|
hummermania00
Strange Son of aBitch
Registered: 04/07/07
Posts: 327
Last seen: 14 years, 6 months
|
Re: One thing I don't understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Economist]
#7134248 - 07/05/07 07:03 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Economist said:
Quote:
hummermania00 said: Of course, what is being cited? These types of loose numbers do nothing to confirm what is actually being researched. If (for example) half the research money and developments in the US are targeted cosmetically toward tits, dicks, pussies, and the plethora of vanities people crave; how much real value has that type of research put into medical research?
My response to this would be the 2001 poll of physicians cited in the first link I posted.
Physicians were asked what they thought the 6 most important medical innovations of the last 25 years were. The answers: MRI, ACE Inhibitors, Balloon Angioplasty, Mammography, Statins (used to lower cholesterol), and Coronary Artery Bypass grafts.
Of the 6, Balloon Angioplasty and Mammography were developed in Europe.
The other 4 were developed in the US.
OK, that's nice info, but how does that address what the overall demographic picture is with respect to where in the hell the money is being spent? My impression (and I might be full of shit) of the medical research communities is that socialized medicine countries tend to focus all their research attention toward strictly medical related issues: cancer, etc. And while the US private system surely spends its share on strictly medical issues, it also spends hugely on elective vanities that are not covered by most insurers anyway. So a portion of the research industry is strictly profit driven for out of pocket expenses that are being labeled as medical. I dispute this definition. The question is then, can there be, or is there, a definition to determine what are expenses/research for electives or enhancements , and what is strictly health related medical research/expenses whose "product" is the enhancement and sustainability of life?
-------------------- You are a fortunate person indeed, if you can begin each day accepting the fact that during that day there will be ups and downs, good breaks and bad ones, disappointments, surprises, and unexpected turns of events. When you have solved all the mysteries of life you long for death, for it is but another mystery of life.
|
confusion
ProfessionalNovice
Registered: 10/28/06
Posts: 400
Last seen: 3 years, 6 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: hummermania00]
#7134486 - 07/05/07 07:54 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I think his foreign policy perspective will hurt the U.S. in the long run. We need a candidate that understands world issues. I also see no reason to support a pro-life candidate either. Simply because the Supreme Court does not need another justice to undermine freedoms that people spent years to get, such as the abolition of sodomy laws, desegregation, freedom of speech, and the list goes on and on. Furthermore, the legalization of Marijuana is not going to be any more likely with him as president or not, let us remember we still have a Congress. He is for legalization great, but that should not be the only reason or even the main reason you like him as a candidate. You need to look at what impact he will have on America at large and the world abroad. Sure use a few key issues to put things in perspective, but also realize the limitations.
|
Economist
in training
Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: One thing I don't understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Arp]
#7135369 - 07/05/07 11:18 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Arp said: I have no national pride whatsoever but describing EU as one country is wrong.
Just compare Estonia and Poland with Sweden and Norway.
And as I already said, compare Kentucky and Montana with New York and California. The US is divided geographically into higher and lower-income regions. The difference is that we don't draw lines between them and call them different countries.
|
Arp
roving mycophagist
Registered: 04/20/98
Posts: 2,191
Loc: in a van by the river
|
Re: One thing I don't understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Economist]
#7136001 - 07/06/07 04:11 AM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
*doublepost*
Edited by Arp (07/06/07 04:18 AM)
|
Arp
roving mycophagist
Registered: 04/20/98
Posts: 2,191
Loc: in a van by the river
|
Re: One thing I don't understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Economist]
#7136003 - 07/06/07 04:13 AM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
US is a federation. EU is not.
You can't let the numbers of a country like Poland affect the numbers of a country like Denmark in order to get an idea on how efficient their separate systems are.
Edited by Arp (07/06/07 06:47 AM)
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: confusion]
#7136066 - 07/06/07 05:40 AM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
confusion writes:
Quote:
I think his foreign policy perspective will hurt the U.S. in the long run. We need a candidate that understands world issues. I also see no reason to support a pro-life candidate either. Simply because the Supreme Court does not need another justice to undermine freedoms that people spent years to get, such as the abolition of sodomy laws, desegregation, freedom of speech, and the list goes on and on. Furthermore, the legalization of Marijuana is not going to be any more likely with him as president or not, let us remember we still have a Congress. He is for legalization great, but that should not be the only reason or even the main reason you like him as a candidate. You need to look at what impact he will have on America at large and the world abroad. Sure use a few key issues to put things in perspective, but also realize the limitations.
Finally! A post which actually addresses the topic of the thread -- Ron Paul.
Would the rest of y'all please follow this example? If not, I'd say it's time to close this thread.
