Do you value your libertarian sense of personal responsibility and autonomy and tolerate the deaths as necessary cost of your free society.
Middle ground is ????
This.
Thre middle ground is the libertarian approach. The far right approach is no oversight whatsoever, commonly called anarchy.
Jake, I know what you're saying, but the majority of three things on that list can are for the most part avoidable by taking better care of yourself.
The difference is that you have a great deal of control over taking better care of yourself with regards to those health issues. When an idiot shows up with a gun and kills you, you have practically no control in that situation.
<**** or John Anthony West, they've got some cool insights on how old civilization is. Not important to this, just some interesting shi!t.
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
No pass. The bounds in this country are between some reflection of libertariansim and some reflection of social democracy.
No, I don't agree with this either. We have far left, and left. There isn't too many in our government that stand up for things like personal freedom, though the masses may cry out against things, their votes speak differently. On the economic side, there's even fewer. I spend far more paying taxes than I get to pay myself to support the social democracy.
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
Interestingly... where does the idea that moderation ... being in the middle is virtuous.... compromise is a moral high ground, if you will come from? I set it up that way... you implicitly agreed.
Please re-write this sentence in a coherent fashion.
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
So, what are your values grounded in so that the middle ground is "good"?
I value personal responsibility. Self sufficiency when possible. Acting in an honorable way, and not taking advantage of those who can be. Too many in our small view of this world take no responsibility, are far from self sufficient on any measure, and have no honor of any kind. Basically, I'm not here to rely on you, you aren't here to rely on me, and we shouldn't be f ucking one another over. Seems simple right?
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider
nothing?, might makes right? who has the most money? just the means to an end you want... civil /philosophical principles? theology? which theology?
This inquiry is the foundation for seeing the middle ground as a compromise, ie. a morally superior solution,
OR see the middle ground as a temporary circumstance forced down your throat and you will reverse it ASAP.
Pick an issue..... nephritis... or gun regulations. What are your principles and how do they inform your value that is essentially libertarian.
You're starting to get repetitive Mark.
-Might apparently does make right in this society. Ever try to tell a police officer to go f uck himself when he tells you you have to wear a seatbelt? Ever have your plans completely crushed because the treasury decides it needs another $50,000.00 from you last year then see what happens when you tell them to go f uck themselves? They call in the gov't for muscle and you either pay and sidetrack your life, or go to jail. -Apparently money helps, though I get by, I'm a long ways from buying my way out of problems. You gotta go past the 1% to get into that realm. More like the .00001% -Everything is a means to an end. As an example, you drop a dollar into some charity, the means in the dollar, the end is you pretend to feel better about yourself. I go to work so I can eat, and have a roof. -Theology? I'm not going there. Religion in any form is not for me, I'm far too skeptical of that sort of thing.
You're making stuff up for the middle ground as being anything, much less morally superior.
Everything is temporary. You're temporary, I'm temporary our government is temporary, our specie is temporary, our solar system is temporary. Done being dramatic in your choice of words yet?
Picking an issue, you should be free to do what you want so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. You want to smoke meth, have at it. You want to own firearms, have at it. I'm sick of being controlled on almost every front. I was just born in the wrong time. I would've been better suited to living even a hundred years ago. Humans are genetically the same as they were 40k years ago, I ain't cut out for this sh!t.
I'm boatless.
Re: Popular Vote Loser News
[Re: Jake]
#286364 03/05/1710:05 AM03/05/1710:05 AM
Do you value your libertarian sense of personal responsibility and autonomy and tolerate the deaths as necessary cost of your free society.
Middle ground is ????
This.
Thre middle ground is the libertarian approach. The far right approach is no oversight whatsoever, commonly called anarchy.
Jake, I know what you're saying, but the majority of three things on that list can are for the most part avoidable by taking better care of yourself.
The difference is that you have a great deal of control over taking better care of yourself with regards to those health issues. When an idiot shows up with a gun and kills you, you have practically no control in that situation.
So people are lazy? They aren't willing to take control and take better care of themselves, so they want a small bandaid fix on what is in actuality a non-issue to make them feel better about being an overweight slob?
You can't fix crazy. There's a lot of people on this planet, some of them are going to do some f ucked up things, the tools don't matter. I'm not sure removing an essential part of the checks and balances our government is built around is wise.
So people are lazy? They aren't willing to take control and take better care of themselves, so they want a small bandaid fix on what is in actuality a non-issue to make them feel better about being an overweight slob?
You can't fix crazy. There's a lot of people on this planet, some of them are going to do some f ucked up things, the tools don't matter. I'm not sure removing an essential part of the checks and balances our government is built around is wise.
I'm not sure what you mean by a "non-issue"...you talking about gun related deaths?
