I agree with Shazbot5, its unclear that intervening in Syria would make things better. The opposition to Assad is wide-spread but ill-defined. There are no prominent organizations or leaders among them. It just seems to be a loosely confederated group of different organizations that share one goal, getting rid of Assad. In Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt, the opposition was a bit better defined.
Its also unclear whether the opposition is going to be better than Assad. Many of the minority groups in Syria are siding with Assad because they fear persecution from the Sunni majority if the Opposition wins the Syrian Civil War. Its not even clear whether Opposition knows what they want for Syria besides no Assad.
The entire situation in Syria is chaotic. We should provide asylum and aid for Syrian refugees. Thats a given. Feed them, clothe them, house them, medicate them, and give them legal status in other countries if they so desire. At the same time, do not intervene within interal Syrian politics except to contain the Syrian Civil War in Syria. More actors would just make the entire situation more confusing.
Isn't X one of the obscure bands from the 1980s and not even late 1980s but early to mid-1980s? They were kind of like Sonic Youth but slightly older when they started or at least I thought as much. Are they still around?
Egypt seems intent on turning itself into Pakistan-on-the-Nile. Is there anyway we can convince the Muslim-majority countries to keep the fighting among themselves and leave the rest of the world out of it?
The problem is that a lot of dancers do have a limited shelf life, especially if they are women. They are best from their twenties to mid-thirities and than the body begins to take its toll. Men have a slightly longer career life. Partner dancers can last longer to since the stress on the body is a bit less, so its more forgiving. Athletes also have a short shelf life. The incentives are for using this short professional life as best as possible for everybody even if its at the cost of the body.
Shazbot lists all the reasons why intervening in Syria is a really, really bad idea. Syria is a mess and horrible things are happening in it. More people have been killed in the Syrian Civil War than the entire Arab-Israel conflict. I think that intervention in Syria is going to make things much worse and we really shouldn't intervene because of this.
Assad is bastard but its not really that clear whether the opposition would be much better except in the sense that leadership would be more widespread so we would have more people participating in the making of really bad decisions. The best we can do is make sure that Syrian troubles remain internal.
A lot of parents aren't going to help because they are living vicariously through their daughter dancers and athletic sons and encouraging some really bad decisions as a result. Even if parents aren't living vicariously through their children, they might egg them on. Parents are only going to be help if they are satisfied enough with their lives that the do not feel a need to push their children.
Kazzy, what type of dancing did Chloe did? Was it ballet/modern/theatrical dancing or was it more competitive partner dancing? I'm involved in partner dancing on an amateur level and its culture is a bit different than ballet/modern/theatrical dancing. Partner dancing tends to have fewer of the concerns about weight and body than ballet/modern dance but dancers also have a longer professional life in partner dancing so it might be a side effect of that. Why damage something that you are going to need for the rest of your career?
Just Me hit the nail on the head. We as a society have beliefs about what the ideal athlete or dancer should look like. People really want to see talented athletes and dancers, they pay good money for it. Dancers are less lionized than athletes but are just as popular in the right social circles. There are people who seem to have a natural tendency to punish their bodies in order to become an athlete or dancer even if most of them are going to fail. There are parents who are going to push their kids in that direction. You can't really solve these problems without really changing society enough so that there isn't a demand for people to push their bodies.
This is pretty spot on. I think that the two biggest problems with more than a few gun owners is that many of them seem to feel the need to be a hero and that they are absolutely sure of their skill. Its the entire the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. I'd really like to hear at least one gun owner express some doubt about his or her ability in mass spree shooting. The certainty among them is disconcerning.
The other problem is that many of them to have they "when all you have is a hammer, all your problems" look like nails. "Bad people" do bad things with guns? Why the solution is to have good people do good things with guns, which mainly seems to be shooting "bad people". There can't be any other solution like allowing people with mental illneses to get the help they need.
The market for people who need replacement organs might be relatively static but the people in the market for replacement organs usually need them as a matter of life and death. That will make up for the relative staticness of the market more than enough to make it lucretive.
We have no evidence of that in the record. She could have been in many different positions during conception. Thats nothing more than impermissible speculation and conjecture.
What about the entire 19th century? Very little or no regulation of the economy or finance and no bankruptcy laws and no government bailouts or assistance during the various panics.
