That's a simplistic, Ayn Randian view of the world that a 13 year old would have. Life ain't that simple, kiddo.
That's the simplistic view of a member of the privileged middle class wage slave who has been enriching himself at the expense of his fellow Americans, both poor and rich, for so long that he simply cannot imagine standing on his own two feet.
But in some industries, when there's no government involvement at all you are likely to end up with monopolies due to the economics of the industry in question. That's the other problem that we need a solution for
Well, since that's never been seen for ISPs, that "problem" seems about as likely as getting abducted by space aliens.
What are you talking about? Hunter gatherer societies had sexual division of labor for tens of thousands of years, and those became even more pronounced in agricultural societies and industrial societies.
I like how you get smug about the worst examples you can cherry-pick
I'm happy for you. But I simply pointed out that the OP is wrong: conservatives and progressives have no interest in denying cases where progressives harass or abuse women.
If you do want to talk about implications, it's clear that progressive policies are ineffective in eliminating the harassment of women, contrary to their stated objectives; we can reach that conclusion regardless of what conservatives or libertarians do.
Saying "conservatives do it just as much" is just an irrelevant tu quoque fallacy (in addition to probably being factually false).
Permission for anyone to put whatever they like on public rights-of-way?
No, private markets in which rights-of-way are traded.
Should Joe's Bait Shop And Internet Connectivity be allowed to dig a trench across my driveway whenever they feel like it?
If and only if they have purchased the right of way.
Burden utility poles until they fall over in a stiff wind?
That's up to the utility pole owner. They will presumably auction off the slots on the poles. Even government could do that. Ditto with in-the-ground conduits. Right there, you have the potential for dozens of separate last mile providers even if they share no cables at all.
Drop the "market will solve it" noise and suggest specifics.
The "solution" to having an unwanted government-maintained monopoly is for the government to stop maintaining the monopoly, isn't it? What other problem do you want a solution for?
For years women have been subjugated to the role society placed them in.. "motherhood" while the men went out and had to provide.
Traditional gender roles were not a social construct, but the result of biology, specifically pregnancy and high child mortality.
You are one of the reasons this "political" stance even exists.
I don't doubt it: government based on individual liberty and personal responsibility scares people, which is why they then embrace authoritarian and oppressive forms of government.
Elon Musk is a progressive Clinton supporter. So are most Silicon Valley VCs and CEOs. The fact that these people and companies are constantly mired in misogyny and harassment claims neither surprises, nor prompts denials from, conservatives and libertarians. Why should it? It's not surprising to us that progressives and male "feminists" harass women.
So, when you talk about "misogynist scum", you perhaps need to be a bit clearer who you're talking about.
They only lack that information because gathering that information would cost money
Really? How would regulators decide whether it is more valuable to satisfy my dad's desire to have a tablet that lasts him ten years than it is to satisfy my desire to have a tablet that has a processor that's 30% faster than last year's?
Why? Many European countries have private health insurers. And in the US, high health care costs are primarily driven by the massive single payer public system.
Its absolutely ridiculous to jump to conclusions as to why they are banned. Maybe it was a mistake, maybe there was actionable intel that one of the members was a known subversive.
And as I was pointing out, it probably was none of those. The most common reason why people from poor and third world nations are denied entry to the US (or Europe) is insufficient funds or doubts about their intent to leave. That's the most likely reason here; nothing to do with religion.
A free market requires unrestricted competition and balanced bargaining power.
No, a free market simply means that the government doesn't interfere in business transactions; it doesn't "require" anything beyond that.
Just one pharmaceutical company creates an essential product (e.g. Epipen), makes it a requirement for organizations to have them on-hand, then jack up the price.
Epipen is not an "essential product", there are many cheap alternatives. And Mylan doesn't have the power to make it "a requirement", government did that.
This would be a non-issue in any other western nation with socialized medicine
You're right, in the sense that other western nations with socialized medicine will likely simply tell you to use a cheap alternative when some proprietary drug or device is too expensive.
Breaking Bad would be a 5-minute short if it took place in any sane country.
I'm all for getting a UK-style health care system, but that has to include UK-style cost controls. The UK spends about $4000/person/year (PPP). If we get Medicare/Medicaid spending down to that level, we can have universal healthcare in the US without a dime of new spending. On the other hand, a UK-style health care system with US-style per capita spending is not acceptable.
I'm sure I will be denounced, but this does seem like an area where imposing some kind of regulation would have good environmental consequences (reducing the waste stream) and consumer benefit even if it results in marginal price premiums.
Your argument is really no different from the general central planning vs free market argument. In theory, regulated (or centrally planned) markets always do better than free markets. In practice, they never do, because regulators lack the information to decide on the right policies and objectives.
You know he has dozens of accounts, farming for mod points, just so he could get himself back up from those downmods and create an illusion of wider consent to his lunacy?
I don't actually know how "farming for mod points" would work, but you seem to have experience with it. Can you explain? I always believed that in order to get mod points, you actually need to use an account and receive positive mods yourself. Isn't that true?
Well, yes, it would be. These girls have no financial resources of their own. So the tax payer will have to pay for their healthcare and education, hundreds of thousands of dollars per kid. Furthermore, the tax payer is never going to recoup that investment in terms of economic contributions.
God knows how our culture could possibly survive allowing a few young girls come here.
