Minnesota here and Nova Scotia before. The worst the environs can sling in this charming state is a snow storm or a tornado so I don't fret very much. Well I suppose there's the supervolcanoe in Yellowstone but hell, if that puppy pops I'd be dead of asphyxiation before I started worrying about food.
*sigh* every time I think I've heard the most cringe inducing embaressing and mortifying thing about "ex-gays" and nothing will top it; something new comes along to shovel a few more feet out of the bottom of that hole. Those poor poor bastards.
Congrats ED, make sure you post your updates to the damn sidebar.. real life presses me cruelly. I can't surf all your blog empire looking for your comments.
Sonmi, I take second place to very few people in my support of abortion choices for women but surely you have to admit that Murali's presentation comes from a much different angle than your standard pro-life lines.
I personally think that even by his own Rawlsian reasoning he's giving too much weight (and simplicity) to the position of the pre-personhood fetus and far too little to the pregnancy carrying woman. But it's an interesting formulation.
I'd also agree that his more expansive definitions of "if you're liberal or libertarian then you should believe not only this but also this and this" lines are certainly weak and grating. That they're weak merits them having holes poked in them. That their wording may be grating does merit some charity; we're not discussing this in his first language and he is from a foreign (and more authoratarian) culture so yes he'll see and present things in a different and potentially more jarring manner.
Also I like to try and remain level of cheerful toned regardless of the author.
The problem generally is that Freddie doesn't argue here; he pronounces. I love his writing but he has an utterly horrific habit of flying in, depositing a condemnation and then flying off again into the ether never to be heard from again on the subject.
Also I think Freddie prefers to save his powder for higher profile objections than the posts here at our humble little League (and that's a perfectly sensible choice).
Gently Sonmi, I understand (and agree) that questions of abortion and gay marriage are emotionally freighted but best to remain level toned. Murali's excellent thought provoking writing was no more representative of liberaltarianism than is was a legitimate rewriting of what liberals and libertarians believe. Murali is merely presenting his view and reasoning as it appears to him from his unique cultural and philosophical background. I think there is an enormous amount of value in him presenting that even though I don't agree with him.
Yeah I don't agree with her but she's a pretty nice blogger. If she ever got tired of the pay and the prestige of writing at the Atlantic she could fit in here pretty well.
Joey, I haven't been around my old haunts here at the League as much as I'd like so I'm unfamiliar with you and am unsure if you're about a lot. As a (presumably) fellow liberal would you mind upping your game? The trolling and such is kindof embarrassing for us fellow travelers on your side of the political spectrum. Also it could eventually get you thrown out (and rightfully so) so come on, put some effort and thought into your comments dude. Please?
No thanks, I know better than to try and replicate you. We can barely contain your brilliance inside Mindless Diversions and despite all the lead I ducktape to the walls there you still get out and sprinkle your wry wit all over the rest of the League.
Didn't mean to imply you'd be angry Jay. Just threw in our best known non-angry wry libertarian as the likely outcome of the mutually destructive reaction of an angry liberal and angry conservative.
Well yeah, Mcmegan has a special writing tone she uses that drives people nuts and she has some tics that justifiably earn her a lot of negative credit.
But I found this article of hers pretty decent, once you get around the way she sometimes puts things. Certainly reading the whole thing really helps.
Well McArdle posited that outside of the large effect that decision making and time constraints put on the poor there was also a strong negative effect from the very support networks they create to survive at that economic level. For instance a tight night social circle will help get you food and a place to sleep when the wolves are at the door but will also tap into you in return when you benefit from improved circumstances or a windfall.
If we could somehow bring both of the Leagues Scott's into close proximity to each other in a controlled setting the resulting all heat/no light fooferaw could probably power enough turbines to keep the east coast illuminated with carbon free electricity. Of course it might also produce a troll-fest singularity that'd suck the entire internets in and crush it to the size of a grape. Perhaps best not to risk it.
McArdle can been a touch kooky at times but I found her post in question pretty thoughtful and even handed. Did you read it? It addressed most of your points here.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “The Amish, Imagery, and 9/11”
Great stuff Mark.
On “Rethinking Rural and Urban Investment”
Actually Kimmie I've always heard that the very worst of the slumlords were products of rent control.
On “Prepping for Emergencies”
Minnesota here and Nova Scotia before. The worst the environs can sling in this charming state is a snow storm or a tornado so I don't fret very much. Well I suppose there's the supervolcanoe in Yellowstone but hell, if that puppy pops I'd be dead of asphyxiation before I started worrying about food.
