Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com

  #11  
Old August 30th, 2011, 12:39 PM
sagefr0g's Avatar
sagefr0g sagefr0g is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,141
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Friendo View Post
Google "golden mean fallacy", or "argument to moderation".

"Some people feel that Hitler did a lot of good things for Germany, and that his ideas, as expressed in Mein Kampf, have merit. Others feel that he was terrible for Germany and the world in general, and that his philosophy is horrible. We should take care, then, to find a position between these two extremes: surely, there is where we will find the truth."
yah, ok, not arguing a middle ground approach here, more arguing use of as fully as we can muster the knowledge we do have, then think.
  #12  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:11 PM
aslan's Avatar
aslan aslan is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 8,683
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackriver View Post
yeah, but we spend more than other countries on medicine and are much less healthy. people with serious/expensive problems can be prevented on the cheap. we chose not to give people simple treatment, sometimes just some counciling and then they become very unhealthy to the point that they now need to use the ER which they will and itll cost a quarter mill now to treat some idiot who just needed to be told to take some shots or penicilian a month ago.

everyone hates the idea that there are experts. maybe they arent perfect but everytime democrats try to improve a system where the market has failed republicans say "no, let the market handle it [even though its failed thus far]" and act like we're all supposed to be experts on everything. yeah the market will handle it eventually by way of survival of the fittest. litterally just like survival of the fittest does a very good job or managing our health (not sarcastic, yet). your not healthy? dont worry, there are others who've been thru what you've been thru and some of them will have better genes to handle it ensuring future generations will be fine. which is very elegant and good for the species. but that doesnt help you. the same way a business killing you will also be shooting itself in the foot. yeah, that business womt last for ever. but why not have people in charge of fixing these problems sooner than later.

we recogise that we dont want to be experts in product safety, so the governemnt protects us. we dont want to have to spend our lives focusing on survival so we have police and tanks to protect us. we want to be able to move around easily so we have the government build roads etc. this is just another arbitrary line. it could just as easily be about trash collection. and youd have a bunch of assholes saying "the gubermint cant tell me what to do with my old refridgerators, cars and matresses. let the yuppies pay to send it to a landfill/recycling and ill dump mine in a river or a park." lots of people believe that and they also feel the same way about healthcare.



the idea behind libertrianism is that people will just learn to deal with the consequences of their actions. but life is largely random and our consequences are not perfectly alligned. life is like poker/blackjack where people do stupid **** all the time and get rewarded for it while others do the right thing and get punished. you would probably never have become a pro b player if no one had done the ground work for you and figured most of it out. well life is like playign 20 your first 20-50 hands of blackjack or poker. maybe after 10 hands you understand the game mechanics and how things are. but by the time its over you may or may not have any idea how to make a decision right. probably not.

if you only get to play 20 hands of poker in life, you would greatly prefer to have a dealer guide you and some skalansky books to tellyou how not to get punked.


what we've chosen to privatize or not is also somewhat random. but if you didnt lready know what sort of things we privatise and to what extent but had to decided what sorts of industries should be private and which shouldnt you would see some things as being products services that require competition among providers, differentiation and arent necessary for everyone. youd see other things that the market wouldnt create enough of but people would rather have than not such as defence, education, infrastructure, police,post offices etc. there is obvious overlap between these things. people can buy guns, roads education, security, and postal services. health insurance is one of these. you can just wallow around until your in a life or death situation and go to the ER or you can pay a little and prevent these expensive catastrophes.

the rest of the world has decided that they would rather ay less up front and provide people with better and more productive lives than wait for their lives to ge to the point of desparation and pay 1000x times the cost to keep them alive albeit miserable and unhealthy still
I hear what you are saying. I agree that the focus of American medicine is not always where it should be and that the profit motive is in part to blame. But your whole message is premised on the belief that government is somehow better able to get it right. This I reject. At least now we have government as a watchdog over business. When government IS the business, then who will watch government. How many benign governments can you count in the history of the world compared to the number of bad and oppressive ones? How do you know that government will not also bow to the almighty dollar in operating the health care business, handsomely rewarding their friends and lining their own pockets, and taking moral decisions regarding life and death out of our hands? Some on here are great champions of more socialization and their idealism and fervor are admirable, but they are reminiscent to me of the idealism and fervor that marked young people in the aftermath of the Bolshevik revolution. Little did they realize that a brave new world was not awaiting them, but some of the most brutal oppression and repression ever visited on mankind by the godless regimes that followed.

