Abortion, of which I'm pro, is already a step towards eugenics. In 200 years, many diseases will have ceased to exist because of this.
Down's Syndrome has already been reduced over 90% in Europe, and by about 70% in America. The American parents almost certainly include a number of hypocrites, since 44% of Americans think abortion should be illegal.
Why? Because you said so? Nazi style eugenics is morally wrong because it involved murdering people. This does not, so I don't see any moral or ethical problem. How is this any more morally wrong than, say, pregnant women taking folic acid supplements to reduce birth defects, thus "weeding out the undesirables"?
Liberal: "I want someone who'll fight for me." Conservative: "I want someone who'll leave me the fuck alone."
Liberal: Someone who wants the government to leave people alone unless they are trying to use their wallet. Conservative: Someone who wants the government to leave people alone unless they are trying to have sex or go to the bathroom.
If the female deficit was even spread through all ages, then it would be about 2%, which would be no big deal. But it is concentrated among the young, where it exceeds 10% in many areas. That is socially destabilizing. Many Chinese social media comments made about the recent atoll dispute with the Philippines are shockingly jingoistic, calling for war to seize land and defend China's "honor". I doubt if those comments are coming from guys with families or even GFs.
The sound is mandatory in Japan and Korea. 1. Women there are more likely to wear skirts. 2. Men there are are more likely to be perverts. 3. Crowded trains and elevators offer many photo ops.
Prostitution is degrading and dangerous because our laws and institutions have made it that way. It isn't like that everywhere. Many other countries have legalized prostitution, which is safer for both hookers and johns. Less violence, less coercion, less disease, less social decay.
So long as Erdogan does as he is told, nothing. So long as he is our bastard, he can do what he wants.
But Erdogan does not doing what he is told. America would like to see Turkey become more democratic, secular, and bound to European institutions, including NATO, and eventually the EU. We would like Turkey to be tolerant of the Turkish Kurds in the south east, and support the Iraqi and Syrian Kurds in the fight against ISIS. Erdogan is doing the opposite of all these things. He is undermining democracy, arresting judges, and rounding up political opponents. He is promoting Islamic law, and imposing Halal restrictions on pork and alcohol onto non-muslims. He is provoking and attacking the Kurds. He was lukewarm in the fight against ISIS until they started setting off bombs in Turkish cities (which he tried to pin on the Kurds).
Three of the last four times I've seen a doctor, it was for a sore throat, and she didn't even spend thirty seconds with me.
In countries with much lower medical costs than America, routine ailments like sore throats and sniffles are handled by nurses or pharmacists. You only see a doctor if your problem is serious and/or non-routine.
I once switched doctors because he spent most of every consultation oriented towards his screen and keyboard, entering symptoms, treatments, and medication into my medical record, and little time speaking with me face-to-face.
So you switched because your doctor focused on medical issues rather than providing you with emotionally comforting talk therapy?
You are not alone. If you look at doctor review sites, by far the biggest reason for low ratings is a rude receptionist. The 2nd biggest reason is doctors that avoided chit-chat. Actual quality of treatment and medical outcomes are rarely even mentioned.
Here is the root problem: America spends 18% of GDP on healthcare. Other developed countries spend 6-9%, yet mostly have better health outcomes. So if we become as efficient as them, 1/2 to 2/3rds of healthcare workers will be redundant. What interest do they have in destroying their own jobs? Our healthcare system will not fix itself from the inside. They have absolutely no incentive to do that.
When lives are on the line? Fuck off with that bullshit.
I served in the military, and I can assure you that when "lives are on the line", decision making is no less dysfunctional. If anything, it is even worse, as officers who have spent years in a "zero defect" peacetime environment, are suddenly faced with potentially career ending decisions. So they delay, and push the responsibility up the chain of command, to someone who has less information and likely less relevant expertise.
Only if you're one of those oddballs that think "college" should be synonymous with "trade school".
