Just one little drone in this big hive
The post "Welfare for Everyone" at "Coyote Blog"
links to a humongously stupid news article coming from California. Gee,
who could have predicted that if you let the homeowners in some town
decide whether new housing can be built in that town, they would decide
that no more housing is needed? And as a result of this choice, housing
prices shoot to the sky so that normal people can no longer afford to
live in that town, making the town lose its policemen, nurses and even
doctors? And now that town has woken up to this trend and grudgingly
allows some "affordable housing" to be built? Another gee, I wonder how
long the waiting list for that little condo (the town does not allow
anything higher than four stories to be built) is going to be. I can
understand a lot better now why tens of thousands of middle class
people are leaving that nutcase state and moving to somewhat saner
areas. Time to cash out and leave the table, it was fun while it lasted.
Somebody linked to "Freedom to Tinker", always a good read that I haven't checked out lately. Edward Felten usually writes smart stuff, such as the post "Bill Gates: Is he an IP Maximalist, or an Open Access Advocate?" that points out an interesting hypocrisy of this nerdy billionaire. About the same topic elsewhere, the post "Paul Krugman on Inequality" by "Vox Baby" points out a hypocrisy by the famous economist: if we assume that the wealthiest 1% of American has gotten richer not because of their merit but because of the unfair policies of Republicans, the way Krugman claims has happened, what should we make of the fact that Krugman himself almost certainly belongs to the wealthiest 1% of Americans? Does he make an exception of himself and attribute his wealth gains to his merit for being so smart and hard-working?
Speaking of rich people, here in Toronto the news article "Steppin up income ladder means better health" informs us how those dastardly rich people benefit from the wealth that they stole from workers, women and minorities: they go on live longer and healthier lives due to their higher social status. How fundamentally unfair! Something should surely be done about this.
But coming back to Felten, I do have to wonder about the post "Attacks on a Plane" in which he wonders why terrorists target airplanes for which security is strict, since it would be much easier to blow up a mall or a movie theater. Well, duh. First, it would take a pretty huge bomb to reliably kill even twenty people in a mall or a movie theater, but a much smaller bomb would suffice to destroy a whole airliner by letting gravity take care of most of the work. Second, taking out an airliner (or ten) would indirectly cause massive economic destruction, next to which the few hundred or even thousand immediate victims would ultimately be insignificant. Make air travel impossible and the whole Western economy would collapse, incapacitating the American military might and eventually indirectly killing millions of people.
(Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier for a terrorist to smuggle some kind of poison gas into the plane, instead of a bomb? Poison gas would kill everybody on board just the same, but would have no wires or anything that the security screeners could detect.)
The post "Sampling Bias on a Plane" at EconLog reminded me of an angry complaint I read years ago in some Finnish scifi board. Some nerd couldn't believe that Star Trek (in whatever incarnation it was playing back then) didn't show up in the list of programs that had received the biggest audience that week, because everybody he knew liked to watch that show. I believed that episodes of Trek got something like 50,000 viewers at best, whereas to even get on the list, a show generally had to get at least 500,000 viewers. Typically, only certain popular domestic shows that mainly appealed to senior citizens and other not-(urban sophisticates) could achieve this. Another time, some other nerd complained that Trek doesn't have more viewers and fandom in Finland, since in America the show gets millions of viewers. Of course, America also has about 50 times the population of Finland, a fact that you'd expect the average Finnish nerd to understand, but I guess not.
But of course we are all brothers, unlike those animalistic brutes and beasts of nature who don't listen to reason but fight and eat each other red in tooth and claw. Marginal Revolution asks an interesting question in "The pedagogy of comparative advantage": since trade is so massively beneficial, how come evolution didn't create any animals who engage in it, except us humans? The explanation offered is that "they aren't smart enough", but I don't really buy this, since this is like saying that animals can't engage in kin selection because they are not smart enough to compute fractions in their little heads. And of course there are also symbiotic relationships between species. Another post "Department of Yikes" links to a news article about group of sexual revolutionaries that our repressive and fascist society forces to keep their edgy and transgressive desires hidden.
Pretty soon even the locks won't keep these fellows away from our kids, if the claims made in the post "The Cunning Old Bastard Has Fitted a Yale" are true. Okay, that was a pretty silly "donkey's bridge" to move from one topic to something completely different, but it's not like I'm a professional writer or anything, so don't expect me to be witty. More seriously, I have been wondering why exactly we don't use keycards in apartment buildings since they have been so routine in hotels for decades now. I am sure that there is some reason for this, but I can't think of one right now. As far as I can tell, locks that operate on keycards are superior to ordinary locks and keys in all possible respects. So what is it with this massive resistance to adopting them in all doors? Physical keys are so 19th century!
