"Why is that a smart decision for the 25 year-old? Is he psychic enough to know that he will never get in a car accident or tear up his knee playing basketball?"
Why are you talking as though health care is inherently expensive and there's no possible way for a person to pay for it on their own?
As I said, I'm a diabetic. And on a dollars-paid basis, I break even on coverage. If you add up the amount I pay in premiums, and then add up the amount of expenses that are covered by the insurance provider, then they turn out to be within 10% of each other--and the balance goes to the payments side.
I admit that I'm not taking into account the pre-tax nature of the premium payments, but the point is that it's not out of the question for someone to buy their own doctoring, even with an expensive chronic condition like diabetes.
I think it's interesting how supporters of the Act say we're supposed to conform to the exact language in the "tax versus mandate" sense, but we're supposed to just understand that the Act includes severability even though the text doesn't say any such thing.
"Given these facts then where is your actual argument that a person growing wheat for their own use shouldn’t be touched by a Federal law?"
How about the Tenth Amendment? That seems a pretty clear justification for the argument that Congress can't use the ICC to regulate an activity which is neither commerce nor interstate.
But I have to say that, given all the myriad ways that children die, I wouldn't necessarily rank "miscarriage" as a serious medial issue either--with the caveat that any number of unintentionally dead babies is too many, and that ranking miscarriage as "less serious" on a relative scale doesn't mean I believe it's not serious.
And, frankly, I doubt that the philosophy test lets me make that distinction.
I have real problems with "philosophy tests" like this, mostly for the same reason as you; they seem to be more constructed around the idea of "gotchas" than an attempt to analyse or discuss actual philosophies.
"Their track record is proven beyond just about any other methods, but the Church is strongly against all of them."
Well, that's because the Church isn't so much pro-life as anti-sex. If you can have sex without consequences then you'll just do it all the time, instead of going out and doing the Lord's work. And, as they always say, the best form of birth control is someone else's bratty kid.
(And then they wonder why the priests can't keep their hands off the altar boys, but that's a different discussion.)
Exactly. It's not as though these people buying houses were greedy fucks who wanted a mansion for a dollar a day. They honestly believed the financial agents who told them that they could afford the house. (Hell, in most cases they were paying those agents, either by commission or directly!)
Of course, the conservative-troll reply to this liberal-troll would be that if you washed your goddamn hands you wouldn't get gangrene from a paper cut.
"Actually the way I read it the rural white person whose on disability would be in the ‘entitlement class’ while the one that’s a self employed home contractor would be in the ‘labor class’."
Per the Tennessee Taxonomy in the post, yes. Per Fussell's definition, no. Like I said.
"Yes but the usual thinking with a market system is that rewards (here ability to consume) should follow productivity. "
And the capital class is indeed productive. Transplanted Lawyer gets paid to provide them with legal services; makers of luxury items derive income from the existence of the capital class's trust funds and investments; heck, even those fund and investment managers wouldn't have jobs if there weren't funds and investments for them to manage. While the members of the capital class might not be earning money through their own effort, it's not like they don't put money into the economy.
Indeed, what TL suggests is that the notion of "get money because of personal effort" is an expression of class morality, not a universal truth.
" I’m not arguing that’s right or wrong, just that the politics of the day can affect our constitutional law."
...and this isn't a case of the politics of the day affecting constitutional law?
You're talking as though the interpretation of the Commerce Clause as a "Do Anything I Want To" Clause is something that everyone has agreed on for a long time, and now here's these Republican idiots trying to screw everything up. That's not the case.
To those who are wondering "Why
isn't 'S-F' the same as 'sci-fi'?"
Well, you see, there's a fine line
between Robert Heinlein
and 'Son of the Two-Headed Fly'.
250 years before Al Gore invented the Internet, and here's James Madison telling us why Web2.0 and "crowdsourcing" are terrible ideas. The Founding Fathers were visionaries indeed!
No, because the term implies "government payments are the sole source of support and the person is intentionally acting so as to maximize those payments, to the extent of acting in an immoral and irresponsible manner". "Got some kind of government benefit" is not the same thing.
Haha, yeah. "These are the best years of your life! Now eat this boring food you hate and then get to bed. You've got to get up early tomorrow so you aren't late for eight hours of school!"
I can think of a few. Or, at least, I can think of some where I'd have rather been more cutting, more intellectual, more willing to grab an opportunity and ram it up the bastard's ass sideways. Instead of just bellowing inchoate fury and storming off. There's some fights I'd love to do over again.
"The Gulf may not be totaled, but it, and the coast people, are seriously damaged."
And one of the reasons that the Gulf and the coast people are so seriously damaged is the number of people insisting that the Gulf and the coast people must be seriously damaged.
"I'm not going to eat Gulf shrimp, everyone says they're full of oil!" "Have you actually looked it up yourself?" "Well, no, but everyone says they are..."
Are there any states where stimulus couldn't be said to have "helped get them through the last few years"?
