Wabash82
-
Posts
254 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Articles
Events
Posts posted by Wabash82
-
-
On 4/9/2019 at 8:46 AM, Muda69 said:
https://www.cato.org/blog/pentagons-accounting-problem
Agreed. I read the article by Mr. Taibbi, it is very disheartening.
And if we stop this waste, we can fund the entire Green New Deal!! Upfront! With cash!
-
9 hours ago, Impartial_Observer said:
Heard a story on the radio the other day about San Francisco giving an obscene amount of free syringes to addicts. I'm not for sure, but I would guess a place like San Francisco would be one of the early adopters of banning plastic straws. It begs the question, they ban straws, yet give away free syringes. I understand straws "can" harm wildlife, but I mean even in tiny Seymour, syringes are literally found lying around everywhere. I don't recall every hearing a story where someone was inadvertently poked with an HIV/AIDS tainted straw. I am only left to scratch my head.
Quick Google search yielded this result, not necessarily the story I was referring to:
At the risk of stating the obvious, the cost/benefit analysis of handing out drinking straw, versus handing out clean syringes, is a bit different (unless we are equating human lives and tortoise lives).
-
3 hours ago, swordfish said:
"New photos" from 30 years ago. (Before The Hair had fully ripened.) Lots has changed since then, including the "$hlthole countries" remark, etc.
Do you think The Donald would softly caress Rev Al's hand like that if they met up today? His opinion of those two gentlemen obviously has also changed since that long ago day when this warm and fuzzy snapshot was taken. Perhaps they all just know each other's true character better now days?
-
1
-
-
Just now, Muda69 said:
Yes they sometime do that. Kind of a pain, especially if you are accessing the internet via a public access point like at a Starbucks or something.
That is one of the reasons I use a VPN on my personal laptop -- in addition to my having finally been convinced by a certain GID poster that the government is out there watching my every move! 😄
-
1 minute ago, Muda69 said:
Trying clearing the multitude of cookies that the WaPo (and a lot of other websites) put on your machine. It uses these cookies to track how many articles you have viewed and after a certain threshold has been reached (some as low as one) you'll be prevented from viewing the article and get some kind of "subscribe to me" pop up.
In Google Chrome go to Settings-->Advanced-->Content Settings-->Cookies-->See all cookies and site data. From here in the 'search cookies" text entry type "washington" or something to that effect. If should give you a list of all the URL's matching what you typed. Then just click on "Remove All Shown" to delete them and in effect "reset" your counter.
You may also have to refresh your router's connection to the internet (to your ISP), since they also sometimes track visits to their pages by IP address as well.
-
2 minutes ago, swordfish said:
LOL - it asks me for a subscription.
That's weird. Normally Republicans just get an intense electrical shock sent over the interwebs whem they click the link! 😄
The story outlines a recently-released study (jointly made by the University of Chicago and the Fed) of the effects of the tariff on foreign-made washing machines imposed by the Trump administration at the request of Whirlpool. The study showed that the tariff appeared to create about 2,000 new U.S. jobs, and that the tariff-based price increases paid by consumers for washers and dryers (dryers were not subject to the tariff, but since they are usually bought in tandem with washers, manufacturers thought, why not?) worked out to $1.5 billion annually, or around $815,000 per job created (again, that's an annual cost, presumably, until the tariffs go away).
The study also pointed out that, historically, federal job-creation programs that are funded directly by taxes create one new job per $50,000 of tax dollars directed to the program.
-
Not that this outcome was unexpected, but surely the President could have found a cheaper way to buy 2,000 votes in Michigan for his re-election campaign:
-
I am a little puzzled why this "But I personally didn't do anything wrong!!!" whining wasn't raised when the U.S. under President Reagan paid reparations to Japanese-Americans placed in detention during WW II, or the multiple times in the last 100 years when the U.S. has paid billions in reprations to various Native American tribes for dirty deeds it had done long ago to their ancestors.
I am reminded of the line from the movie "Diner" where the guy tells the creepy guy who is getting in his face, "I'll hit you so hard it'll kill your whole family."
Isn't this another case, ala the Native American tribes, where the U.S. government would just be acknowledging that it did wrong in the past to a group of people in a manner that was so eggregious that it literally is still causing harm to those people's ancestors generations later?
