Probably just feeding the trolls here, but: Seriously? That's the best argument you can come up with?
I was just responding to your claim that any society that doesnt provide medical care isnt a society-- Im assuming here that you arent prepared to discount all civilizations outside of the last 200 years as "not societies".
There really is no valid argument as to why "Society" shouldn't (to some extend) be "Socialist
Find me a socialist-run country in the last 100 years that hasnt been an absolute disaster.
Most Human beings have plenty of incentive to be meaningfully productive members of a society, it's called a conscience, and a full set of operating emotions
In the context of dealing with alcoholism, have you ever heard of the term "enabling"? Same concept.
Unfortunately the people paid to come up with the memes like that one seem to be in the group of humans that lack both.
Are you sure we live in the same world with the same race? Everything ive seen indicates that the number of people who might concievably make communism work is utterly drowned out by the number who ensure it will never work.
You don't ran around and claim "this land is mine". You don't kill any animal you find to eat it (cause it could be owned by someone else). You don't hit the next lady with a bat and pull her into your lair.
In each of those instances, society is protecting the rights of others. To some degree you can argue that youre giving up rights (the right to murder etc), but thats a pretty silly argument to make as most people would say there is no right to murder, steal, etc.
Vaccination is a matter of public safety, because even if you don't get sick you can infect other children or adults, causing deaths
Are we talking a number of additional deaths from not being MMR vacinated (statistically) thats even remotely on par with the number of, say, automotive deaths?
If not, it would seem to invalidate the idea that its a sufficient public risk to warrant such a violation of personal liberty.
Youre starting with the false premise that it is society's responsibility to provide medical care for you. It isnt. This can be done at a local community level, and thats generally OK so long as it isnt mandated, but the whole "socialism" thing has been tried and fundamentally doesnt work because it removes incentives. Doing socialism piecemeal isnt going to work any better than just going whole hog, except perhaps it wont fail quite as badly, as quickly.
The fact is, nobody needs health insurance...until they do.
Seems to me thats a personal decision, not a government one. I might remark the same thing about computer backups, but the government issuing a personal mandate for a cloud-stored computer backup would rightfully be seen as a violation of personal rights (I hope).
I guess if the state you live in just couldn't get the job done themselves, and NEEDS TO RELY ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO IT FOR THEM, well, beggers can't be choosers, can they?
The whole point of obamacare is to do an end run around a state's desire to "do the job themselves", and youre lambasting them for it now?
Until such revolutionary change comes about in medicine, choosing not to vaccinate a child *is* particularly evil
no, its exercising personal liberty. It doesnt become "OK" to sack any personal liberty you like just because you can show its beneficial to society to do so. Or would you like to bring back policies of sterilizing the unfit?
There is no "right" to "not get ill". "Bodily autonomy" is one of the most fundamental rights there is. The idea that the state is mandating strapping someone down and giving them an injection whether they like it or no is pretty horrifying in my book, much more so than if they simply quarantined the kid on the off chance he got sick.
Im assuming youve never had a vasovagal reaction; its no picnic either. Fainting in a public clinic is not up there with one of my top hobbies, and its usually more trouble than its worth convincing the clinic aid that youre not going to die, you just need somewhere to lie down, and please dont call the ambulance.
Not that Im saying the flu is preferable, I just think you underestimate the degree to which needles can be a problem for some people. And do spare me the "get over it" thing; this isnt something one can control.
The dangerous idea floating around is that the state has more rights than the individual. Are you going to defend the violation of someones body against their will-- not for any crime committed, but simply because the state deems it best?
Brainwashing your kids against vaccination is particularly evil.
Its not quite as bad as forgetting that society exists for the individual, not the other way around, and mandating medical procedures is about one of the most onerous invasions of personal liberty there is.
then others at Booz Allen, etc, could certainly do so as well, with smaller data sets, that would be easier to sneak out and would have a higher value on the black market.
Booz would be held responsible, and the employee in question (termination aside) would be prosecuted under federal law.
If your brilliant point is that someone could attempt espionage, and if successful could make a buck, sure. But dont pretend that its lightly done; contractors have no vested interest in being barred from federal bidding, and their employees have no vested interest in having the FBI on their tail for a felony.
I agree, and dont get me started on computers. Smart folk post our slashdot comments by encoding an HTTP response directly onto a ethernet cable with a steady hand, some copper wire, and a pair of AA batteries in series. Honestly, the shortcuts kids take these days with their "operating systems" and "networking stacks".
Of course, what the Senate is passing is a Continuing Resolution, where everything just stays the way it was for another year
Right, which constitutes "What the senate wants". Republicans want to cut spending to deal with a debt that is in excess of 100% GDP, and it is perfectly reasonable to do so in the main yearly "budget" discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably just feeding the trolls here, but: Seriously? That's the best argument you can come up with?
I was just responding to your claim that any society that doesnt provide medical care isnt a society-- Im assuming here that you arent prepared to discount all civilizations outside of the last 200 years as "not societies".
There really is no valid argument as to why "Society" shouldn't (to some extend) be "Socialist
Find me a socialist-run country in the last 100 years that hasnt been an absolute disaster.
Most Human beings have plenty of incentive to be meaningfully productive members of a society, it's called a conscience, and a full set of operating emotions
In the context of dealing with alcoholism, have you ever heard of the term "enabling"? Same concept.