I'm sorry I can't really buy this. I can't think of any historical or current example where a corporation willingly agreed to treat the environment better or deal with workers more fairly or build safer products simply because of market pressure or to protect the brand. Corporations and indivdual business people have opposed environmental regulations, workplace safety regulations, unionization, and product safety regulation hook, line, and singer. They have hid scientific evidence that their products were harmful to the public, I'm thinking asbestos and tobacco, and opposed warning labels. In general, corporations only acted better because of fear of government regulation or because of government regulation.
Corporations care about the bottom line and the bottom line is that pollution, lack of workplace safety, a non-unionized workforce, and lack of product safety regulations increase profits. Public ignorance of the harmful effects of certain products increase profits.
If I remember correctly, I think that the generation that has grown up with the Internet and social media place less value on privacy has a whole because of the nature of the Internet. If you engage in sexting than your sense of privacy is probably not going to be great. I think that a sense of privacy is closely aligned with a sense of inhibition, that there are something's that you don't want people to know. With no sense of inhibition there is no value given to privacy.
But people have more power over government through the democratic process and protest. It's very hard, long, and boring work but it is possible to address the abuses of government. In contrast, my toolkit in dealing with the abuses of corporations are much more limited. I can protest against pollution or abuse of employees as much ad I want but corporations usually only change their ways under government order.
The problem with a "do nothing but ordinary law enforcement" response to terrorism in a democracy is that the politicians have to deal with the voters. The number of people who will be fine with "do nothing" are insignificant to the vote the bums out of office for not protecting us crowd. People want to be safe or at least feel safe and will vote accordingly. Politicians know this and act accordingly in order to keep their jobs.
Oh please Katherine. Every Arab and Muslim leader tells the Palestiniams never to compromise and so do their intellectual allies in the West. Palestinian leadership have always chosen war over negotiation since 1948. Same goes for most of the test of Arab leadership. Do the Palestinians have no agency? Is it not possible that at least some of their decisions might have been not for the best?
Paying taxes used to be seen as an act of civic virtue by many people. If you see taxes as an act virtue, its not taking anything. Especially since money comes from the government anyway. Without the state, there would be no market and no private property.
As to essential services, yes they loose the right to strike in theory but it happens at times anyway. Also, nobody is forcing people to enter into government service. Civil servants do not look at a young person and say since that person is strong and brave he or she must become a fireman or marine. Its a voluntary choice.
This is nonsense. Most of the positive rights like education or healthcare are provided through taxes and people become teachers and healthcare providers on their own volition. Public housing is also funded through taxation and built through contracts in the construction business and designed by paid architects. The government does not force anybody to provide labor for positive rights, it pays them to provide labor. Even in a libertarian system, some taxation and labour is necessary for things like the courts and the police. A libertarian government is not entirely without services.
Have you ever considered that it might be worth some effort to get the Palestinians and other Arabs just to accept the fact that Israel exists rather than to encourage them on in their worse behavior?
I can find no shortage of essays, columns, and what not from alleged allies of Israel telling Israel that the time for the amount of time left for the two-state solution is ending, that a deal has to be reached now or its the end of Israel. Essays like this have been published regularly since 1948. What I can't find are similar essays from the alleged allies of the Palestinians saying something similar. I can find several essays that tell the Palestinians or really Muslims in general, never to give into the "evil, colonialist Zionists" and fight on to the end of Israel. These essays usually engage in some rather blatant Jew-hatred. Has anybody who is Pro-Palestinian ever considered that we might have progress if the Palestinians were given the same message to compromise that Israelis regularly receive.
And honestly, I find Evangelical Zionists much more to my liking than the Christian Anti-Zionists, whom at best believe in "lets cross our fingers and hope it doesn't turn out to badly for the Jews" at best, basically benign apathy, to outright malevolence at worse.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Waiting for Halabja”
I agree with Shazbot5, its unclear that intervening in Syria would make things better. The opposition to Assad is wide-spread but ill-defined. There are no prominent organizations or leaders among them. It just seems to be a loosely confederated group of different organizations that share one goal, getting rid of Assad. In Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt, the opposition was a bit better defined.
Its also unclear whether the opposition is going to be better than Assad. Many of the minority groups in Syria are siding with Assad because they fear persecution from the Sunni majority if the Opposition wins the Syrian Civil War. Its not even clear whether Opposition knows what they want for Syria besides no Assad.