I say, hold fast to the ideals and hold fast to the fervor, but redirect them into making the present system bear good fruit. Nothing is so corrupt that it cannot be restored by individuals like yourself in a country that is still the free-est country on the face of the earth. If we lose that freedom, all bets are off. We need to take back our country from both corrupt businessmen and corrupt politicians. There is nothing wrong with either system, capitalism or representative democracy, we just need to repopulate them with good people through elections and legal/criminal prosecutions. Maintaining freedom and keeping our institutions free from corruption requires patience, hard work, constant vigilance, fortitude, courage, and an idealism that perseveres through whatever obstacles life may throw our way. But in the end, it is worth it. Do not believe anyone who says it is too late. We still have freedom, hold onto it. And if we should become enslaved, it will only be a temporary setback so long as the flame of freedom still burns in our hearts. The destiny of mankind is freedom. It is a force that cannot be stopped, a flame that cannot be quenched. [Me standing on a soap box. ]
  #13  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:19 PM
QFIT's Avatar
QFIT QFIT is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NO LONGER HERE
Posts: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aslan View Post
I hear what you are saying. I agree that the focus of American medicine is not always where it should be and that the profit motive is in part to blame. But your whole message is premised on the belief that government is somehow better able to get it right. This I reject. At least now we have government as a watchdog over business. When government IS the business, then who will watch government. How many benign governments can you count in the history of the world compared to the number of bad and oppressive ones? How do you know that government will not also bow to the almighty dollar in operating the health care business, handsomely rewarding their friends and lining their own pockets, and taking moral decisions regarding life and death out of our hands? Some on here are great champions of more socialization and their idealism and fervor are admirable, but they are reminiscent to me of the idealism and fervor that marked young people in the aftermath of the Bolshevik revolution. Little did they realize that a brave new world was not awaiting them, but some of the most brutal oppression and repression ever visited on mankind by the godless regimes that followed.

I say, hold fast to the ideals and hold fast to the fervor, but redirect them into making the present system bear good fruit. Nothing is so corrupt that it cannot be restored by individuals like yourself in a country that is still the free-est country on the face of the earth. If we lose that freedom, all bets are off. We need to take back our country from both corrupt businessmen and corrupt politicians. There is nothing wrong with either system, capitalism or representative democracy, we just need to repopulate them with good people through elections and legal/criminal prosecutions. Maintaining freedom and keeping our institutions free from corruption requires patience, hard work, constant vigilance, fortitude, courage, and an idealism that perseveres through whatever obstacles life may throw our way. But in the end, it is worth it. Do not believe anyone who says it is too late. We still have freedom, hold onto it. And if we should become enslaved, it will only be a temporary setback so long as the flame of freedom still burns in our hearts. The destiny of mankind is freedom. It is a force that cannot be stopped, a flame that cannot be quenched. [Me standing on a soap box. ]
There is absolutely nothing in the current health care plan that puts gov't in charge. You have been lied to.
  #14  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:26 PM
shadroch shadroch is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by QFIT View Post
There is absolutely nothing in the current health care plan that puts gov't in charge. You have been lied to.

As oppossed to lying himself?
  #15  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:33 PM
aslan's Avatar
aslan aslan is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 8,683
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackjack avenger View Post
Someone may look it up

I think aid to dependent mothers was open ended regarding number of kids before Clinton. Then welfare reform, aid was limited to 3 kids tops? Any guess what happened to birth rates? Dropped to 3 kids tops. It's been a generation, time for help to be limited to 2 kids.

Want poor? Have programs for the poor. If you pay people not working it morphs into paying people not to work. Politically, it becomes vote buying. The high pay of government employees is just vote buying.

Norway? Discovered the average length of unemployment matched the length of unemployment insurance.

Ben Franklin? Has a quote stating similar. Programs create poor.

BJ as a business, if government backed my losses & allowed any expense. Reckless high variance play would be the rule with wine, women & song as expenses, or at least sport
stadium suites.

A big problem with US health is personal responsibility: obesity, smoke, drink, drugs.
If drug users got 0 support, there would be tragedies, but fewer people would probably start because that road would truly be dark. Of course ones humanity would cry out to not let them starve in the streets, but then where is the lesson for the rest of us?