College should provide you with a broad education. It should ALSO provide you with skills needed for employment. If you are a college graduate, and your job is "Uber driver", then you messed up.
If these remarkable advancements in technology are only giving us 0.4% annual growth in salaries, is it even worth it?
You are mixing up statistics. Lack of growth in median salaries does not mean lack of growth in salaries. Skilled workers have seen plenty of salary growth. Low skill workers (including the median) have seen little growth. Unskilled workers have seen a decline in income. So is automation beneficial? For skilled workers, it certainly is.
I don't suppose you could point me towards a news story about it?
Of course not. When an AC describes a wildly implausible scenario that is almost certainly fabricated, asking for a citation is generally pointless. Apply some critical thinking: If this actually happened, the media would have hyped it to the max, it would have been a HUGE story, and everyone would have heard about it.
Or figure out a way to control population growth. Because you can't continue to "give them money" forever; eventually the well will run dry. Then what?
An obvious solution would be to give people a basic income in return for agreeing to be sterilized.
What if instead of giving money to big banks and businesses via monetary policy, give it to any citizen that wanted it with the string of you must either volunteer, teach, or be going to class to receive that money?
Because you would need a huge bureaucracy to ensure that people were actually volunteering, teaching, or learning. You would soon have thousands of sham "colleges" generating worthless degrees and sucking up the subsidies. We already have a lot of that from the student loans that foolish younglings treat as "free money", until it is too late and they realize they will spend much of their life paying off their debt. The end result of your proposal is that millions would be paid to do nothing productive, while taxes on actual productive people would be cranked up to pay for it.
That is certainly not true. Try to find a plumbing contractor, or an electrician. The problem is that these are skilled jobs, that often require licensing, and the jobs are often geographically separated from the jobless. There are no assembly line jobs for people that have no ability other than to turn a screw. You can't make a living by trying to compete with a servo motor.
Affordable housing is a great idea, but how is that different from a UBI? Whatever housing subsidy you apply is just part of the UBI.
Affordable housing does NOT require subsidies. It just requires sidelining the NIMBYs and BANANAs that are obstructing construction. If we expand the supply by building new housing, the price will go down.
Cost of a Starbucks latte: about $4 Cost of a gallon of gasoline: about $4 Cost of modest-sized house: about $4,000,000
So if you can't afford to buy a house in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the world, then there is just no point in investing at all? I have relatives nearing retirement with $0 in IRA/401k, living in a trailer park, who think exactly the same way. But they can always find the money to go to Starbucks and buy the latest iPhone.
So, you want every home (remember every home is a potential airbnb place) inspected by the Governments?
Of course not. They would only have to be inspected when they are placed on the market. In fact, even that is not necessary. Instead the government could just publicise the requirements, and offer a reward for turning in violators. So, if I stay in an Airbnb, and there is no smoke detector in my room, I can report the violation and receive a portion of the fine.
Disclaimer: I rent several rooms on Airbnb. They all have smoke detectors, as required under California law.
These people are driving up the rents and prices of homes in communities
The rents are driven up by housing shortages. The NIMBYs and BANANAs have stopped nearly all housing construction in most big American cities. In SF, more than 95% of building permits were rejected last year, and most prospective builders didn't even bother to submit a request. So new growth is forced out into the suburban sprawl. Blaming the shortage of urban housing on Airbnb is silly.
Over half this country does not have the money to invest even 1 cent
Yet they have enough money to gas up their SUV and drive to Starbucks everyday. The people that "can't invest" are the same people that failed the Marshmallow Experiment.
Slashdot Mirror
Abortion, of which I'm pro, is already a step towards eugenics. In 200 years, many diseases will have ceased to exist because of this.
Down's Syndrome has already been reduced over 90% in Europe, and by about 70% in America. The American parents almost certainly include a number of hypocrites, since 44% of Americans think abortion should be illegal.
This is morally and ethically wrong.
Why? Because you said so? