costard
-
Posts
1,351 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by costard
-
-
Stalins Organist..
I am fairly certain that all parts of the transport system are taxpayer supported, as well they should be..my break from that is the difference between using money to help fund something, vs taking over the management of whatever it is. Roads do not count, because they are not a service, but rather in a different category. A better example for mine would be the AMTRAK system mentioned, where not only are they federally funded, they are run by the government in the same way as the Postal Service, and the VA medical service..very very poorly, especially when looked at in a side-by-side comparison with private industries that do the same things, better.
The combination of low oil price and the ubiquity of a road transport system (1970's - 2000) would have sent any privately run (non-government subsidised) rail system into bankruptcy. Interestingly enough, this is an unacceptable circumstance for the military to find itself in: the need for a large, interconnected domestic rail network is essential to the US military logistics crew. Of course, if you now wish to sell the infrastructure back into private hands, you should probably point out that profiteering, scam running or denial of service to the military in time of war will be met with the use of detention and summary execution. (Of course, that wouldn't happen.. except for the banks, yeah, well, what would you expect.)
-
Also worth noting that the military hierarchy is selected for capability and proven performance. Or at least most of it - at the highest levels it becomes dependent on political relationships. This could explain the problems it faces.
-
URC, I haven't seen any references to the True Finns as fascists or neo-nazis - obviously I read the wrong press. That said, I can understand why they would be labelled as such: it's convenient (for the powers trying to maintain the status quo), it's the sort of hysteria raising emotive bunkum that passes for mainstream journalism these days.
Bailing out the nations that allowed themselves to get into the position they now find themselves in is tantamount to rewarding them for for behaving like financial cretins. It's throwing good money after bad and there is no way the potential recipients can be said to be arguing in good faith when they still cannot bring themselves to practice honest accounting or fiscal discipline (reference the big misses on the Portugese and Greek deficits this financial year). Bailing them out helps no-one in these circumstances.
I don't think the devolution of the EU is on the cards, even with a vetoed bailout. You might see the Finns and Norwegians secede if the EU decides that the natural resources enjoyed by these nations are in some fashion the property of the EU (maybe take a look at the way Australia manages its resource base, particularly with respect to the taxation of profits from the mining companies (paid to the Federal Government) and the royalties (paid to the State government on whose land the resource is found). *Australia is a federation): then again, if the structuring of the EU taxation system provided real, acceptable benefits in return for this approach this might well be the way to go.
The market (if it is let alone to work itself out) will force the PIIGS governments to adopt realistic policies and non-corrupt practices: these are the only things that will let the populations of these nations enjoy anything like the current standard of living enjoyed by their northern neighbours. The oversight of the global financial system will take care of itself in the not-too-distant future: banks and exchanges will be prohibited by law from running the scams they have been for the last little while (in the meantime, I hope you're well stocked with lube.) The problem isn't small, but the belief that throwing money at it will provide a solution is beyond credibility. Money is a symbol - of value, of trust, of a belief in a future better than the present. The power of money lies in the systems that can be built around it and the behaviours those systems drive: thrift, honesty and working for a better future. Giving it to people shown to be liars and nincompoops is not a sensible thing to do: letting it benefit those who do work, don't tell fibs as a matter of policy and respect the symbol in so far as they won't willingly waste its physical manifestation is a much better course of action.
-
Stuka relearns the lesson - cheap white spirits are bad, bad news. Spewing up his ring and suffering from the sort of headache that brings on the temptation of oblivion... we can only hope he never learns and repeats the exercise next weekend. Silly man.
Decrepitudinous 'ol Joe is at it again, parceling out titles like the candy he uses to lure the unwary (and only those without the use of any of their senses could possibly be unwary of the 'pshaw). Watch out Sir Guellen, Joe believes you might be a tasty little cabbage!
-
I saw somewhere that the health insurance for a family of four in New York came to $65000 a year. Given that the average wage in the US is about $32000 and the minimum wage about $17000, I can see people having difficulty affording the cover they need.
Something is definitely rotten in the system - it might be best to find the problem and fix it before the patient dies.