Phred
--------------------
|
Viveka
refutation bias
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Phred]
#7137286 - 07/06/07 12:51 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
edit...meant to reply to confusion
Quote:
I also see no reason to support a pro-life candidate either. Simply because the Supreme Court does not need another justice to undermine freedoms that people spent years to get, such as the abolition of sodomy laws, desegregation, freedom of speech, and the list goes on and on.
The only problem with the gaining of legal access to abortions and sodomy is that it was a dispensation of the federal government, thus a tyranny in disguise. Sure, I think people should be free to have abortions and sodomize each other, but when the is accomplished by the federal gov't trampling the states, you have to do a cost benefit analysis. The benefit is the citizens of the respective states can now perform the deregulated activity without fear of prosecution. The cost is a growing precedent of federal government overstepping its Constitutional power through case law, ie: our wacky judicial system.
And remember, marijuana would be effectively legal or decriminalized in ten states already if it weren't for the federal laws overriding the states. The Federal gov't has usurped too much power and is so ridiculed with bureaucracy and politics that Congress is entirely out of step with its constituents, ie: you and me. Ron Paul recognizes this and is right there in the midst of it and won't be bought off or stand down from what he thinks is right and that's why I like him.
I don't really think it's possible to restore the US to a legitimate Constitutional Republic, the country is too riddled with compromise at this point. But that doesn't mean there shouldn't still be some reckoning and an effort to move back towards the values of 'Classical Liberalism'.
Edited by Viveka (07/06/07 01:52 PM)
|
confusion
ProfessionalNovice
Registered: 10/28/06
Posts: 400
Last seen: 3 years, 6 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Viveka]
#7143022 - 07/07/07 05:58 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I am not a strong advocate for states rights. I think courts create necessary social change where Congress and the Executive fail to see the logic. I see the point of creating balance between the Fed. Gov't and the states, but I don't see a lot of danger in the courts, unless spots will be opened soon and filled by new conservative individuals. This would result with Ron Paul. If he is elected spots of older justices will be filled by conservatives. Again see things as a whole, it'd be great if marijuana were legal, but a whole bunch of things would also be illegal if the states had more say.
|
lonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 13 years, 1 day
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: confusion]
#7143112 - 07/07/07 06:29 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
confusion said: I am not a strong advocate for states rights. I think courts create necessary social change where Congress and the Executive fail to see the logic. I see the point of creating balance between the Fed. Gov't and the states, but I don't see a lot of danger in the courts, unless spots will be opened soon and filled by new conservative individuals. This would result with Ron Paul. If he is elected spots of older justices will be filled by conservatives. Again see things as a whole, it'd be great if marijuana were legal, but a whole bunch of things would also be illegal if the states had more say.
jesus, Liberal FEDERAL courts scare the fuck out of me! Would you please give some examples of "a whole bunch of things that would be illegal if the states had more say"??????
BTW have you ever read the Constitution? The central government was created by the states. States rights came first before the central government was formed by the states.
It is the federal government that is suppose to have limited powers. The Federal government has only those powers specifically granted to it by the states, all other powers remain with the people and the states. Basic Constitution 101.
-------------------- America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure" We have "reckless fiscal policies" America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better Barack Obama
Edited by lonestar2004 (07/07/07 06:30 PM)
|
Viveka
refutation bias
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: confusion]
#7143217 - 07/07/07 06:58 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
That's all fine and good once you disregard the fact that activist judges have been trampling the Constitution for decades now.
|
lonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 13 years, 1 day
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Viveka]
#7143306 - 07/07/07 07:29 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Viveka said: That's all fine and good once you disregard the fact that activist judges have been trampling the Constitution for decades now.
Really.
And I,ll admit that Power Grabs come from both sides!
For example (Doctor-assisted suicide) it is offensive to think that the FEDERAL government has some kind of right to force the terminally ill to suffer in agony.
IMO The Federal Gov has no right to deny people who are terminally ill the right to die humanely. WHY PROLONG PAIN AND SUFFERING???
I wonder how Confusion feels about STATES RIGHTS on this issue?
-------------------- America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure" We have "reckless fiscal policies" America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better Barack Obama
|
Viveka
refutation bias
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: lonestar2004]
#7143403 - 07/07/07 07:54 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm sure he's fine with any abuses of the land's highest law, so long as they aren't carried out by Conservative justices.
|
Middleman
Registered: 07/11/99
Posts: 8,399
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Madtowntripper]
#7149003 - 07/08/07 11:27 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
We live in a fascist ONE PARTY system.
Dig deep enough and you will find connections between the canine dates.
"Coke and Pepsi are the same thing, WAKE UP PEOPLE!"