The opinion piece "The Fertility Gap" is about America, but you don't need to edit it much to make it also apply to certain other nations. Demographics has all the mercy of a glacier, as somebody once wrote and if I could remember who it was, I would properly credit him. Since the American liberals no longer replenish their ranks the natural way, it is not that hard to guess why they are so eager to import millions of new welfare cases from the Third World. It's not like those people are generally going to be voting Republican, since as hostile they are towards liberal pet ideas such as gay marriage and political correctness, they like their welfare cheques a lot more. And it's not like the liberals generally pay for this, seeing that they are mostly net recipients of welfare. (Just take a look which groups are most enthusiastic for welfare, and angriest towards demands of eliminating it.)
By the way, the exact same social dynamic can be observed, for example, in Sweden. Jussi Halla-Aho's latest essay "Keskustelua meillä ja naapurissa, osa 2" lists and examines the voting statistics in the large Swedish immigrant ghettoes (oh yes, they already have them and how, with no-go areas for the police) and notes to his surprise that Social Democrats, Leftist Coalition and Greens typically get 70 to 80 percent of the votes cast in those districts! Those Muslim immigrants sure would seem to care about the worker's and women's rights and the state of the environment.
Speaking of Sweden, that model of leftist enlightenment to all nations, I recently remembered something about that particular Balleland that I read in a newspaper back when I was a teenager. So this was, like, way before all the current troubles, but it is so funny that perhaps my readers will get a chuckle out of it. Apparently, the harmony of the egalitarian Swedish social democracy was disturbed by a new political party that was shamelessly and explicitly "populist". Lead by some charismatic figure like these outfits always are, the platform of this party included demands like opposing parking enforcement. I actually remember laughing at this silly demand, and thinking that perhaps the civil servants who work in the parking enforcement should one day park their cars in places where they most efficiently harass and block other traffic, just to remind people why parking enforcement is important. But another demand in the party platform was lowering taxes, and I can now vividly remember how this demand was phrased: it should be possible for the average middle-class father to take his family to eat out once a month. Yes, you read that right. His words, not mine. I swear that I am not joking or making this up, so let's everybody sit back and think about that for a minute.
Meanwhile, we can try to remember and appreciate what a beautiful and natural thing the sex change operations can be. Few things are as wonderful as a man choosing to become a woman. Or not. "Logical Meme" gives us a post "The Trouble When Jane Becomes Jack" that reminds us that it's not like even the most enlightened leftists have unlimited love to spare for these biological errors (this term may sound harsh, but it is what trannies are by their very own admission, and they expect to get advanced surgery to correct it), when the push really comes to shove.
In the medical news, we can also note the post "I Hate Eating, I’m Trying To Quit" at PunkassBlog that offers us one point of view how horrible it can be to live under the reign of Corporate America these days. Let us hope that the writer of this post will soon get better. Now, I am not a medical expert nor do I play one on TV, but there are a couple of solutions that I could immediately think of, for example, giving up the linear, phallocratic and invasive Western medicine and looking for alternative treatments such as homeopathy and aromatherapy. Another solution to consider here might be to give up the racist, fascist and sexist nation of AmeriKKKA altogether and move to some other, more enlightened place such as Cuba, a vibrant, diverse and multicultural nation where excellent but free health care is considered to be a basic human right for everybody. I kind of have to wonder why so few leftists ever take this step, since you'd think that if there was one place on Earth in which their goals have been realized a long time ago, the spunky and gutsy little Cuba would be it. The surf's up!
More generally, I actually have to admire the average Western leftist's willingness to sacrifice the quality of his or her life by choosing to remain to live among us unenlightened brutes, hoping that one day we might see the light and reshape the society the way they tell us, instead of moving to countries where their ideas and goals have already been realized. Even though I tend to disagree with their ideas and goals, I have to tip my hat for such enormous commitment to bring the revolution to the other nations, since at least this undeniably demonstrates that these fellas are honest and serious.
Somebody linked to "Freedom to Tinker", always a good read that I haven't checked out lately. Edward Felten usually writes smart stuff, such as the post "Bill Gates: Is he an IP Maximalist, or an Open Access Advocate?" that points out an interesting hypocrisy of this nerdy billionaire. About the same topic elsewhere, the post "Paul Krugman on Inequality" by "Vox Baby" points out a hypocrisy by the famous economist: if we assume that the wealthiest 1% of American has gotten richer not because of their merit but because of the unfair policies of Republicans, the way Krugman claims has happened, what should we make of the fact that Krugman himself almost certainly belongs to the wealthiest 1% of Americans? Does he make an exception of himself and attribute his wealth gains to his merit for being so smart and hard-working?
Speaking of rich people, here in Toronto the news article "Steppin up income ladder means better health" informs us how those dastardly rich people benefit from the wealth that they stole from workers, women and minorities: they go on live longer and healthier lives due to their higher social status. How fundamentally unfair! Something should surely be done about this.
But coming back to Felten, I do have to wonder about the post "Attacks on a Plane" in which he wonders why terrorists target airplanes for which security is strict, since it would be much easier to blow up a mall or a movie theater. Well, duh. First, it would take a pretty huge bomb to reliably kill even twenty people in a mall or a movie theater, but a much smaller bomb would suffice to destroy a whole airliner by letting gravity take care of most of the work. Second, taking out an airliner (or ten) would indirectly cause massive economic destruction, next to which the few hundred or even thousand immediate victims would ultimately be insignificant. Make air travel impossible and the whole Western economy would collapse, incapacitating the American military might and eventually indirectly killing millions of people.
(Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier for a terrorist to smuggle some kind of poison gas into the plane, instead of a bomb? Poison gas would kill everybody on board just the same, but would have no wires or anything that the security screeners could detect.)
The post "Sampling Bias on a Plane" at EconLog reminded me of an angry complaint I read years ago in some Finnish scifi board. Some nerd couldn't believe that Star Trek (in whatever incarnation it was playing back then) didn't show up in the list of programs that had received the biggest audience that week, because everybody he knew liked to watch that show. I believed that episodes of Trek got something like 50,000 viewers at best, whereas to even get on the list, a show generally had to get at least 500,000 viewers. Typically, only certain popular domestic shows that mainly appealed to senior citizens and other not-(urban sophisticates) could achieve this. Another time, some other nerd complained that Trek doesn't have more viewers and fandom in Finland, since in America the show gets millions of viewers. Of course, America also has about 50 times the population of Finland, a fact that you'd expect the average Finnish nerd to understand, but I guess not.
But of course we are all brothers, unlike those animalistic brutes and beasts of nature who don't listen to reason but fight and eat each other red in tooth and claw. Marginal Revolution asks an interesting question in "The pedagogy of comparative advantage": since trade is so massively beneficial, how come evolution didn't create any animals who engage in it, except us humans? The explanation offered is that "they aren't smart enough", but I don't really buy this, since this is like saying that animals can't engage in kin selection because they are not smart enough to compute fractions in their little heads. And of course there are also symbiotic relationships between species. Another post "Department of Yikes" links to a news article about group of sexual revolutionaries that our repressive and fascist society forces to keep their edgy and transgressive desires hidden.
Pretty soon even the locks won't keep these fellows away from our kids, if the claims made in the post "The Cunning Old Bastard Has Fitted a Yale" are true. Okay, that was a pretty silly "donkey's bridge" to move from one topic to something completely different, but it's not like I'm a professional writer or anything, so don't expect me to be witty. More seriously, I have been wondering why exactly we don't use keycards in apartment buildings since they have been so routine in hotels for decades now. I am sure that there is some reason for this, but I can't think of one right now. As far as I can tell, locks that operate on keycards are superior to ordinary locks and keys in all possible respects. So what is it with this massive resistance to adopting them in all doors? Physical keys are so 19th century!
The opinion piece "The Fertility Gap" is about America, but you don't need to edit it much to make it also apply to certain other nations. Demographics has all the mercy of a glacier, as somebody once wrote and if I could remember who it was, I would properly credit him. Since the American liberals no longer replenish their ranks the natural way, it is not that hard to guess why they are so eager to import millions of new welfare cases from the Third World. It's not like those people are generally going to be voting Republican, since as hostile they are towards liberal pet ideas such as gay marriage and political correctness, they like their welfare cheques a lot more. And it's not like the liberals generally pay for this, seeing that they are mostly net recipients of welfare. (Just take a look which groups are most enthusiastic for welfare, and angriest towards demands of eliminating it.)