On “Occasional Notes: Temptations”
*sigh* every time I think I've heard the most cringe inducing embaressing and mortifying thing about "ex-gays" and nothing will top it; something new comes along to shovel a few more feet out of the bottom of that hole. Those poor poor bastards.
On “A New Politics Blog”
Congrats ED, make sure you post your updates to the damn sidebar.. real life presses me cruelly. I can't surf all your blog empire looking for your comments.
On “On Envy”
Agreed.
On “More on abortion, and liberalism (and for that matter liberaltarianism)”
Sonmi, I take second place to very few people in my support of abortion choices for women but surely you have to admit that Murali's presentation comes from a much different angle than your standard pro-life lines.
I personally think that even by his own Rawlsian reasoning he's giving too much weight (and simplicity) to the position of the pre-personhood fetus and far too little to the pregnancy carrying woman. But it's an interesting formulation.
I'd also agree that his more expansive definitions of "if you're liberal or libertarian then you should believe not only this but also this and this" lines are certainly weak and grating. That they're weak merits them having holes poked in them. That their wording may be grating does merit some charity; we're not discussing this in his first language and he is from a foreign (and more authoratarian) culture so yes he'll see and present things in a different and potentially more jarring manner.
Also I like to try and remain level of cheerful toned regardless of the author.
On “On Envy”
The problem generally is that Freddie doesn't argue here; he pronounces. I love his writing but he has an utterly horrific habit of flying in, depositing a condemnation and then flying off again into the ether never to be heard from again on the subject.
Also I think Freddie prefers to save his powder for higher profile objections than the posts here at our humble little League (and that's a perfectly sensible choice).
On “More on abortion, and liberalism (and for that matter liberaltarianism)”
Gently Sonmi, I understand (and agree) that questions of abortion and gay marriage are emotionally freighted but best to remain level toned. Murali's excellent thought provoking writing was no more representative of liberaltarianism than is was a legitimate rewriting of what liberals and libertarians believe. Murali is merely presenting his view and reasoning as it appears to him from his unique cultural and philosophical background. I think there is an enormous amount of value in him presenting that even though I don't agree with him.
"
Condolences on your cat BlaiseP.
On “The Habits of the Poor”
You're lucky this salon we chat in is electronic or I'd have thrown a bottle.
"
I've always left the purity tests to conservatives.
"
Huh, ya learn something new every day. Good job on that at least.
"
Are you sure you're a liberal? You sure seem intent on pushing people into the conservative camp.
"
I'd be grateful if you'd stop implying through word and behavior that courtesy and thoughtfulness are antithical to the left.
"
Probably because I've never read her endorsing objectivism?
"
Yeah I don't agree with her but she's a pretty nice blogger. If she ever got tired of the pay and the prestige of writing at the Atlantic she could fit in here pretty well.
Wonder what she'd call her sub-blog?
"
Joey, I haven't been around my old haunts here at the League as much as I'd like so I'm unfamiliar with you and am unsure if you're about a lot. As a (presumably) fellow liberal would you mind upping your game? The trolling and such is kindof embarrassing for us fellow travelers on your side of the political spectrum. Also it could eventually get you thrown out (and rightfully so) so come on, put some effort and thought into your comments dude. Please?
"
No thanks, I know better than to try and replicate you. We can barely contain your brilliance inside Mindless Diversions and despite all the lead I ducktape to the walls there you still get out and sprinkle your wry wit all over the rest of the League.
"
Didn't mean to imply you'd be angry Jay. Just threw in our best known non-angry wry libertarian as the likely outcome of the mutually destructive reaction of an angry liberal and angry conservative.
"
Ohh or they'd cancel out and turn into Jay Bird! *ba dum dum*
"
Well yeah, Mcmegan has a special writing tone she uses that drives people nuts and she has some tics that justifiably earn her a lot of negative credit.
But I found this article of hers pretty decent, once you get around the way she sometimes puts things. Certainly reading the whole thing really helps.
"
Well McArdle posited that outside of the large effect that decision making and time constraints put on the poor there was also a strong negative effect from the very support networks they create to survive at that economic level. For instance a tight night social circle will help get you food and a place to sleep when the wolves are at the door but will also tap into you in return when you benefit from improved circumstances or a windfall.
What did you think of McArdle’s post Stillwater?
"
If we could somehow bring both of the Leagues Scott's into close proximity to each other in a controlled setting the resulting all heat/no light fooferaw could probably power enough turbines to keep the east coast illuminated with carbon free electricity. Of course it might also produce a troll-fest singularity that'd suck the entire internets in and crush it to the size of a grape. Perhaps best not to risk it.
"
McArdle can been a touch kooky at times but I found her post in question pretty thoughtful and even handed. Did you read it? It addressed most of your points here.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.