-
Aff, most scientific research ends up as wasted money but we need to keep funding it or limit our objectives to building a society where each of us has a bucket of seaweed carried on our head and a square metre of land to stand in. The risk/reward equation is somewhat skewed by the (nearly) infinite reward offered by movement between solar systems: the limiting variable becomes the likelihood of the race surviving long enough to generate the results from research that allow us to exploit that reward.
-
Most of the problem associated with building a legal system is based around the idea of limiting the abuse of power. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely - the end result is the demise of the legal system and its associated societal structures: economic infrastructure, relationships built on trust, the synergy of a functional and directed group of people. The discipline required to exercise power whilst understanding the second and third order effects of that exercise requires a familiarity with history and the demonstrated second, etc. order effects, also the the humility to value other lives as somewhat equivalent with our own. It requires a level of intellectual capability that is beyond the majority of the populace, something recognised and dealt with in the formation of hierarchies. If we reach the point where power is entrenched in a corrupt system of politics, one where the positions of power are distributed to those with familial connections as opposed to genuine ability, we face the possibility of an armed struggle to regain an uncorrupted system (even then, it's a toss-up and dependent on the character and capability of the leadership of the rebellion). The struggle becomes necessary in order to protect the commonwealth, the value of the lives of the populace of the society. We know this, because we've done it before: again and again and again.
So, having established that people are barely able to keep a society functional and rewarding to the populace that makes up its component parts, that we need to respect the learning of those that came before us (particularly when they've experienced cataclysms like WW2 and various wars of independence), that we are inclined to repeat the same dumb mistakes that allow the corruption and demise of political systems and societies, why not study the facts leading up to those collapses and see if we can not make the same mistakes? Generally, the democratic system has risen out of attempts to do precisely this: decisions about the exercise of power are debated, opposing viewpoints are valued because there is an understanding that no-one knows everything, no-one is capable of predicting the future infallibly, no-one is immune to the corruption inherent in the exercise of power. The option of non-violent change of leadership aims to preserve infrastructure and investment and allows for the continued growth in the commonwealth. It entrenches the value of others as equivalent to ourselves by way of a mechanism that specifically asks the members of the democracy to put their point of view on the value of the current leadership and values each point of view as roughly equivalent. In this way a democratic society gets the benefits of a system that drives empathy as a behaviour, whereas a political organisation based on a religious hierarchy merely teaches that such a behaviour is a requirement of a functional society: generally, those political organisations haven't taken the trouble to build the system in such a way as to include the entire populace (systems drive behaviours). A democracy is also more able to respond quickly to a change in our understanding of the world: this is useful in times of crisis and lends itself to a possibility of self-repair, eradication of corruption without need to resort to armed conflict.
There are risks associated with the abandoning of the moral and intellectual reasonings that underlie the legal and political systems of our democracies. These risks have not been adequately factored in because there is a belief on the part of the leadership that those risks do not apply to them: they are ignorant of history and believe that the military will do as it is told: it will protect those in power from the consequences of abuse of power. Apparently humility is the province of the sheeple, as is any consequence of poor decision making by our leadership.
-
Broken link, Jon.
-
What was the bounty?
-
Nice post BD6 - thanks.
-
Thanks John. Worth reading.
-
With the recent Taliban jailbreak in Afghanistan through which a sizable number of the most dangerous insurgents garnered their freedom, the case for retaining Guantanamo as an operational prison can only be strengthened from this point forward.
For practical reasons, it's simply easier to control and observe the flow of human traffic in a tightly controlled environment that is far removed from civilian population centers within the continental US where active Al Queda sleeper cells continue to reside.
Gumph. "active sleeper cells" is an oxymoron. There is no "flow of human traffic" in "a tightly controlled environment" to observe.
If AQ has cells in the continental US, they either active (given that they are in the middle of a knock-down, drag-out fight for their survival), or the AQ leadership has determined that the US is doing a fine job of furthering AQ's goals with its current strategy. If the need for Guantanamo has strengthened, will we see an expansion of it's capabilities? Do you think there might be obstacles to this?