By the way, the exact same social dynamic can be observed, for example, in Sweden. Jussi Halla-Aho's latest essay "Keskustelua meillä ja naapurissa, osa 2" lists and examines the voting statistics in the large Swedish immigrant ghettoes (oh yes, they already have them and how, with no-go areas for the police) and notes to his surprise that Social Democrats, Leftist Coalition and Greens typically get 70 to 80 percent of the votes cast in those districts! Those Muslim immigrants sure would seem to care about the worker's and women's rights and the state of the environment.
Speaking of Sweden, that model of leftist enlightenment to all nations, I recently remembered something about that particular Balleland that I read in a newspaper back when I was a teenager. So this was, like, way before all the current troubles, but it is so funny that perhaps my readers will get a chuckle out of it. Apparently, the harmony of the egalitarian Swedish social democracy was disturbed by a new political party that was shamelessly and explicitly "populist". Lead by some charismatic figure like these outfits always are, the platform of this party included demands like opposing parking enforcement. I actually remember laughing at this silly demand, and thinking that perhaps the civil servants who work in the parking enforcement should one day park their cars in places where they most efficiently harass and block other traffic, just to remind people why parking enforcement is important. But another demand in the party platform was lowering taxes, and I can now vividly remember how this demand was phrased: it should be possible for the average middle-class father to take his family to eat out once a month. Yes, you read that right. His words, not mine. I swear that I am not joking or making this up, so let's everybody sit back and think about that for a minute.
Meanwhile, we can try to remember and appreciate what a beautiful and natural thing the sex change operations can be. Few things are as wonderful as a man choosing to become a woman. Or not. "Logical Meme" gives us a post "The Trouble When Jane Becomes Jack" that reminds us that it's not like even the most enlightened leftists have unlimited love to spare for these biological errors (this term may sound harsh, but it is what trannies are by their very own admission, and they expect to get advanced surgery to correct it), when the push really comes to shove.
In the medical news, we can also note the post "I Hate Eating, I’m Trying To Quit" at PunkassBlog that offers us one point of view how horrible it can be to live under the reign of Corporate America these days. Let us hope that the writer of this post will soon get better. Now, I am not a medical expert nor do I play one on TV, but there are a couple of solutions that I could immediately think of, for example, giving up the linear, phallocratic and invasive Western medicine and looking for alternative treatments such as homeopathy and aromatherapy. Another solution to consider here might be to give up the racist, fascist and sexist nation of AmeriKKKA altogether and move to some other, more enlightened place such as Cuba, a vibrant, diverse and multicultural nation where excellent but free health care is considered to be a basic human right for everybody. I kind of have to wonder why so few leftists ever take this step, since you'd think that if there was one place on Earth in which their goals have been realized a long time ago, the spunky and gutsy little Cuba would be it. The surf's up!
More generally, I actually have to admire the average Western leftist's willingness to sacrifice the quality of his or her life by choosing to remain to live among us unenlightened brutes, hoping that one day we might see the light and reshape the society the way they tell us, instead of moving to countries where their ideas and goals have already been realized. Even though I tend to disagree with their ideas and goals, I have to tip my hat for such enormous commitment to bring the revolution to the other nations, since at least this undeniably demonstrates that these fellas are honest and serious.
"(Speaking of which, wouldn't it be easier for a terrorist to smuggle some kind of poison gas into the plane, instead of a bomb? Poison gas would kill everybody on board just the same, but would have no wires or anything that the security screeners could detect.)"
Explosives can be woven into clothing and the trigger can be a chemical one. Why somone would use wires at all, is beyond me.
...
'
I've learned a lot about women. I think I've learned exactly how the fall of man occured in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, and Adam said one day, "Wow, Eve, here we are, at one with nature, at one with God, we'll never age, we'll never die, and all our dreams come true the instant that we have them." And Eve said, "Yeah... it's just not enough is it?"
' - Bill Hicks
Posted by Anonymous | 5:29 PM
"So what is it with this massive resistance to adopting them in all doors? Physical keys are so 19th century!"
If keys were replaced with cards, how on earth, would the stereotypes get inside and make a living?
Bump Keying
Posted by Anonymous | 5:37 PM
Anon, seemingly quoting Bill Hicks, says:
I've learned a lot about women. I think I've learned exactly how the fall of man occured in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, and Adam said one day, "Wow, Eve, here we are, at one with nature, at one with God, we'll never age, we'll never die, and all our dreams come true the instant that we have them." And Eve said, "Yeah... it's just not enough is it?"
I find it hard to believe that any female would say that ...
Posted by Loki on the run | 6:24 PM
What is so interesting in the Krugman fiasco is how so many people can resist pointing out that high IQ people will be better placed to exploit the political environment, unless restrictions are placed on them (but they will also attempt to circumvent those restrictions).
Posted by Loki on the run | 6:36 PM
Wow, way to make fun of someone who is having genuine health issues. You sure are the compassionate conservative.
Posted by punkass marc | 7:18 PM
Wow, way to make fun of someone who is having genuine health issues. You sure are the compassionate conservative.
Ohhh, poor Punkass Marc doesn't have health care.
What went wrong. I have no problems with health care. Oh yeah, I forgot. I got a degree in a subject that actually meant something (and did a few other things besides), so now I get health care and can afford to put my children through university and so on, and buy a house and buy beer and wine and so on.
Life's like that.
Posted by Loki on the run | 8:11 PM
Wow, way to make fun of someone who is having genuine health issues.
I can't help doing so, since you socialists just are so inherently comical.
The defining characteristic of the people on your side is just so hilarious, that tremendous contrast between your grand plans to rearrange the whole society and your total inability to successfully manage even your own lives, making you helplessly drift from one personal crisis to another.
And I don't even feel bad about laughing at this. Next to what you guys did during the twentieth century, killing about a hundred million people and condemning billions of others to live under a tyranny of poverty and misery that we can't even imagine today, nothing that I could ever do would amount to much more than a bite of a flea.
Posted by Ilkka Kokkarinen | 9:50 PM
Loki,
You fucking retard. I have full coverage and a great career. You ignorant fuck.
Posted by punkass marc | 10:31 PM
and ilkka, uh, i hate to break it to you, but hitler's party was socialist only in name. he was a fascist. you should really read a history book.
and get rid of those fleas.
Posted by punkass marc | 10:38 PM
Loki, you grievous error, do you go to homeless shelters and kick the residents for being poor, or are you just this much of a sackless fuckstain on the internet?
Posted by junk science | 10:48 PM
Ahhh, Punkass Marc, so it was some other leftist loser who wrote this:
4. I can’t afford to go to a doctor because
a. I don’t have insurance,
Oh well, great crowd you hang out with.
BTW, which of those people labelled socialists are actually not, in your estimation?
Posted by Loki on the run | 10:50 PM
Sounds like Punkass Marc would really benefit from reading "Black Book of Communism". During the 20th century, Nazis were small potatoes compared to socialists. A million kulaks killed here and a million people who wear glasses killed there, and soon we are talking about a real revolution.
Personally, I just can't understand why some people can these days openly proclaim that they are socialists, since during the twentieth century, socialists caused far more human suffering, misery and death than all nazis, pedophiles and rapists ever put together.
My good advice of emigrating to Cuba still also stands. They still have socialism over there.
Posted by Ilkka Kokkarinen | 11:01 PM
I was in Las Vegas airport last Friday getting a flight home and the lines for security screening were enormous (though quickly moving). There must've been a good 500 people squeezed into a surprisingly small area. Trust me, a suicide bomber - or a couple people with assault rifles - could've wrought absolute havoc. And there's no real way to defend against not, though I'm unconvinced that there's really much risk.
Peter
Iron Rails & Iron Weights
Posted by Anonymous | 11:24 PM
One funny story what happens when some progressive anarcho-leftist meets the real underclass:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/antra/NOKKAEN.htm
[in the library] I found there Bobby Seale's book Seize the Time, which had been translated to Finnish right when it came up. I got one of my cellmates to read it, after I had promised that "they shoot cops in it". He read the whole book, and really liked it! Propaganda was even too effective, since he adopted the authoritarian Marxist arguments of the book as well. And as controversial as it may sound, guy did not changed his racist prejudices against Somali due to book, seems like some elementary logic is too much asked.
Posted by Anonymous | 6:47 AM
loki,
it is a great crowd, thanks. mcboing totally rules and probably deserves, oh, about 10x what i make.
ilkka,
uh, just because someone calls themselves a socialist doesn't mean their actions are in line with socialism. that was the broader point i was making with hitler as an example. most of europe is socialist, and aren't you always pissed at them for their _non_ violence? can't have it both ways.
and aren't you in canada, enjoying craploads of socialism?