Absolutely people are lazy. There are a lot of ways a people can negatively impact their health and we all do at least some of them. It would be insane to expect that level of governance to make people take care of themselves (with regards to something that mostly impacts the person who's responsible himself). Bandaid? Gun deaths? I'm not an overweight slob and I would feel better if we at least made some sort of effort to reduce the number of gun related deaths. I want our society to thrive and advances...making this place safer, more comfortable, easier to live and thrive in so the people that DO take care of themselves have an easier path to success and enjoying life. It's important to me that people don't needlessly lose their lives in a way that is out of their control but that can be prevented.
You can actually make a pretty significant impact on crazy...for starters, making it harder for people who are certifiably crazy, and getting government assistance because of it (because that an easy list to create), to buy a gun (you know, the bit Trump just undid). You can also improve the mental health care in the country (which, BTW, is a really poorly run system). Background checks can certainly be improved. You can make guns, or certain types of guns, harder or impossible to obtain. There are plenty of examples of these things, and more, that have simply saved lives.
I'm lost on your point about checks-n-balances part - are you referring to guns again or something else?
I value personal responsibility. Self sufficiency when possible. Acting in an honorable way, and not taking advantage of those who can be. Too many in our small view of this world take no responsibility, are far from self sufficient on any measure, and have no honor of any kind. Basically, I'm not here to rely on you, you aren't here to rely on me, and we shouldn't be f ucking one another over. Seems simple right?
Quote
nothing?, might makes right? who has the most money? just the means to an end you want... civil /philosophical principles? theology? which theology?
so... your guiding principle is uber individualism and hyper self sufficiency for which you value a strict libertarian points of view. Moreover, you recognize that you are out of step with a large majority of the country.
So... How do you compromise.... or find a middle ground with the world....
Where do you stand when another individuals concerns are unavoidable conflict with yours?
Where is there room for negotiation and compromise with a liberal like my self who grounds their values in the philosophy of "do unto other's as you would have them do to you"?
Do you value your libertarian sense of personal responsibility and autonomy and tolerate the deaths as necessary cost of your free society.
Middle ground is ????
This.
Thre middle ground is the libertarian approach. The far right approach is no oversight whatsoever, commonly called anarchy.
Jake, I know what you're saying, but the majority of three things on that list can are for the most part avoidable by taking better care of yourself.
The difference is that you have a great deal of control over taking better care of yourself with regards to those health issues. When an idiot shows up with a gun and kills you, you have practically no control in that situation.
So people are lazy? They aren't willing to take control and take better care of themselves, so they want a small bandaid fix on what is in actuality a non-issue to make them feel better about being an overweight slob?
You can't fix crazy. There's a lot of people on this planet, some of them are going to do some f ucked up things, the tools don't matter. I'm not sure removing an essential part of the checks and balances our government is built around is wise.
Miss you Karl!! [End BroMance]
USA 777
Re: Popular Vote Loser News
[Re: tback]
#286379 03/06/1710:30 AM03/06/1710:30 AM
Even as Trump was making groundless claims that his White House predecessor, Barack Obama, had wiretapped him, Trump was also fuming that Obama had achieved more during the first month-and-a-half of his presidency than Trump has pulled off in the same period of time, according to The Washington Post. This has forced Trump to focus on reimplementing his notorious Muslim travel ban, as well as concentrate on a repeal-and-replace bill for the Affordable Care Act while temporarily setting aside everything else in his legislative agenda.
Trump’s young presidency has existed in a perpetual state of chaos. The issue of Russia has distracted from what was meant to be his most triumphant moment: his address last Tuesday to a joint session of Congress. And now his latest unfounded accusation — that Barack Obama tapped Trump’s phones during last fall’s campaign — had been denied by the former president and doubted by both allies and fellow Republicans.
US Sail Level 2 Instructor US Sail Level 3 Coach
Re: Popular Vote Loser News
[Re: Jake]
#286380 03/06/1710:38 AM03/06/1710:38 AM
But that overall decline has been accompanied by some unusual growth: Gun clubs and shops that cater to black and LGBT clients say there has been an uptick in interest in firearms since November among those who fear that racial and gender-based violence could increase during Donald Trump’s presidency.
You can also improve the mental health care in the country (which, BTW, is a really poorly run system).
Any suggestions on a starting point?
Universally include more significant mental health care in health insurance coverage for starters. Place more legal emphasis and oversight on the facilities that are providing serious/emergency mental health care. There is a lot of BS going on in the facilities that are run by big business and its nearly impossible to get the legal / policing system to take incidents seriously.
Jake Kohl
Re: Popular Vote Loser News
[Re: Jake]
#286400 03/07/1709:38 AM03/07/1709:38 AM
You can also improve the mental health care in the country (which, BTW, is a really poorly run system).
Any suggestions on a starting point?