The United States as a nation frequently takes current tax dollars to pay for obligations it incurred in some past time, when many current tax payers may not have even been alive, and had nothing to do with the events that created that obligation -- the reparations paid out in 1988 to Japanese-Americans interred in WW II being just one example. I think it would have struck people as odd to have heard some 35 year old white taxpayer back in 1988 complain about those reparations because he personally had no beef with Japanese-Americans, and his parents told him that they were against the internment when it happened.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, swordfish said:
#6,274 on the list of things Hillary was way wrong about. She thought her husband was faithful, too....
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, TrojanDad said:
Not enough hair there for him to sniff!
-
2
-
-
45 minutes ago, swordfish said:
Welcome to identity politics.....
Mayor Pete is very intelligent, so it is sad (but it was pretty predictable) to see him sink into the mire of national politics like he is doing. The City of South Bend and him (professionally) have benefited immensely due to his previous relationship first with Governor(s) Pence and now Holcomb and the Republicans that pretty much controlled Indiana politics. It was amazing to see him work effectively and successfully in that environment. I had hoped he would avoid identity politics and point to his bipartisanship working with the other side, but he is falling into the role the DNC would like him to play - the alter-ego to Mike Pence - who will absolutely crush him if he continues this path.
Mike Pence will crush him? Or are you referring to something/someone else? Didn't follow that statement....
In what I have seen of him so far, Mayor Pete (not gonna commit to trying to spell that last name accurately) seems to be minimizing the identity politics aspects of his sexual orientation and positioning himself more broadly as the candidate who is "just as progressive, but also much more practical" than Bernie, or Corey, or Kamala, or Elizabeth, etc., with a "plus, I'm a millennial, so I think like you" ("you" as in second largest voting bloc demographically) kicker, to separate himself from the other (older) candidates with executive office experience.
I see his recent statements related to Pence's purported view of gay people as a framing mechanism for the pitch he eventually has to make successfully to the many Americans who are still uncertain in how they "feel" about homosexuals: the folks who 20 to 15 years ago firmly believed gay people were "perverts", equivalent to pedophiles, but who have come to discover in the last decade or so that there seem to be a heck of a lot of "normal" gay people.
He has to convince those people that he's gay because that's how God made him, and while he is not ashamed or embarrassed of it, it is also just one of many components of the person God made him to be; it is not the animating "force" of what he is about, as a person or as a politician, any more than the fact that God made them heterosexual defines who they are.
-
1
-
-
I’m a weekend hat wearer and have about 8 currently that I rotate thru. A nicely broken in hat is like a well worn pair of jeans for me, part of the “uniform” on Saturdays. I don’t think I have ever bought a hat, though, which explains why my wife won’t be seen with me when I am wearing some of them. (The neon yellow “corn” cap I got as a giveaway at the State Fair a few years back was one of her least favorites; it mysteriously disappeared from my closet a few weeks later....)
-
1
-
-
On 4/9/2019 at 5:10 PM, TrojanDad said:
I am talking about a publication that is known to have a political agenda, information can and is commonly skewed in a given direction. So yes, I am suspect. The article I provided (including the one more recent that your Statesman LiveScience 2017) does not dismiss what you provided, but clearly indicate "a few births out of a thousand babies". This is what I stated originally.
There are some variations, though. Recent research has found that a person can have a variety of different combinations of sex chromosomes and genes, particularly those who identify as LGBT. For example, a certain X chromosome called Xq28 and a gene on chromosome 8 seem to be found in higher prevalence in men who are gay, according to a 2014 study in the journal Psychological Medicine.
A few births out of a thousand of babies are born with a single sex chromosome (45X or 45Y) and are referred to as sex monosomies. Others are born with three or more sex chromosomes (47XXX, 47XYY or 47XXY, etc.) and are called sex polysomies. "In addition, some males are born 46XX due to the translocation of a tiny section of the sex determining region of the Y chromosome," said WHO. "Similarly some females are also born 46XY due to mutations in the Y chromosome. Clearly, there are not only females who are XX and males who are XY, but rather, there is a range of chromosome complements, hormone balances, and phenotypic variations that determine sex."