Posted by punkass marc | 7:20 AM
anon:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/antra/NOKKAEN.htm
A HIV-positive homosexual amphetamine junkie had for sure the lowest status of the floor. A repeat offender who had committed a number of stabbings, altogether doing time more than three decades I guess. I was really sorry for this guy, but for some reason I found his presence and stories very repellent, and I was not able to deal with him at all. This cellmate of mine was almost only person in the floor who communicated with him, and got a lot of shit for that.
Hahahahaahaaa
Posted by Anonymous | 7:23 AM
I found this piece rather amusing:
However my veganism was about only visible thing which made me different from other prisoners, and this got some people annoyed. So they promised both beat me up and rape me.
Posted by Anonymous | 7:30 AM
Punkass Marc: uh, just because someone calls themselves a socialist doesn't mean their actions are in line with socialism.
Oh, right. The leftist canard that the horrible real-world experience about the large number of countries around the world that actually implemented a socialist economy is somehow not relevant to what socialism really is, but we should instead take leftist punks for their word when they claim that somehow their real socialism would be a completely different peaceful utopia, for reasons that they never bother to explain for us rubes. (Oh, I know, don't tell me: "This time women and minorities would be the ones in power, which would, like, make it totally different.")
"Socialism" means that the state owns the means of production, and a central planner tells everybody what and how much they should produce. (The last time I checked, Canada does not have this system, nor does even Europe these days. If you have some other, more idiosyncratic meaning for the word "socialism", this would be good time to bring it up.) Both in the real world and theory, we can instantly see that such a system cannot possibly allow certain individual freedoms that we take for granted, such as privacy or the freedoms of thought, speech or movement, for the simple reason that very few people, especially the productive ones, would voluntarily do what the central planner tells them to do.
Socialism, that is, a centrally planned command economy, therefore necessarily involves an all-encompassing police state, and it is made even more necessary by the fact that in the absense of price information, the socialist economies are inherently horribly inefficient and thus can't really provide anything for their people. The horrors of socialism are not a bug, but a feature. This makes all you blogosphere leftists who proudly proclaim their socialism while acting so concerned about individual freedoms to do what you want with your life... damn, I can't think of a good word. Well, hypocrites. Or maybe just useful fucking idiots.
Be a "liberal" if you want, be a "leftist" if you want, but once you say that you are a "socialist", you really are no better than a nazi, a pedophile or a serial rapist.
And by the way, I actually know a couple of people who did escape the real socialist system of the Soviet block. In that light, I most sincerely hope that Marc and his fellow travellers will one day would really get their wish to live in a socialist economy. And not as the nomenklatura that they now imagine they would be, but as ordinary people.
Posted by Ilkka Kokkarinen | 9:47 AM
"Punkass Marc: uh, just because someone calls themselves a socialist doesn't mean their actions are in line with socialism."
Uh, just because someone calls themselves a nazi doesn't mean their actions are in line with nazism.
I really don't understand why people, especially leftists, consider neo-nazis such satanic scumbags.
Posted by Anonymous | 12:35 PM
Ilkka says:
And by the way, I actually know a couple of people who did escape the real socialist system of the Soviet block.
Yeah, an I have relatives who went through Uncle Mao's Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution ...
They are happier at living in a western country with all the many more freedoms they have.
Posted by Loki on the run | 12:41 PM
I don't think Ilkka has ever claimed to be "compassionate". His addiction to schadenfreude is prominently and repeatedly displayed on this blog, which is one of the things that makes it so great.
In the Fraser Institute's Economic Freedom of the World index, Canada is number 7, two spots below the United States. Finland is number 17 and Sweden is tied with Taiwan at 24.
Posted by tggp | 4:14 PM
"uh, just because someone calls themselves a socialist doesn't mean their actions are in line with socialism."
I see this argument used by certain Christian apologists when the various massacres, wars, and genocides committed in the name of Christianity are listed off, and it still sounds as silly and illogical as marc's.
The fact is, it matters little whether socialist or Christian or what have you. These actions were committed based off individual interpretations of what their various dogmas dictated. Marc's rather weak claims to authenticity ring hollow when the most influential socialists in the last 100 years have used those doctrines to justify the mass murder and general misery committed under their rule.
Marc's huffy attempt at a "black/white" dichotomy between socialism and naziism is equally laughable. Both systems use the concept of insidious state control of individual freedoms as a cornerstone of their philosophy, and both systems have used militarism as a means of rallying the public to their cause, and both are ultimately coercive forms of government because of the foundational belief that the individual is secondary to the needs of the state. One may cite the "soft" socialism of Europe as a refutation, of course, but a quick perusal of the formation of the modern European welfare state shows that they have been able to accomplish this thanks to the presence of American military power for continental defense, freeing these various societies to implement social welfare to their heart's content without worrying about sustaining a large military at the same time.
