Educated vs "Non-Educated"

Burp !

 

I can see you’re not into this dictionary thing....gets in the way of facts.

 

The dictionary is irrelevant when discussing political philosophy and anyone who thinks it matters is not worthy my time.

Read some books.

 

Ha ha
This sounds like a Republican. Libertarians are not opposed to the notion of government. They’re oppose to the role of govt in our personal lives. They’re all for government in a big way for national defense, they just haven’t accepted the idea that personal freedom doesn’t exist without personal defense.

They’re about 250 years behind the times. If you ask one about the role of govt in interstate commerce or pollution control across state lines that poison wells in another state by way of our water ways, through un regulated corporate greed, they stumble about an irrelevant platetude. They are solution-less.

 

the dictionary is irrelevant ?
You just confirmed your status as a devout Republican; as definitions, speech, facts and science don’t matter....science and math are built upon definitions, glossaries and agreed upon facts.
Definitions don’t matter ? Good grief.

read some books ? Oh, that’s impossible, without a dictionary, we wouldn’t know what the author is saying.

 

Wow. You are too dumb. I am putting you on ignore.

 

Being as a child in the lower quarter, as to intelligence, but with well to do parents is more likely to go to and complete college than a child of poor parent but who scores in the top quarter, as to intelligence. It is not to difficult to understand why some college educated people seem incredibly stupid, some who go on to be managers and really f$&@ things up. I have meet enough dumb as door knob types with a degree in business, to doubt it takes a lot of intelligence to get a degree in business. I think that most economic and other woes we face in the US is the result of bad management. Most companies fail because of bad management. Epic fails. RCA was once the premier electronics company in the world, until management drive them into the ground. Montgomery Ward and Gateway Computers has wonderful businesses going, yet died off because the man in charge refused to keep up with the times. Chrysler failed after top management decided they didn’t need so many engineers to design cars.

In my industry, it isn’t all that uncommon to find a technician who is more on the ball than some engineers. The good technicians tending to have had a childhood in poverty, and poor engineers tending to have had well to do parents. Throughout my career I have repeatedly had to do back door engineering to get around ignorant higher ups who were just too stupid to deal with. The plus side though, is that those same ignorant managers tended to unwittingly fund my side projects.

As much as I would like to think that we live in a meritocracy, it is quite clear we live in an aristocracy. There is a reason that a large percentage of the talking heads on television are sons and daughters of someone known.

 

When I was a kid, on long car trips we would play Ford/Chevy. One person would count Fords we passed, while the other would count Chevrolets. I remember some states being Ford heavy and others being Chevy heavy.

 

Healthcare statistics are notoriously unreliable due to there not being a standardized reporting method for literally any health outcome. The most accurate information that you can find comes from various insurance databases, and even with that, you will see a difference between various insurance databases due to differing reporting requirements and methods of classification. This reality has enormous ramifications when it comes to "studies" that try to compare healthcare outcomes between various countries, but that is a subject for another time. (If you honestly think that Cuba has a better infant mortality rate than the United States, I have some swampland that I would like to sell you.....but i digress.)

With that being said, this does NOT apply to death, because that information has always been reported via death certificates that are filed with each state's registrar office (For that matter, a lot of deaths occur outside of the healthcare system). For this reason, death is the one healthcare outcome that we have reliable and consistent data dating back over a hundred years. Your assertion is incorrect. The ACA did NOT create a national healthcare system. It was mostly an expansion of Medicaid, and it created a new and relatively small insurance pool, but it most certainly did NOT create a national healthcare system. Nor did its creation change ANYTHING regarding the various state's registrars office reporting of death certificates. The truth of the matter is that you created that excuse completely out of thin air, and you presented this fabrication as if it is well known. You basically made it up and were bluffing.

In truth, a slight uptick in the death rate is logically due to the aging of the outsized baby boom generation, and that trend is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

 

I suspect that was back when we would argue endlessly about which was the best car when really knew nothing about them.

 

Please do.....you save me from looking at a dictionary and defining “ignore.”

 

I have read enough libertarian ideology to puke. It is highly idealistic but not very practical. I would classify libertarianism as those who spend a lot of time looking into and thinking about things without actually looking into things and thinking about them. In a vacuum, with like minded individuals, it seems like a utopia, but in the real world, it does not fit. It does not work.

I would love to live in a society where everyone was nice and respectful of others. Where everyone cooperated for the greater good. I’m sure, with the right type of people, such a society could exist and thrive. But it only takes a couple of unscrupulous individuals to screw the whole system to hell.

Libertarians make it sound like government is an outside monster come to take away your rights and freedoms. It is quite the opposite. Government exists to mediate conflicting interests. Without a strong government, your rights and freedoms extend only as far as one has the muscle to exert those rights and freedoms. Without government, without rules, it is every man for himself, the law of the jungle.

 

Well said. You have only to travel on a cruise ship and talk to the workers to realize how innately intelligent many are from third world countries who don’t have the opportunity. Many of these people would kick asteroid of many of our unmotivated kids from a well to do family. Other countries get it. There is a wealth of talent among the less fortunate. Yup, as long as you qualify, free college tuition at public universities should be available to everyone.

 

Enjoy your sushi.

 

I went to college on a scholarship from the state. I think all students, that qualify, should be able to go to college. All of society benefits if the best advance.

 

Exactly. We haven’t yet come to the realization that a high school education from decades ago has became the college education including 2 year tech schools of today. College education should be as available as pubic schools have made high school.
We can still have private colleges , like we have private schools in high school. Little changes but everyone benefits.