Additional source
https://www.genome.gov/26524120/
The limiting statement "a few births out of a thousand", refers specifically to instances of people being born with a single sex chromosome. The article does not say anything about how common it is to have the "variety of different combinations of sex chromosomes and genes" discovered in recent research.
Again, the whole point of the book discussed in the New Stateman review is that the recent research has overturned the traditional focus on the X and Y chromsomes being the the "sex chromosomes", and thus the traditional view that only mutations/variations affecting those two chromosomes are relevant to determining a person's sex. Rather, the new research shows exactly what the last sentence of your quoted article says:
"Clearly, there are not only females who are XX and males who are XY, but rather, there is a range of chromosome complements, hormone balances, and phenotypic variations that determine sex."
-
On 4/9/2019 at 4:11 PM, swordfish said:
SF can admit there is a basic element of truth in a lot of what you are saying here W as much that I would characterize as your assumptions or opinions. I may not agree with it, but I can empathize your belief system as genuine. However, using that logic, for SF this becomes equivalent to the constant dropping of the N word in various rap artist's lyrics.
I get the comparison, and there are certainly many black Americans who agree with you regarding other black people using the n-word. As we have discussed before, I think it would be great if nobody used the word. But the historical context makes the use of it by a white person much, much worse than the use of it by a black person, and it is simply not a justification for any white person to use it just because some black people do.
And I feel the same is true with regard to wearing a MAGA hat: the fact that some people (like this elderly Jewish man in the news story) may not be aware or care that the hat has been adopted by white supremists as a symbol of their "cause" doesn't justify a person who does know and care about that fact continuing to wear one. It is like a rainbow flag: whether a person likes it or not, that flag has been adopted by a group of people as a symbol of their cause, and flying that flag makes a statement as a result, inadvertently or not.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, TrojanDad said:
OK..I understand...but you do realize the links I provided you are from science and medical based sources....not from a British pub known for political leanings....and in the livescience.com source for sure is more current than what you provided......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Statesman
The New Statesman is a British political and cultural magazine published in London.[2] Founded as a weekly review of politics and literature on 12 April 1913, it was connected then with Sidney and Beatrice Webb and other leading members of the socialist Fabian Society, such as George Bernard Shaw who was a founding director. They had supported The New Age, a journal edited by A. R. Orage, but by 1912 that journal moved away editorially from supporting Fabian politics and women's suffrage. Today, the magazine is a print-digital hybrid. According to its present self-description, it has a liberal, sceptical, political position.[3]
Yes, and the science and medical sources you linked to supported the info in the article I linked to... which was a book review describing things in a new book written by a well-respected historian who studies the history of science. So books somehow are now tainted by the supposed politics of their reviewers?
-
2 hours ago, swordfish said:
And the Confederate Army is comparable to the Taliban.......
Well, the Taliban have proven to be a more diffficult adversary to fully vanquish. But in terms of fighting for an evil or bad cause, I'd say that they were pretty comparable. You are not suggesting that the Confederates were the "good guys"?
The "MAGA" thing is like the three fingers down "OK" sign thing. Neither is inherently racist. But, unfortunately, both have noe been adopted by white supremist in the U.S. and internationally as a means to make winking references to each other. They are good for that purpose because they carry plausible deniability, as there are (obviously) people who flash that particular OK sign and who wear "MAGA" hats who are not white supremists.
Once a person who is not a white supremist has become aware that these hate groups have co-opted the MAGA hat for their movement, it is difficult for me to understand why that person would continuing to wear one, in the same way that I'd have a difficult time understanding why a non-fascist would display a swastika symbol after the Nazis had gone and "ruined it" for everyone.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, foxbat said:
Take a look at the "coincidences" attached to Confederate statue building/placement and look at the narrative about it today. Similarly, the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. What it starts out as and what it becomes based on framing tends to be altered for acceptability later on. It is a direct reflection that Churchill was incorrect when he stated that, "History is written by the victors."
The South won the waiting game in regard to the North tiring of the efforts of Reconstruction, and in that respect the South was the ultimate "victor" when it came to reframing a war over slavery into a war supposedly over the great "lost cause" of defending "States Rights".
Sort of like how the Taliban will eventually win the waiting game in Afghanistan and one day write the "history" of the defeat of the American Infidel Crusaders.