I guess you could say that if a state didn't take any stimulus money at all. But then, if they have a budget deficit and don't take stimulus money they're "foolishly ideological to the point of harming their residents". If they didn't take money and don't have a deficit then they're "ignoring the threat of underfunded pensions". And if they didn't take money and don't have deficits and are fully funding their pensions, well, I'm sure there's a pothole somewhere that will let us do 'em for "crumbling infrastructure".
That Act established government-built and -run hospitals, staffed with doctors who were government employees. It was paid for by taxing the wages of only those it was intended to benefit. And it was put into place because the persons in question were considered vital to national security.
"You can have two rural white people both with average incomes but belonging to two different classes….one person’s ‘average income’ coming from say being a contractor and another person’s ‘average income’ coming from disability payments."
Except that Fussell would say that both of those persons were the same 'class', at least the way he defines classes.
"There are indeed a class of people who make their way by being parasites on the ‘capital class’ either as heirs to fortunes or simply ‘hangers on’..."
But that's not a 'class' as defined by Transplanted Lawyer. That's just an occupation. He'd say that those people you describe are probably solidly within the 'labor class', in that they believe Work is necessary to obtain Wealth. The Tennessee Taxonomy doesn't make any distinctions about what kind of work--indeed, there's just as much of an industry providing services to the 'entitlement class' as there is to the 'capital class'.
"This is somewhat ironic IMO because you’d think the market system would drive towards efficiency and productivity but it seems like many in the ‘capital class’ are not very efficient nor productive. "
In a way, this is addressed by Transplanted Lawyer's comment that "[i]n terms of absolute dollars, cable TV, cell phones, clothing, and even auto leases are not terribly expensive anymore." This applies to both ends of the scale. Society is becoming increasingly removed from the confluence of income and survival; that is, you don't have to work anymore to obtain what's needed for survival (and, depending on your tastes, the what's needed for luxury.)
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “History’s Lost, Part I: Stesichorus”
That guy's name sounds like a dinosaur. "The fearsome Allosaurus often preyed upon the stolid Stestichorus..."
On “Florida Judge Voids Affordable Care Act”
"Why is that a smart decision for the 25 year-old? Is he psychic enough to know that he will never get in a car accident or tear up his knee playing basketball?"
Why are you talking as though health care is inherently expensive and there's no possible way for a person to pay for it on their own?
As I said, I'm a diabetic. And on a dollars-paid basis, I break even on coverage. If you add up the amount I pay in premiums, and then add up the amount of expenses that are covered by the insurance provider, then they turn out to be within 10% of each other--and the balance goes to the payments side.
I admit that I'm not taking into account the pre-tax nature of the premium payments, but the point is that it's not out of the question for someone to buy their own doctoring, even with an expensive chronic condition like diabetes.
"
If I weren't a diabetic, then I wouldn't have had a single health-care expense since the day 20 years ago when my wisdom teeth were removed.
"
I think it's interesting how supporters of the Act say we're supposed to conform to the exact language in the "tax versus mandate" sense, but we're supposed to just understand that the Act includes severability even though the text doesn't say any such thing.
"
"Given these facts then where is your actual argument that a person growing wheat for their own use shouldn’t be touched by a Federal law?"
How about the Tenth Amendment? That seems a pretty clear justification for the argument that Congress can't use the ICC to regulate an activity which is neither commerce nor interstate.
On “A Utilitarian Framework for Evaluating the Morality of Abortion”
I can't go to the site at work, due to filtering.
But I have to say that, given all the myriad ways that children die, I wouldn't necessarily rank "miscarriage" as a serious medial issue either--with the caveat that any number of unintentionally dead babies is too many, and that ranking miscarriage as "less serious" on a relative scale doesn't mean I believe it's not serious.
And, frankly, I doubt that the philosophy test lets me make that distinction.
"
I have real problems with "philosophy tests" like this, mostly for the same reason as you; they seem to be more constructed around the idea of "gotchas" than an attempt to analyse or discuss actual philosophies.
"
"Their track record is proven beyond just about any other methods, but the Church is strongly against all of them."
Well, that's because the Church isn't so much pro-life as anti-sex. If you can have sex without consequences then you'll just do it all the time, instead of going out and doing the Lord's work. And, as they always say, the best form of birth control is someone else's bratty kid.
(And then they wonder why the priests can't keep their hands off the altar boys, but that's a different discussion.)
"
See, the funny part is that you're being as inflexible and absolutionist as the anti-abortionists you despise.
On “Wealth Transfer”
Same here, although I had to ask twice to be shown a scenario that wasn't two-mortgage interest-only nothing-down ARMs.
"
Exactly. It's not as though these people buying houses were greedy fucks who wanted a mansion for a dollar a day. They honestly believed the financial agents who told them that they could afford the house. (Hell, in most cases they were paying those agents, either by commission or directly!)
On “Oh the times! Oh the customs!”
Of course, the conservative-troll reply to this liberal-troll would be that if you washed your goddamn hands you wouldn't get gangrene from a paper cut.
"
Starbucks is a fad? Yeah, just like that Mickey Donald place. It'll never catch on, people like the local diner too much to go somewhere else.
On “Three Classes”
"Actually the way I read it the rural white person whose on disability would be in the ‘entitlement class’ while the one that’s a self employed home contractor would be in the ‘labor class’."
Per the Tennessee Taxonomy in the post, yes. Per Fussell's definition, no. Like I said.
"Yes but the usual thinking with a market system is that rewards (here ability to consume) should follow productivity. "
And the capital class is indeed productive. Transplanted Lawyer gets paid to provide them with legal services; makers of luxury items derive income from the existence of the capital class's trust funds and investments; heck, even those fund and investment managers wouldn't have jobs if there weren't funds and investments for them to manage. While the members of the capital class might not be earning money through their own effort, it's not like they don't put money into the economy.
Indeed, what TL suggests is that the notion of "get money because of personal effort" is an expression of class morality, not a universal truth.
On “Texas, Welfare Queen”
When was the last time Bill Gates did anything resembling the "work" his academic career had prepared him for?
On “Schilling on Social Security”
" I’m not arguing that’s right or wrong, just that the politics of the day can affect our constitutional law."
...and this isn't a case of the politics of the day affecting constitutional law?
You're talking as though the interpretation of the Commerce Clause as a "Do Anything I Want To" Clause is something that everyone has agreed on for a long time, and now here's these Republican idiots trying to screw everything up. That's not the case.
On “Science in Sci-Fi film”
To those who are wondering "Why
isn't 'S-F' the same as 'sci-fi'?"
Well, you see, there's a fine line
between Robert Heinlein
and 'Son of the Two-Headed Fly'.
On “Oh the times! Oh the customs!”
250 years before Al Gore invented the Internet, and here's James Madison telling us why Web2.0 and "crowdsourcing" are terrible ideas. The Founding Fathers were visionaries indeed!
On “Texas, Welfare Queen”
No, because the term implies "government payments are the sole source of support and the person is intentionally acting so as to maximize those payments, to the extent of acting in an immoral and irresponsible manner". "Got some kind of government benefit" is not the same thing.
On “What’s your Sputnik moment?”
Haha, yeah. "These are the best years of your life! Now eat this boring food you hate and then get to bed. You've got to get up early tomorrow so you aren't late for eight hours of school!"
"
I can think of a few. Or, at least, I can think of some where I'd have rather been more cutting, more intellectual, more willing to grab an opportunity and ram it up the bastard's ass sideways. Instead of just bellowing inchoate fury and storming off. There's some fights I'd love to do over again.
On “Obama’s pep talk”
"The Gulf may not be totaled, but it, and the coast people, are seriously damaged."
And one of the reasons that the Gulf and the coast people are so seriously damaged is the number of people insisting that the Gulf and the coast people must be seriously damaged.
"I'm not going to eat Gulf shrimp, everyone says they're full of oil!" "Have you actually looked it up yourself?" "Well, no, but everyone says they are..."
On “Texas, Welfare Queen”
Are there any states where stimulus couldn't be said to have "helped get them through the last few years"?
I guess you could say that if a state didn't take any stimulus money at all. But then, if they have a budget deficit and don't take stimulus money they're "foolishly ideological to the point of harming their residents". If they didn't take money and don't have a deficit then they're "ignoring the threat of underfunded pensions". And if they didn't take money and don't have deficits and are fully funding their pensions, well, I'm sure there's a pothole somewhere that will let us do 'em for "crumbling infrastructure".
On “Schilling on Social Security”
That Act established government-built and -run hospitals, staffed with doctors who were government employees. It was paid for by taxing the wages of only those it was intended to benefit. And it was put into place because the persons in question were considered vital to national security.
That's not Obamacare; that's the VA.
On “Three Classes”
"You can have two rural white people both with average incomes but belonging to two different classes….one person’s ‘average income’ coming from say being a contractor and another person’s ‘average income’ coming from disability payments."
Except that Fussell would say that both of those persons were the same 'class', at least the way he defines classes.
"There are indeed a class of people who make their way by being parasites on the ‘capital class’ either as heirs to fortunes or simply ‘hangers on’..."
But that's not a 'class' as defined by Transplanted Lawyer. That's just an occupation. He'd say that those people you describe are probably solidly within the 'labor class', in that they believe Work is necessary to obtain Wealth. The Tennessee Taxonomy doesn't make any distinctions about what kind of work--indeed, there's just as much of an industry providing services to the 'entitlement class' as there is to the 'capital class'.
"This is somewhat ironic IMO because you’d think the market system would drive towards efficiency and productivity but it seems like many in the ‘capital class’ are not very efficient nor productive. "
In a way, this is addressed by Transplanted Lawyer's comment that "[i]n terms of absolute dollars, cable TV, cell phones, clothing, and even auto leases are not terribly expensive anymore." This applies to both ends of the scale. Society is becoming increasingly removed from the confluence of income and survival; that is, you don't have to work anymore to obtain what's needed for survival (and, depending on your tastes, the what's needed for luxury.)
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.