Ron, boeman, at some time you will have to examine your belief systems for internal consistency. I myself cannot reconcile a living christian ethic with the desirability for torture (and humane torture is another oxymoron, Ron), nor can I reconcile the need for rule of law with denial of legal due process. The US military finds itself in a position similar to that of the late Vietnam war - it has abandoned those behavioural codes it determined as necessary for good maintenance of the organisation and, as a result, finds itself with a diminishing support base in the civilian population. The clearer thinkers in the leadership have left the organisation or been sidelined and those left have been those parroting the propaganda line. The eventual failure of the operation(s) will be blamed on the economic circumstances we're enduring (and they're going to get worse, much worse), but a more disciplined examination will show that the stated goals were unachievable without internally consistent philosophies backing up the reasoning behind the planning of the operations.
Sadly, US (and allied) military personnel, having repaired their reputation through the eighties and nineties with the adoption of those behavioural codes so easily abandoned through this last decade, will find themselves painted with the broad brush of condemnation that characterised the popular view of the military through the late sixties through to the late eighties.
-
The fact that the prisoners are well treated (apart from the torturing, granted) is justification for the denial of legal due process and the monstrous injustices perpetrated upon them?
It's a pool of bloody diarrhoea - why would anyone else want to clean up the mess when the US refuses to take steps to address the primary pathology? As I'm sure you understand, doing so raises the expectation of being requested to perform the same ****ty task in the future.
-
Aff, as I understand it, the idea behind the incarceration of people at Gitmo was based around a mathematical model of intelligence gathering: get enough people from the area you're interested in, ask them a number of questions, plug the data into a large and fast computer and you can build a picture of the environment you expect to be operating in. The more people and the more questions, the better the resultant picture.
I surmise that this was attractive enough an idea for it to be funded and tested. Most likely anyone who understood the failings of the model (mostly, that you still need intelligence gatherers on the ground, in country, so your economic justification for the existence of the program is at best just plain crap) was needed in the real-world business of intelligence gathering. Thus, the skills required for useful and effective interrogation were being employed elsewhere. Given that the benefits of the exercise were recognised by anyone with a modicum of intellect as about as likely as the natural occurrence of rocking-horse ****, methods of interrogation weren't subjected to cost/benefit analysis (this work having been done quite a long time ago, torture being found to be a quantitatively and qualitatively poorer option than practically all others), nor were they managed.
What was the point? Government funding for a privately owned and operated intelligence unit (sub-contracting of the intelligence work of the CIA in line with the dominant philosophy of taxpayer funding of state apparatus). The morality of the circumstances wasn't costed in because the morality of the circumstances was considered unimportant. It is a very sad indictment of the quality of the leadership of the USA that this program could be justified, supported, funded, defended and continued. The US leadership chose to surrender their moral right in the pursuit of the "War on Terror", and in doing so, surrendered their right to lead. The fact that their chosen path has done nothing good for anyone outside of the US defense industry is indicative of either the leadership's complicity in a plot to plunder the US taxpayer or the totality of it's intellectual impairment. If it were the former, there would be some hope for us all: I suspect it is the latter.
-
Two Justcarrots? How about we put you both in the colosseum with a pride of hungry lions? To make things interesting, we'll tie your hands and feet and paint you with honey (and maybe stick some hummingbirds or other small fluttery creatures to you). The one that lives longest wins.
-
Of course we bought the beer. Drank it, too. It was good - particularly the bit where we didn't share it with you, Emrys.
-
Hey Ron, good call on the money not mattering to the poor sods who fight the wars. Australians get paid about three times as much as the Yanks. You're fighting your own here.
Back to the morality/religion thing - I think we can simplify the argument and let it be be more tractable to reason if we understand that the difference between man and the "lower" order of animals is the acuity in the perception of time. Most of the arguments given have a time variable that applies: if we recognise that this is important, the argument is simplified, and for the most part (where we argue reasons for group behaviour) comes back to certain economic groups fighting for control and supremacy. Go back and read each counter, note where the perception of time plays a role: you will get what I mean. If you can't undertand "perception of time" as relevant, think about conciousness as a travelling loop in existence, the individual experiencing time, needing to predict events to enable enhanced survival capabilities.