Unfortunately the people paid to come up with the memes like that one seem to be in the group of humans that lack both.
Are you sure we live in the same world with the same race? Everything ive seen indicates that the number of people who might concievably make communism work is utterly drowned out by the number who ensure it will never work.
Just use an Office format, those will be around forever.
We can argue about that premise
For most societies up until the last 100 years or so, it hasnt been society's responsiblity. Hows that?
You don't ran around and claim "this land is mine". You don't kill any animal you find to eat it (cause it could be owned by someone else). You don't hit the next lady with a bat and pull her into your lair.
In each of those instances, society is protecting the rights of others. To some degree you can argue that youre giving up rights (the right to murder etc), but thats a pretty silly argument to make as most people would say there is no right to murder, steal, etc.
Vaccination is a matter of public safety, because even if you don't get sick you can infect other children or adults, causing deaths
Are we talking a number of additional deaths from not being MMR vacinated (statistically) thats even remotely on par with the number of, say, automotive deaths?
If not, it would seem to invalidate the idea that its a sufficient public risk to warrant such a violation of personal liberty.
Theyre not "my germs". Bacteria exists in the real world. Deal with it (preferably without stomping over every notion of personal liberty).
I think of it as an assault.
Thinking it so doesnt make it so.
No. It doesnt. The right to parent your kids is another fairly fundamental right.
Fair enough, but GP does seem to be advocating this regardless of whether the father supported it or not.
Youre starting with the false premise that it is society's responsibility to provide medical care for you. It isnt. This can be done at a local community level, and thats generally OK so long as it isnt mandated, but the whole "socialism" thing has been tried and fundamentally doesnt work because it removes incentives. Doing socialism piecemeal isnt going to work any better than just going whole hog, except perhaps it wont fail quite as badly, as quickly.
The fact is, nobody needs health insurance...until they do.
Seems to me thats a personal decision, not a government one. I might remark the same thing about computer backups, but the government issuing a personal mandate for a cloud-stored computer backup would rightfully be seen as a violation of personal rights (I hope).
I guess if the state you live in just couldn't get the job done themselves, and NEEDS TO RELY ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO IT FOR THEM, well, beggers can't be choosers, can they?
The whole point of obamacare is to do an end run around a state's desire to "do the job themselves", and youre lambasting them for it now?
Wow.
At least it makes it hard for them to ignore things like personal rights, which are (in theory) the whole reason society exists to begin with.
Until such revolutionary change comes about in medicine, choosing not to vaccinate a child *is* particularly evil
no, its exercising personal liberty. It doesnt become "OK" to sack any personal liberty you like just because you can show its beneficial to society to do so. Or would you like to bring back policies of sterilizing the unfit?
There is no "right" to "not get ill". "Bodily autonomy" is one of the most fundamental rights there is. The idea that the state is mandating strapping someone down and giving them an injection whether they like it or no is pretty horrifying in my book, much more so than if they simply quarantined the kid on the off chance he got sick.
Then you've probably never really had the flu.
Im assuming youve never had a vasovagal reaction; its no picnic either. Fainting in a public clinic is not up there with one of my top hobbies, and its usually more trouble than its worth convincing the clinic aid that youre not going to die, you just need somewhere to lie down, and please dont call the ambulance.
Not that Im saying the flu is preferable, I just think you underestimate the degree to which needles can be a problem for some people. And do spare me the "get over it" thing; this isnt something one can control.
The dangerous idea floating around is that the state has more rights than the individual. Are you going to defend the violation of someones body against their will-- not for any crime committed, but simply because the state deems it best?
Whats next, sterilizing the unfit?
Brainwashing your kids against vaccination is particularly evil.
Its not quite as bad as forgetting that society exists for the individual, not the other way around, and mandating medical procedures is about one of the most onerous invasions of personal liberty there is.
Apparently written accounts, letters, etc are no longer considered historical data.
then others at Booz Allen, etc, could certainly do so as well, with smaller data sets, that would be easier to sneak out and would have a higher value on the black market.
Booz would be held responsible, and the employee in question (termination aside) would be prosecuted under federal law.
If your brilliant point is that someone could attempt espionage, and if successful could make a buck, sure. But dont pretend that its lightly done; contractors have no vested interest in being barred from federal bidding, and their employees have no vested interest in having the FBI on their tail for a felony.
I was going to reply that (as per 6th grade teacher) infinity isnt a number and you cant subtract real numbers from it...
But wikipedia is telling me that my childhood was a lie. Thanks, internet!
Maybe that driver could have parked more squarely within his spot-- the solution to this problem 90% of the time.
I agree, and dont get me started on computers. Smart folk post our slashdot comments by encoding an HTTP response directly onto a ethernet cable with a steady hand, some copper wire, and a pair of AA batteries in series. Honestly, the shortcuts kids take these days with their "operating systems" and "networking stacks".
Of course, what the Senate is passing is a Continuing Resolution, where everything just stays the way it was for another year
Right, which constitutes "What the senate wants". Republicans want to cut spending to deal with a debt that is in excess of 100% GDP, and it is perfectly reasonable to do so in the main yearly "budget" discussion.
Every bit of reporting is biased; if you think it isnt, you just arent looking hard enough.
A really strange sentiment to express in the same sentence you acknowledge a scientific achievement by the US.
Thats their prerogative. The Senate doesnt get to demand that everything they want funded gets funded, and say that anything else is stonewalling.