Universally include more significant mental health care in health insurance coverage for starters. Place more legal emphasis and oversight on the facilities that are providing serious/emergency mental health care. There is a lot of BS going on in the facilities that are run by big business and its nearly impossible to get the legal / policing system to take incidents seriously.
Actually the police and legal system does take mental health seriously. The problem, at least here,is their hands are tied by the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, which virtually abolished involuntary hospitalization except in extreme cases. All they can do is hold them for 24 to 72 hours. From there you go before the judge, they ask three questions, and if you can answer them you're on your way back out.
I can't speak for your neck of the woods, but out here and quite a few other states mental health is generally under the domain of the state or county government.. I don't know how much more oversight you can get.. Regarding the private facilities these are generally Hiltons with psyc staff. I think by your statement of big business, are you referring to the convalescent facilities that may have a psychiatrist on call.
As for the coverage, I believe this was addressed with the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008(MHPAEA) which pretty much does cover what is detailed at the time in the DSM-IV.. which is now DSM-5.
You can also improve the mental health care in the country (which, BTW, is a really poorly run system).
Any suggestions on a starting point?
Universally include more significant mental health care in health insurance coverage for starters. Place more legal emphasis and oversight on the facilities that are providing serious/emergency mental health care. There is a lot of BS going on in the facilities that are run by big business and its nearly impossible to get the legal / policing system to take incidents seriously.
Actually the police and legal system does take mental health seriously. The problem, at least here,is their hands are tied by the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, which virtually abolished involuntary hospitalization except in extreme cases. All they can do is hold them for 24 to 72 hours. From there you go before the judge, they ask three questions, and if you can answer them you're on your way back out.
I can't speak for your neck of the woods, but out here and quite a few other states mental health is generally under the domain of the state or county government.. I don't know how much more oversight you can get.. Regarding the private facilities these are generally Hiltons with psyc staff. I think by your statement of big business, are you referring to the convalescent facilities that may have a psychiatrist on call.
As for the coverage, I believe this was addressed with the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008(MHPAEA) which pretty much does cover what is detailed at the time in the DSM-IV.. which is now DSM-5.
UHS is one example and is a national outfit. They get away with quite a lot that is not in the interest of the patient. I'm not going into details but trust that I have witnessed several of the exact poor/illegal practices as what is portrayed in this article by the same company. https://www.buzzfeed.com/rosalindadams/intake?utm_term=.dr1K9eOMK#.na4AVbmQA
There are also other specific cases where our mental health care system failed to properly handle persons with issues that have turned violent. It's HARD and it's definitely complex but there is certainly room for improvement.
What should a United States senator, or any citizen, do if the president is a liar? Does ignoring this reality benefit the American people? Do we make a bad situation worse by disrespecting the president of the United States? Or do we have an obligation to say that he is a liar to protect America’s standing in the world and people’s trust in our institutions?
I happen to strongly believe in civil political discourse. The vast majority of people in Congress who hold views different than mine are not liars. It is critical we have strong, fact-based debates on the important issues facing our country and that we respect people who come to different conclusions. In a democracy people will always have honestly held different points of view.
But how do we deal with a president who makes statements that reverberate around our country and the world that are not based on fact or evidence? What is the appropriate way to respond to that? And if the media and political leaders fail to call lies what they are, are they then guilty of misleading the public? ---Bernie Sanders
US Sail Level 2 Instructor US Sail Level 3 Coach
Re: Popular Vote Loser News
[Re: hobie1616]
#286476 03/11/1709:39 AM03/11/1709:39 AM
This could have been called ToddFest because SchwantzFest just doesn't roll off the tongue easily.
Lock her up, lock her up, we still need to pursue that.
If you don’t like it here, go to Syria, go to someplace else.
I don’t want ’em, as a veteran I don’t want ’em, let ’em go back home. If they’ve got a problem, let Saudi Arabia take care of ’em.
If she’s Jewish, she should go back to her country.
This is America, we don’t want Sharia Law. Christian country.
Sen. John McCain is a secret communist.
I just want to let them know that I can’t wait for the liberal genocide to begin. That’s the way to make America great again. Liberals are destroying the country.
US Sail Level 2 Instructor US Sail Level 3 Coach
Re: Popular Vote Loser News
[Re: hobie1616]
#286537 03/17/1710:54 AM03/17/1710:54 AM
H1616, I thought you must have emigrated. The circus has been going on without your commentary.
Have you been on holidays?
Last edited by phill; 03/24/1710:24 PM.
I know that the voices in my head aint real, but they have some pretty good ideas. There is no such thing as a quick fix and I've never had free lunch!
Guys, look. This is not a discussion. This is not a debate. You have no choice but to vote for this bill. ---Steve Bannon
You know, the last time someone ordered me to something, I was 18 years old. And it was my daddy. And I didn't listen to him, either. ---Member of House Republican Caucus