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 5 months, 8 days
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Middleman]
#7149022 - 07/08/07 11:32 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
How is the US fascist? I don't want any vague, beat-around-the-bush explanations, either. I was to hear explicitly what makes the US a fascist state.
"the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else... almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’." -George Orwell
|
confusion
ProfessionalNovice
Registered: 10/28/06
Posts: 400
Last seen: 3 years, 6 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: lonestar2004]
#7150855 - 07/09/07 11:32 AM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
lonestar2004 said:
Quote:
confusion said: I am not a strong advocate for states rights. I think courts create necessary social change where Congress and the Executive fail to see the logic. I see the point of creating balance between the Fed. Gov't and the states, but I don't see a lot of danger in the courts, unless spots will be opened soon and filled by new conservative individuals. This would result with Ron Paul. If he is elected spots of older justices will be filled by conservatives. Again see things as a whole, it'd be great if marijuana were legal, but a whole bunch of things would also be illegal if the states had more say.
jesus, Liberal FEDERAL courts scare the fuck out of me! Would you please give some examples of "a whole bunch of things that would be illegal if the states had more say"??????
BTW have you ever read the Constitution? The central government was created by the states. States rights came first before the central government was formed by the states.
It is the federal government that is suppose to have limited powers. The Federal government has only those powers specifically granted to it by the states, all other powers remain with the people and the states. Basic Constitution 101.
I'm not advocating an entirely liberal court or a even majority, but a court with some balance to it. So the decisions will not be made by the dominating party. If the states had the option to enact their own legality rather than the federal government, then alcohol would become illegal in many states, loss of civil rights for some minorities, increase in poverty because of loss of federal funding, some states would lose pieces of their education system, and the list goes on. The fact of the matter is some states simply haven't heard of equity among all classes.
I have two copies of the constitution, one at home and one for school, both of which are thoroughly marked with notes about different articles. Yes, we were founded by the states, but at the same time the federal government should have the final say over the states in *certain* matters. Not all matters mind you, there should be checks and balances to it all, but in certain matters that relate to all people not just on a local municipal level. I think the federal government should have the authority that is given to it by the people. Remember our Constitution was founded after the Articles of Confederation, meaning that it established a federal government to govern the states, because of the problematic and decentralized relations that were created by a predominantly state based rule.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: confusion]
#7151133 - 07/09/07 12:47 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
5-4 is not exactly domination. Which is too bad. I'd like to see it dominated by justices who know their place.
--------------------
|
Middleman
Registered: 07/11/99
Posts: 8,399
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Redstorm]
#7152285 - 07/09/07 04:43 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said:
How is the US fascist?
Yes, there are many definitions for that word, I understand it simply as "corporate dictatorship in disguise"
Wiki says :
The term fascismo was first coined by the Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini[citation needed]. It is derived from the Italian word fascio, which means "union" or "league", and from the Latin word fasces. The fasces, which consisted of a bundle of rods tied around an axe, were an ancient Roman symbol of the authority of the civic magistrates, and the symbolism of the fasces suggested strength through unity: a single rod is easily broken, while the bundle is very difficult to break.
Anyway, I'm not a political theorist, but I can add 2+2...
^^^ I just now noticed what Lincoln is resting his hands on.
"...and in the darkness BIND THEM."
|
OneMoreRobot3021
Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 61,026
Loc: the sky
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Middleman]
#7152304 - 07/09/07 04:47 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Wait, what do you think his hands are resting on?
-------------------- Acid doesn't give you truths; it builds machines that push the envelope of perception. Whatever revelations came to me then have dissolved like skywriting. All I really know is that those few years saddled me with a faith in the redemptive potential of the imagination which, however flat, stale and unprofitable the world seems to me now, I cannot for the life of me shake. -Erik Davis
|
Viveka
refutation bias
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Middleman]
#7152589 - 07/09/07 05:47 PM (16 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
If anything i'd say your understanding of fascism as corporate domination is exactly wrong. If anything, fascism is the antithesis of capitalism. It is about state control. It is an outdated word to use in reference to the staus quo of big business manipulating everything from government to media. That's just plain greed and the outpicturing of a lack in most people to self-actualize anything other than their own desire for comfort and security, ie: dollars.
Do you think of a "union" or "league" as representing corporate power? These are organizations aimed at taking power away from business.
|
YawnGG
Stranger
Registered: 01/28/12
Posts: 76
Last seen: 12 years, 1 month
|
Re: One thing I dont understand about Shroomery and Ron Paul [Re: Viveka]
#15744747 - 01/31/12 09:18 PM (12 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Ron Paul 2012, he can win, the numbers don't lie, the people who tell you he can't are another story.
Edited by YawnGG (01/31/12 09:19 PM)
|
|