The entire situation in Syria is chaotic. We should provide asylum and aid for Syrian refugees. Thats a given. Feed them, clothe them, house them, medicate them, and give them legal status in other countries if they so desire. At the same time, do not intervene within interal Syrian politics except to contain the Syrian Civil War in Syria. More actors would just make the entire situation more confusing.
On “So Now We All Need to Learn the Words”
Isn't X one of the obscure bands from the 1980s and not even late 1980s but early to mid-1980s? They were kind of like Sonic Youth but slightly older when they started or at least I thought as much. Are they still around?
On “Small Arms in Syria”
Egypt seems intent on turning itself into Pakistan-on-the-Nile. Is there anyway we can convince the Muslim-majority countries to keep the fighting among themselves and leave the rest of the world out of it?
On “Performance Enhancing Dieting”
The problem is that a lot of dancers do have a limited shelf life, especially if they are women. They are best from their twenties to mid-thirities and than the body begins to take its toll. Men have a slightly longer career life. Partner dancers can last longer to since the stress on the body is a bit less, so its more forgiving. Athletes also have a short shelf life. The incentives are for using this short professional life as best as possible for everybody even if its at the cost of the body.
On “Small Arms in Syria”
Shazbot lists all the reasons why intervening in Syria is a really, really bad idea. Syria is a mess and horrible things are happening in it. More people have been killed in the Syrian Civil War than the entire Arab-Israel conflict. I think that intervention in Syria is going to make things much worse and we really shouldn't intervene because of this.
Assad is bastard but its not really that clear whether the opposition would be much better except in the sense that leadership would be more widespread so we would have more people participating in the making of really bad decisions. The best we can do is make sure that Syrian troubles remain internal.
On “Performance Enhancing Dieting”
A lot of parents aren't going to help because they are living vicariously through their daughter dancers and athletic sons and encouraging some really bad decisions as a result. Even if parents aren't living vicariously through their children, they might egg them on. Parents are only going to be help if they are satisfied enough with their lives that the do not feel a need to push their children.
"
Kazzy, what type of dancing did Chloe did? Was it ballet/modern/theatrical dancing or was it more competitive partner dancing? I'm involved in partner dancing on an amateur level and its culture is a bit different than ballet/modern/theatrical dancing. Partner dancing tends to have fewer of the concerns about weight and body than ballet/modern dance but dancers also have a longer professional life in partner dancing so it might be a side effect of that. Why damage something that you are going to need for the rest of your career?
Just Me hit the nail on the head. We as a society have beliefs about what the ideal athlete or dancer should look like. People really want to see talented athletes and dancers, they pay good money for it. Dancers are less lionized than athletes but are just as popular in the right social circles. There are people who seem to have a natural tendency to punish their bodies in order to become an athlete or dancer even if most of them are going to fail. There are parents who are going to push their kids in that direction. You can't really solve these problems without really changing society enough so that there isn't a demand for people to push their bodies.
On “The Shockingly Small Worth of a Woman’s Life: Texas, Gun Culture, and Black & White Worlds”
This is pretty spot on. I think that the two biggest problems with more than a few gun owners is that many of them seem to feel the need to be a hero and that they are absolutely sure of their skill. Its the entire the way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. I'd really like to hear at least one gun owner express some doubt about his or her ability in mass spree shooting. The certainty among them is disconcerning.
The other problem is that many of them to have they "when all you have is a hammer, all your problems" look like nails. "Bad people" do bad things with guns? Why the solution is to have good people do good things with guns, which mainly seems to be shooting "bad people". There can't be any other solution like allowing people with mental illneses to get the help they need.
On “Putting a Price on Kidneys”
The market for people who need replacement organs might be relatively static but the people in the market for replacement organs usually need them as a matter of life and death. That will make up for the relative staticness of the market more than enough to make it lucretive.
On “Thursday Night Bar Fight #12: Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Batman!!!”
How about the theme to the Batman tv show. Nanananananannan, Batman
"
Go to you room.
"
We have no evidence of that in the record. She could have been in many different positions during conception. Thats nothing more than impermissible speculation and conjecture.
On “Putting a Price on Kidneys”
Isn't the fact that many libertarians recognize that an organ market will need to be strongly regulated something of a red flg?
"
Isn't the fact that many libertarians recognize that an organ market will need to be strongly regulated something of a red flg?
On “Let the Character Assassinations Begin”
What about the entire 19th century? Very little or no regulation of the economy or finance and no bankruptcy laws and no government bailouts or assistance during the various panics.
