same brush. I'm sure some of them are real bastards. But, just what I've noticed.
SactoQt -
We should still get together for a drink. No woman, other than my wife, who ever fell for me didn’t hate me first.
Lol
The love/hate thing huh? Maybe one of these days we'll actually get around to having that blog party Peter P keeps talking about. Peter, you must be so happy to have met Jack and Kurt. Actually, I'm jealous.
Perhaps evolution is the God's tool in His intelligent design. We now have more unprovable theories...
Peter P -
Let me know if you throw the blog party.
I'll fly in from Ct.
I swear I will.
I'll even take a shower and comb my hair.
If we ever do the blog party, we should play a game where everyone shows up and nobody tells anybody who they are. At the end of the night, we have to guess each person's alter ego.
I probably shouldn't mention this but...........
My husband has a co-worker who's a devout Mormon, she also happens to be the original "40 year old virgin" (actually she's something like 42 now) I'm guessing the polygamy thing didn't appeal to her.
Peter, you must be so happy to have met Jack and Kurt. Actually, I’m jealous.
I am sure we will meet someday. Granite Bay is not that far.
“the original 40 year old virginâ€
I'll pass on opening that bottle of wine . . . that's way too much pressure.
I can just see it . . .
"I saved myself for 20 some odd years for THAT?"
Peter P -
Let me know if you throw the blog party.
I’ll fly in from Ct.
Great! I would love to meet you.
I am sure we will meet someday. Granite Bay is not that far.
True, but it does feel like a different world sometimes. Hopefully we can do a get together sometime.
Well this thread took a long time to read. Lot's of fun stuff. And to think I found this blog just looking for ideas/data on irrational real estate prices. Phew, so much more, huh?
Thanks everyone, keep it up (wish I could add more myself)!
It's 4:30, I'm not tired, I want to insulate my attic with Cocoon(TM), I have 4 weeks of work on my desk waiting for me that I am trying to work up the inspiration to attack, oh yeah, and
"I'd like to save the world, but I don't know where to start."
Jesus Stan, you post prompted two quick turn ins.
I'm gonna start calling you "threadkiller"
Don't invite this guy to the blarty.
:)
Stan,
I've seen a documentary on the slaughter of the people migrating to California.
How/why did you learn "their whole deal much better than they...?"
« First « Previous Comments 81 - 120 of 276 Next » Last » Search these comments
By Randy H
Oil Shock! It now appears that the US will suffer another severe blow to its oil refining infrastructure. With this being the second major shock to the supply-side of energy in less than a month, and with oil, gas and petrol being major inputs into the US economy, how could this affect the overall US economic situation. Could inflationary energy pressures, rising interest rates, and worsening deficits finally pop the real-estate bubbles in the “frothy†RE markets?