Posted by Chris | 11:14 PM
Reductio ad Hilterem is a logical fallacy, idiots. As is reductio ad Stalinum.
Posted by JackGoff | 2:03 PM
Should be Hitlerem
Posted by JackGoff | 2:03 PM
Why we don't all use keycards at home. I've never stayed at a hotel with keycards, that I didn't have to have at least one family member's card replaced during our stay because it lost its programming. In other words, their useful life is probably about one day, two if you like taking chances.
Posted by Anonymous | 4:19 PM
Jackgoff: Reductio ad Hitlerem is a logical fallacy, idiots. As is reductio ad Stalinum.
What about reductio ad all known real-world nations that adopted a socialist way of running their economy" ?
Posted by Ilkka Kokkarinen | 4:32 PM
Re: Nazi Germany
You know what was the problem with Nazi Germany? It wasn't Nazi enough*. If the real ideology of Nazism would have been applied in full, there wouldn't have been any of the negative minor side effects such as conquering neighboring countries or exterminating millions of Jews and other minorities.
This problem was due to negative of the Hitlerists**, who hijacked the beautiful ideology of Nazism ant turned it into totalitarian, hateful ideology.
* Known as the Chomsky defense when applied to some other ideology.
** The standard excuse, whenever socialism fails (in a bloody, catastrophical way), othe Socialists will denounce the ideology and separate it from their own ideology (obviously dishonestly, but I digress) by assigning another name to it: Stalinism, Maoism. The rule appears to be that the leader is scapegoated, saving the ideology.
Posted by Tuomas | 5:02 PM
negative influence of the Hitlerists.
Othe=other.
(should use preview).
Posted by Tuomas | 5:04 PM
As far as I can tell, locks that operate on keycards are superior to ordinary locks and keys in all possible respects.
Absolutely! In fact, I can't think of a single situation in which -- hey, where'd the lights go? Too bad I don't have that nifty keycard lock plugged into a UPS...
Posted by Anonymous | 5:16 PM
"Reductio ad Hilterem is a logical fallacy, idiots. As is reductio ad Stalinum."
So is special pleading, tool.
Posted by Chris | 5:47 PM
So is special pleading, tool.
Ah, so wanting not to die is special pleading? Shows how human you are.
What about reductio ad all known real-world nations that adopted a socialist way of running their economy" ?
Ah, you mean Sweden and The Netherlands? Please, there's a huge difference between socialist democracy and Fascism. You just wish to conflate the two because a few evil people were socialists. All I want is universal health care, and you call that socialist because it implies governmental control of health care. I guess that makes me a rapist, right? You're the tool.
Posted by JackGoff | 5:54 PM
I'm not sure where you've gotten the idea that Sweden and Netherlands are socialist countries, altough they do have some similarities with socialism on the surface level. Some socialists claim that they are "mixed-marxet socialist states" but this is IMHO bullshit, as Socialism is all about abolishing private ownership.
Welfare state is not socialist in that aspect at all, most welfare states have rather low property tax rater (usually a fixed, flat rate, 28 % in Finland and IIRC in Sweden too), that contrast with high progressive taxation for paid work. In effect, this means that enterpreneurship has good prospects, as do foreign investments. The main problem is that high-wage earners may want to move to greener pastures, like Ilkka did.
Even the famed "socialist healthcare system of Europe" is usually not that at all -- in welfare states, private medicine sector coexists with the public. By that logic, the US system is socialist too, with Medicare and Medicaid. Canada, on the other, quite recently (I think) implemented full socialist healthcare by banning private healthcare. Ilkka wrote once that the system will collapse and I concur with that assessment. The goal to give everyone equally good healthcare will end up giving everyone bad healthcare.
re: US providing defense for Europe
I'm not buying this. For example, Finland has no US presence and has handled it's defense with (male only) conscription, that is cheap at least when you leave out the cost of men losing one productive year.
Posted by Tuomas | 7:23 PM
I gotta repeat it for you, don't I?
All I want is universal health care
Stupor patriots.
Posted by JackGoff | 7:42 PM
"Ah, so wanting not to die is special pleading? Shows how human you are."
When did you stop beating your wife? I thought only hillbillies did that.