"
Yes, this.
On “On Wrigley Field and Governments vs. Corporations”
I'm sorry I can't really buy this. I can't think of any historical or current example where a corporation willingly agreed to treat the environment better or deal with workers more fairly or build safer products simply because of market pressure or to protect the brand. Corporations and indivdual business people have opposed environmental regulations, workplace safety regulations, unionization, and product safety regulation hook, line, and singer. They have hid scientific evidence that their products were harmful to the public, I'm thinking asbestos and tobacco, and opposed warning labels. In general, corporations only acted better because of fear of government regulation or because of government regulation.
Corporations care about the bottom line and the bottom line is that pollution, lack of workplace safety, a non-unionized workforce, and lack of product safety regulations increase profits. Public ignorance of the harmful effects of certain products increase profits.
On “Things to Hide”
If I remember correctly, I think that the generation that has grown up with the Internet and social media place less value on privacy has a whole because of the nature of the Internet. If you engage in sexting than your sense of privacy is probably not going to be great. I think that a sense of privacy is closely aligned with a sense of inhibition, that there are something's that you don't want people to know. With no sense of inhibition there is no value given to privacy.
On “On Wrigley Field and Governments vs. Corporations”
But people have more power over government through the democratic process and protest. It's very hard, long, and boring work but it is possible to address the abuses of government. In contrast, my toolkit in dealing with the abuses of corporations are much more limited. I can protest against pollution or abuse of employees as much ad I want but corporations usually only change their ways under government order.
On “Random Thoughts on the NSA and Metadata”
The problem with a "do nothing but ordinary law enforcement" response to terrorism in a democracy is that the politicians have to deal with the voters. The number of people who will be fine with "do nothing" are insignificant to the vote the bums out of office for not protecting us crowd. People want to be safe or at least feel safe and will vote accordingly. Politicians know this and act accordingly in order to keep their jobs.
On “How the Tea Party Movement Is Often About Things Uglier Than Fiscal Restraint, and a Challenge to Public Conservatives Who Claim Otherwise”
Oh please Katherine. Every Arab and Muslim leader tells the Palestiniams never to compromise and so do their intellectual allies in the West. Palestinian leadership have always chosen war over negotiation since 1948. Same goes for most of the test of Arab leadership. Do the Palestinians have no agency? Is it not possible that at least some of their decisions might have been not for the best?
On “Comment Rescue: A Priorism in Libertarianism”
Paying taxes used to be seen as an act of civic virtue by many people. If you see taxes as an act virtue, its not taking anything. Especially since money comes from the government anyway. Without the state, there would be no market and no private property.
As to essential services, yes they loose the right to strike in theory but it happens at times anyway. Also, nobody is forcing people to enter into government service. Civil servants do not look at a young person and say since that person is strong and brave he or she must become a fireman or marine. Its a voluntary choice.
"
This is nonsense. Most of the positive rights like education or healthcare are provided through taxes and people become teachers and healthcare providers on their own volition. Public housing is also funded through taxation and built through contracts in the construction business and designed by paid architects. The government does not force anybody to provide labor for positive rights, it pays them to provide labor. Even in a libertarian system, some taxation and labour is necessary for things like the courts and the police. A libertarian government is not entirely without services.
On “How the Tea Party Movement Is Often About Things Uglier Than Fiscal Restraint, and a Challenge to Public Conservatives Who Claim Otherwise”
Have you ever considered that it might be worth some effort to get the Palestinians and other Arabs just to accept the fact that Israel exists rather than to encourage them on in their worse behavior?
I can find no shortage of essays, columns, and what not from alleged allies of Israel telling Israel that the time for the amount of time left for the two-state solution is ending, that a deal has to be reached now or its the end of Israel. Essays like this have been published regularly since 1948. What I can't find are similar essays from the alleged allies of the Palestinians saying something similar. I can find several essays that tell the Palestinians or really Muslims in general, never to give into the "evil, colonialist Zionists" and fight on to the end of Israel. These essays usually engage in some rather blatant Jew-hatred. Has anybody who is Pro-Palestinian ever considered that we might have progress if the Palestinians were given the same message to compromise that Israelis regularly receive.
"
And honestly, I find Evangelical Zionists much more to my liking than the Christian Anti-Zionists, whom at best believe in "lets cross our fingers and hope it doesn't turn out to badly for the Jews" at best, basically benign apathy, to outright malevolence at worse.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.