 

Expanding rights and freedoms had long been a liberal ideal. Lyndon Johnson was a great liberal in this regard. Also in elevating people out of poverty, expanded educational opportunities. This are liberal ideas as well as Democratic ideas. Liberals think that as many people as possible should be able to vote, to voice their opinion. These are central to the Democratic ideology.

It seems to me that you have an unrealistic view of both liberals and Democrats.

By the way, I am a card carrying Green. Thus, in spite of his downfall, I think that Nixon was very good for the Green movement. If he was alive, he would be calling global warming deniers, nuts.

If you were really hungry, would you rather have liberal portions on your plate, or conservative portions?

 

I think that it should start earlier. Say after 10th grade, students could choose, and possibly test for, various vocational orientated schools as well as college prep schools. After a couple of years, students could choose additional educational opportunities that they qualify for.

Take away the requirement for money to get an education, and we will become a meritocracy.

 

Not wanting to get into the weeds of the statistics or anything, but it seems to me that I have heard that over the past several years there has been a drastic uptick in deaths due to drug overdoses. The whole opioid crises and all.


I was reading a report put out by Oregon concerning the ACA, specifically the Oregon Health Plan. It is administered by private companies. I think half are non-profits. In the first couple of years the cost were through the roof, stretching the system to the limit, as people who were long overdue for healthcare, came in for care. Yet over time, health outcomes have improved and costs lowered. The infusion of money had allowed the various medical facilities to update and improve those facilities.

Oregon also has a coordinated care system. Where one’s care can be spread out over more than one care provider, yet your data is linked between them. It is an efficient system that allows each patient to easily get specialized care. I think all the hospital systems are on board.

So, in making a system to help those who need help affording healthcare, they have created a system that works better for everyone.

I don’t know if it matters all that much to the discussion, but Oregon rich people, like Phil Knight of Nike game, have been pumping billions of dollars into the local cancer research universities and what not. For most cancers, for the majority of patients, cancer is now curable. With the healthcare system with free yearly checkups, most cancers can be caught and cured before they become an issue.

 

I agree with you in regards to drug overdose deaths also impacting the numbers but I would add that a drug overdose death impacts life expectancy more heavily than it impacts the death rate. I say that because a young life dying heavily influences life expectancy while it counts the same as a 95 yr old in the death rate data.

 

Health care is affordable for most people if we regulate providers properly, not the least of which is making sure there's enough licensed personnel.

We could have had a means tested system if we had required insurers to provide coverage without charging more for age or preexisting conditions, and stopped states from preventing competition.

It could be a lot less if we had more competition.

There is no "natural market" for healthcare because it's so highly regulated. That said, we can create a market with lower prices by making sure regulations don't become the means for health care providers to raise prices.

I don't think people will be happy with a system that for them means they will be coerced into diagnosing themselves.

I wouldn't be so sure prices to consumers will be lower. If we don't stop price fixing (see Chargemaster), prices to consumers might well be higher than those paid by insurers.

We don't know what would happen with price fixing like we see with Chargemaster if most people, not primarily rich or poor folks, were negotiating on their own. I think we have to end price fixing to have a viable market.

I don't see any possibility we would allow rich people to opt out and thereby avoid paying taxes for healthcare. We pay a lot for folks' poor choices now through Medicare, Medicaid, our employer-based programs, and even for people showing up at the hospital without insurance or means to pay. Smoking cigarettes is an obvious bad choice, but what about a poor diet, lack of exercise, participation in risky sports, failure to get regular checkups, and on and on?

The economic system is set up to make rich people richer. When house prices crashed beginning in 2006 and many homeowners owed more than their homes were worth, the net worth of the bottom 50% of Americans was less than the worth of Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and Warren Buffett.

Government (re)distributes income through the tax system to provide essential and nonessential government services and protects private property.

I tend toward generosity, but that's likely because I have far more money than I need.

I believe you.

 

I am a very conservative eater and do not like experimenting or trying new things. I prefer it simple and clean with basic seasoning (salt, peper, oregano and basil), so I guess I would choose the conservative portion. I am also not a very big eater; I am thin and one potato is enough to get me stuffed.

But, I guess it depends what you are referring to here.

 

If that is your opinion, the criticism is fair. I disagree and think Libertarianism is neither Utopian nor idealistic at all - It only says that we should not fight and not steal.

Libertarians are probably also the most nerdy of thinkers who write the most autistic books there is to find.

Such as politicians.

I have spent way too much time online refuting these basic points of anti-intellectual criticism that I have no will to do so again. There are plenty of books and texts on this matter and if you want to know what Libertarians actually say you should read them. Start with Rothbard's Anatomy of the State and Bastiat's The Law; Those should give you a great overview.

 

The only caution I would make, is that regardless of 10 grader enthusiasm for manual labor involved in vocational schools, it should be done with discretion.

You paid more federal taxes then Amazon did under the gop budget. I really don’t care that you’re fine with it. I’m not because I paid more too. Not only that, but state and local taxes went up too reflecting fewer funds turned back to states. That you don’t care doesn’t bother me in the least. But, because many who could no longer declare deductions we once did, is ridiculous.

 

I am not American, but somehow I am a Republican. I am a Liberal in the tradition of Locke, but somehow I am a Conservative Warhawk.

OK.

You need a dictionary to read a book? That's sad. When I read, I do not have to stop after each word to look them up in the dictionary to understand what I am reading. But, maybe that's just me.