Posted by Chris | 7:43 PM
When did you stop beating your wife?
Don't have a wife. And I'm a pacifist who hasn't hit a human being in 10 years. Are you chronically moronic?
Posted by JackGoff | 8:00 PM
"Please, there's a huge difference between socialist democracy and Fascism."
"Socialist democracy" is a contradiction in terms since socialism, as practiced for decades, is coercive in suppressing individual freedoms to the supposed needs of the state.
Posted by Chris | 8:06 PM
"Don't have a wife. And I'm a pacifist who hasn't hit a human being in 10 years. Are you chronically moronic?"
Well, in the last few posts you've made it quite clear that you are intent on arguing from emotion rather than logic, common sense, or awareness of history. I simply decided to mirror your rather unintellectual line of thought as it appeared anything more complex than "Go fuck yourself" would cause you to spontaneously combust.
Posted by Chris | 8:10 PM
I simply decided to mirror your rather unintellectual line of thought
That people deserve access to good health care? If that's unitellectual, then I don't want a part in your intellectualism. McBoing is suffering, and you don't give a shit, because of reductio ad Hitlerem. You are inhuman. Prove to me you aren't by saying McBoing deserves some form of help for his medical ailment.
Posted by JackGoff | 8:16 PM
This post has been removed by the author.
Posted by JackGoff | 8:24 PM
"Socialist democracy" is a contradiction in terms
I should have known I was arguing with an idiot. [EL]Nevermind[/EL]. Don't answer any question I asked, because it will undoubtedly involve me dealing with complete stupidity.
Posted by JackGoff | 8:25 PM
"That people deserve access to good health care?"
That's your line of argument? That people "deserve" access to good health care? I thought you were merely intent on arguing the rather obduscatory point that Hitler wasn't a socialist because "not all socialists were genocidal murderers."
"McBoing is suffering, and you don't give a shit, because of reductio ad Hitlerem."
Don't confuse me not giving a shit about your drama-queen antics with your pathetic attempts to save socialism's reputation from its most infamous practitioners.
"You are inhuman."
Your opinion of my relative humanity is rather irrelevant to our conversation.
"Prove to me you aren't by saying McBoing deserves some form of help for his medical ailment."
You think I need to prove anything to you? Get over yourself--it's just the internet.
Posted by Chris | 8:35 PM
"Don't answer any question I asked, because it will undoubtedly involve me dealing with complete stupidity."
Apparently projection isn't just for movie theaters.
Posted by Chris | 8:38 PM
Apparently projection isn't just for movie theaters.
Right. It's just for bullshit artists like you who like to conflate Hitler with universal health care. That's cool, for inhuman fucks like you.
Posted by JackGoff | 9:21 PM
That's your line of argument?
Damn! You can't read either! It must suck, being an inhuman, illiterate fuck. I'm totally sorry! I bet it causes problems for you in normal, everyday life.
Posted by JackGoff | 9:32 PM
"Damn! You can't read either! It must suck, being an inhuman, illiterate fuck."
Considering you can't even insult poeple without repeating the same tired phrases over and over, your misplaced sense of self-worth is hardly surprising.
But then, I would expect little else from an illogical, hyperemotional, intellectually lazy infant such as yourself. It must suck having a dim realization you're the poster child for justified abortions.
Posted by Chris | 12:24 AM
you're the poster child for justified abortions
So you're for abortions too. YO\ou haven't been reading the conservative handbook lately.
Granted, you have no argument other than "you're a baby, looser!11!!" so I shouldn't expect too much in the way of rational discourse. Anyway, you haven't said anything about of refuting the need for UHC, so no real need to address any of your comments except to ask, is it tough to be the dipshit in the family? I'm sure your mother is truly disappointed. She wanted a doctor and got a troglodyte. Very sad.
Posted by JackGoff | 12:40 AM
There are lots of good arguments against UHC. For example, the US already provides free healthcare for the indigent (Medicare). Also, people buse a service if they bear no greater share of the costs than everyone else (Tragedy of the Commons). Also, the losers in society oughtn't be subsidized too heavily, or else they will increase in number and overwhelm the productive segment. Remember the single mothers and their government-subsidized broods.
If these two characters (punkass and jackgoff) are indicative of socialists in general, I don't think they're the potential sadistic NKVD-men of Illka's imagination. They're just foul-mouthed little idiots who have discovered an ecoomic system, which promises that they can party while someone else picks up the tab.
Posted by Fred S. | 12:35 AM