The culture you should worry about is Afghan culture: if you keep luring away the smart, educated, independent-minded people from a country, all you're left with is dumb warlords.
Oh, the horror. Educated young women with interests in STEM fields. How would "Merica" ever survive such a thing?
They are around 14 years old and have no financial resources. They are going to cost tax payers many hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical and education costs each. Furthermore, they are unlikely to ever repay that investment over their lifetime. So, a bad deal.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the simplistic view of a member of the privileged middle class wage slave who has been enriching himself at the expense of his fellow Americans, both poor and rich, for so long that he simply cannot imagine standing on his own two feet.
Well, except for the fact that there is no evidence that natural monopolies even exist, or that even if they did, ISPs would be one.
Well, since that's never been seen for ISPs, that "problem" seems about as likely as getting abducted by space aliens.
You're making up terms and "facts" as you go along now.
Where can I see those "conservative POLICIES" that say "women should be harassed and abused"?
What are you talking about? Hunter gatherer societies had sexual division of labor for tens of thousands of years, and those became even more pronounced in agricultural societies and industrial societies.
I'm happy for you. But I simply pointed out that the OP is wrong: conservatives and progressives have no interest in denying cases where progressives harass or abuse women.
If you do want to talk about implications, it's clear that progressive policies are ineffective in eliminating the harassment of women, contrary to their stated objectives; we can reach that conclusion regardless of what conservatives or libertarians do.
Saying "conservatives do it just as much" is just an irrelevant tu quoque fallacy (in addition to probably being factually false).
You're saying Peter Thiel has been trying to sleep with female founders? That's a new one!
No, private markets in which rights-of-way are traded.
If and only if they have purchased the right of way.
That's up to the utility pole owner. They will presumably auction off the slots on the poles. Even government could do that. Ditto with in-the-ground conduits. Right there, you have the potential for dozens of separate last mile providers even if they share no cables at all.
The "solution" to having an unwanted government-maintained monopoly is for the government to stop maintaining the monopoly, isn't it? What other problem do you want a solution for?
Traditional gender roles were not a social construct, but the result of biology, specifically pregnancy and high child mortality.
I don't doubt it: government based on individual liberty and personal responsibility scares people, which is why they then embrace authoritarian and oppressive forms of government.
Elon Musk is a progressive Clinton supporter. So are most Silicon Valley VCs and CEOs. The fact that these people and companies are constantly mired in misogyny and harassment claims neither surprises, nor prompts denials from, conservatives and libertarians. Why should it? It's not surprising to us that progressives and male "feminists" harass women.
So, when you talk about "misogynist scum", you perhaps need to be a bit clearer who you're talking about.
Really? How would regulators decide whether it is more valuable to satisfy my dad's desire to have a tablet that lasts him ten years than it is to satisfy my desire to have a tablet that has a processor that's 30% faster than last year's?
BTW, this looks like a pretty good summary:
http://www.alllaw.com/articles...
Actually, no, I didn't know, but I take your word for it.
I wear it as a matter of pride that socialists and fascists like you call me that.
Why? Many European countries have private health insurers. And in the US, high health care costs are primarily driven by the massive single payer public system.
And as I was pointing out, it probably was none of those. The most common reason why people from poor and third world nations are denied entry to the US (or Europe) is insufficient funds or doubts about their intent to leave. That's the most likely reason here; nothing to do with religion.
No, a free market simply means that the government doesn't interfere in business transactions; it doesn't "require" anything beyond that.
Epipen is not an "essential product", there are many cheap alternatives. And Mylan doesn't have the power to make it "a requirement", government did that.
You're right, in the sense that other western nations with socialized medicine will likely simply tell you to use a cheap alternative when some proprietary drug or device is too expensive.
Walter White was a public school teacher and had a good health plan which would have treated him, he just wasn't satisfied with that. In fact, Walter White would probably have been worse off in the UK.
I'm all for getting a UK-style health care system, but that has to include UK-style cost controls. The UK spends about $4000/person/year (PPP). If we get Medicare/Medicaid spending down to that level, we can have universal healthcare in the US without a dime of new spending. On the other hand, a UK-style health care system with US-style per capita spending is not acceptable.
Your argument is really no different from the general central planning vs free market argument. In theory, regulated (or centrally planned) markets always do better than free markets. In practice, they never do, because regulators lack the information to decide on the right policies and objectives.
I don't actually know how "farming for mod points" would work, but you seem to have experience with it. Can you explain? I always believed that in order to get mod points, you actually need to use an account and receive positive mods yourself. Isn't that true?
Evert iPhone should come with a free pony! The EU demands it!
Thank you! Being called a "right wing racist lunatic" by you is indeed a compliment.
Which is why, of course, the logical thing is to remove them from Afghanistan so that Afghanistan can stay in the hands of oppressive pigs, right?
Well, yes, it would be. These girls have no financial resources of their own. So the tax payer will have to pay for their healthcare and education, hundreds of thousands of dollars per kid. Furthermore, the tax payer is never going to recoup that investment in terms of economic contributions.
The culture you should worry about is Afghan culture: if you keep luring away the smart, educated, independent-minded people from a country, all you're left with is dumb warlords.
They are around 14 years old and have no financial resources. They are going to cost tax payers many hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical and education costs each. Furthermore, they are unlikely to ever repay that investment over their lifetime. So, a bad deal.
And that is probably why they aren't being admitted to the US, because once here, they could likely find a way to legally stay.