-
1 hour ago, Muda69 said:
As I said before, reduce the size and power of government over many aspects of the economy (regulations, licensing, etc.) and you will reduce the size and power of crony capitalism.
Maybe you and I have a different idea as to what "crony capitalism" means. While having cronies in government positions is one aspect of how it has tended to work in the U.S., it is certainly not an inherent aspect of crony capitalism as I understand it. To me, that term primarily refers to a "corrupted" system of capitalism in which many financial and business opportunities and outcomes are controlled by social and family connections, and not by market forces, and in which such connections largely override the Darwinian-like notion of "survival of the fittest" that is often applied to the concept of free market capitalism.
Crony capitalism may include governmental cronies intervening in markets to benefit their cronies, but it much more often involves rather mundane things like Fred's fraternity brother's rich dad throwing less-than-a-go-getter Fred a nice piece of a "deal", because he also went to the same elite boarding school as Fred's dad.
-
3 hours ago, TrojanDad said:
https://www.livescience.com/27248-chromosomes.html
https://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
Are there outliers and abnormalities? Sure...but the science is still there.
It's all science. Per the point specifically made in the first article you linked to, recent scientific advances have disclosed that there are multiple genetic and biological factors beyond the (so called) sex chromosomes that create and influence development of the multiple sex phenotypes (the physical characteristics associated with human males and human females, including -- but certainly not limited to-- the parts that make up the "plumbing", as SF puts it). Modern science tells us that these multiple genetic factors mean that humans can have multiple combinations of sex phenotypes that place individuals on a spectrum that goes far beyond simply who has twigs and berries at birth and who doesn't.
-
7 hours ago, Muda69 said:
And how do we reduce or eliminate crony capitalism? By reducing the size and scope of government, and the power that it holds over the lives of it's citizens.
Eliminate cronies.
Seriously, how is guv'ment responsible for crony capitalism? I'd say that, here in the U.S., private schools and college fraternities and sororities have contributed a lot more to the development of crony capitalism that the guv'ment has.
The real truth is that the whole concept of "private property" rests upon the shoulders of functioning government. Without it, you can "own" anything only until someone bigger and stronger decides that he now "owns" it.
-
3 hours ago, TrojanDad said:
Remember SF....science applies to climate change.
Science does not apply to genetics.
Keep it straight my friend!!
-
1
-
-
On 4/5/2019 at 8:33 AM, Muda69 said:
FTA:
"In capitalism (which is actually inconsistent with the government- created or enabled crony capitalism we see all around us),...."
Perhaps AOC, Biden, Beto et al are referencing the version of capitalism we actually have, not the fantasy capitalism Mises and the article's author are describing?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Muda69 said:
It was? I don't recall reading in the linked article that Mr. Winder was a "lib SJW warrior". Where did you get that information?
And if Mr. Winder is a white supremacist, how does that any difference to the facts of the case?
Those words came from your post, not the articles.
So are you now going to try to claim that you posted this article in a thread dealing with liberals alleged overreaction to President Trump simply as a commentary on our judicial system, and not because of the supposed political angle to the story? Muda, come on dude. You will strain something making a stretch like that....
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Muda69 said:
I don't know anything about the politics of Mr. Winder. The facts are that he assaulted another individual, and then first lied about it.
Huh? The whole point of your original comment, the precise REASON you posted this here, was to make a comment on the supposed political aspects of the incident -- supposedly tolerant lib SJW warrior assaults some guy because of the guy's differing political views, and (supposedly) only gets a slap on the wrist for it.
If you now claim that you "know nothing" about Winder's politics, then how do you know he isn't a white supremist, also, and the reason he hit the other guy had nothing to do with that guy's political views?
-
2
-
The Contradiction at the Heart of Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All Plan
in Out of Bound Forum
Posted
The hospital's charges have little to no connection to their cost for the services, so those figures honestly don't tell us whether the hospital is still making a profit at that level of payment. The "window sticker" charges at hospitals are almost never paid by anyone: private insurance companies aren't paying anything close to those charges, and most poor uninsured people don't pay full boat because the hospitals just write off the charges.
Because of the way our health care system works, the hospital's charge list exist mainly just to (a) be the place to start the negotiations with insurers (public and private) over discounts and actual reimbursement rates, and (b) get over in those rare cases where a wealthy person is willing and able to pay out of pocket.