Now schizophrenics should be taken off the streets, that's different, they are sick through no fault of their own.
The druggies and the alchies have to come to the point where they are willing to help themselves. No one can rehabilitate an unwilling person. But the schizo's, I agree, no matter have far down they reach there is nothing for them to take hold of. They need to be helped. If starvation brings a druggie or alchie to his knees and makes him willing to be helped, now that's a different story; but if they just want to live on the dole and continue their drunken lifestyle, it may be misguided mercy to lend them a hand. Anyway, whatever way one sees this dilemma, resources are limited, for me anyway, so I'll choose to help those who are willing to help themselves.

There was a priest in DC who took the opposite POV. His mission was to feed the hungry without regard to whether they were trying to help themselves. His name was Father McKenna and food programs he started continue years after his death. His prayer was: "Lord, I will keep them alive until you can turn them around." or something to that effect. He may have been right. I don't believe you should get a signed affadavit before you give a hungry person a piece of bread, but at least, I think if you know he has no intention of trying to be a productive human being, starvation as a motivator may serve a useful purpose. Am I wrong? It is one of those areas where conscience fights back and forth.
  #16  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:34 PM
QFIT's Avatar
QFIT QFIT is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NO LONGER HERE
Posts: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadroch View Post
As oppossed to lying himself?
I don't think he is a liar. I think he watches FOX. Earlier he said that Obama went to an Islamic school. This was famously misreported by FOX. I remember the story. FOX said he went to a madrasah, which they said was an Islamic fundamentalist school. (The FOX guy said "this is a really big deal.") In fact, madrasah is just the Arabic word for school (like Midrash in Hebrew), predates Islam and suggests nothing religious. It was later verified that the school was secular with no religious teachings.
  #17  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:34 PM
aslan's Avatar
aslan aslan is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 8,683
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadroch View Post
As oppossed to lying himself?
Thank you, shadroch. I can always count on you.
  #18  
Old August 30th, 2011, 01:55 PM
aslan's Avatar
aslan aslan is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 8,683
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by QFIT View Post
First, there is absolutely nothing about the current health care legislation that is socialist. It is 100% private. There isn't even a public option, which disgusts me.

We do not have universal health care. We have universal emergency care. The difference is enormous. Universal health care means that you get checkups and maintenance medicine. Cholesterol, blood pressure, etc medicines that not only prolong life, but reduce future costs. Universal emergency care means you are made stable, and then sent to a public hospital. If your feet are in bad shape from an accident or diabetes, and you have health insurance or money, they will save your feet. If not, they will save your life -- by amputating your feet. (I'm not making that up.)
I see your point. I would vote for a non-emergency health care for those who could not afford it. I have always advocated for a safety net for those who cannot afford HC insurance, as well as the requirement that insurance companies extend coverage to all, whether or not they belong to a "group." For those who try to save money by not buying HC insurance, they choose to risk their lifesavings being wiped out. Harsh as that may seem, they are no better than the rest of us, and there must be a price to pay for our decisions. When they become destitute, then the government can help them, too. To think otherwise would be like saying that a casino should be required to reimburse an individual for wagering their life savings on the spin or spins of the roulette wheel. Some will win this stupid bet, but to encourage people to risk their life savings by giving them an easy way out, would only compound the problem. Being free in a free country is not easy, but is preferable to someone always saving you from your mistakes whereby you never learn accountability for your actions.

As for the cost saving action of amputating one's feet, that should be addressed by laws prohibiting such cruel and unusual punishments just for being poor. It's barbaric and should be punishable by criminal prosecution.
  #19  
Old August 30th, 2011, 02:15 PM
QFIT's Avatar
QFIT QFIT is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NO LONGER HERE
Posts: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aslan View Post
As for the cost saving action of amputating one's feet, that should be addressed by laws prohibiting such cruel and unusual punishments just for being poor. It's barbaric and should be punishable by criminal prosecution.
Then you are advocating gov't health care, which the gov't cannot afford.

The enacted health plan takes the casino game out of health care. No longer could a parent legally decide to blow his money on the slots instead of buying health insurance for his kids.
  #20  
Old August 30th, 2011, 02:28 PM
shadroch shadroch is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aslan View Post
Thank you, shadroch. I can always count on you.

Keep posting posts full of untruths and what is a person supposed to assume?
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Forum Software vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2011 Bayview Strategies LLC