The Libyan rebels constituted a central bank subservient to the IBS as part of their program. Where in history is there a precedent?
-
It's mostly about land entitlements (recognition of property and the the rent therefrom) that distinguishes the true peerage. About to come back into it's own.
-
He lives in luxury. Until he has kids.
Lamb loin chops are the best, easily the best, done on a grill. The only steak worth grilling is the scotch fillet (and if you can afford either of these, all the best - you made good life decisions). But cleaning the buggers of the rendered grease is a pain.
Grilled toasted cheese - mozzarella, tomato, spring onions and a sprinkling of pepper. Heaven in a heart attack. I miss the grill.
-
If you take mental illness as a deviaton from the norm, any sane person is in real trouble right now. As far as pot goes, it has real and detrimental effects on the brain's ability to supply functional recall to the individual - I expect it will turn out to be prime suspect in the search for the cause of Alzheimer's.
An industry not subject to taxation, reliant on relationships founded in mutual trust (and sustained through the continuation of those relationships) making the top spot in US cash crops? No! How?! The business model is obviously flawed!
-
My machine is pwned. Bad joss to you all - you still get to see the stuff I write (the pwnership is imperfect and subject to whims I do not understand). Hiram can't spell violet, Boo is the best, Stuka (or those parts of him that he most prizes, tho' they be so miniscule) will end up as the entree at some god-approved wedding of cannibal camel clanners. Foul ol' Joe takes his R&R more frequently these days - is he suffering? We hope so.
Boo, I see you took a leaf from the playbook and promoted yourself to Olde One. If you will suffer the critcism, your repartee vis-a-vis the mewling of the SSN lacked, hmm, tang. No spice on the tongue, no frisson of the inner ear, no challenge to the mental capacity of your beloved readers ('cept Stukes, poor guy, he can barely parse "I am") it was as bland as the stimulus.
I suggest (if you live in godzone) you get down to Dan's and get a bottle of Tariquet VSOP - damn fine stuff for the money. If you can't stand the French, get a bottle of Ardbeg (the price has gone beyond my means, or conscionable ability to pay, so it doesn't matter if I promote it). Happy Jesus killing anniversary everyone - chocolate is proof.
-
I'll trade ya a boatload of experienced service personnel for just a couple of decent sushi chefs.
Steve
Heh, you still have to buy the tuna. The Pacific breed is a tad irradiated these days, and those from the Gulf are loaded to the gills with corexit and oil. Hmmm, what else do you have to offer?
-
My all time favourite CD is H. von Karajan and the Berlin Philharmonic playing baroque and early romantic composers: Bach, Gluck, Mozart, Vivaldi, etc. Chopin (and Mozart) need to be exquisitely interpreted for me to enjoy: nothing sucks harder than badly played Mozart keyboards. Bach is a tough one too, the performer needs intellectual and emotional development, in combination with a mastery of the instrument, to bring out the nuance (somatic effect) of the composition. So I much prefer Barenboim's Chopin Nocturnes (another top CD, and another one engineered by Deutsche Grammophon) to Ashkenazy's, even though Ashkenazy probably has a better "touch" on the instrument. My taste in the modern, or nearly so, is likewise influenced by the gift displayed by the performer - Leonard Cohen, Sting, Johnny Cash, Elvis Costello, Sting, Nina Simone, Kasey Chambers. I'll admit to enjoying Queen (love Freddie's singing) and Frank Zappa (Them or Us is my favourite from him. I have Thing Fish, but I haven't listened to it more than once.)
-
Chimay - costs the earth and tastes like it has been through a Swiss, a German and two Frenchies before it got bottled. Oh, yeah, Belgium is at the bottom of the catchment...
Why is medicine expensive?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Have a safe trip Ron - come back with all your bits.
I'll dig around on this AMTRAK thing - there has to be a good reason for the gummint participation in the market (I suspect it's to do with the funding of maintenance costs from the federal budget). If not, then by all means, turf the bugger.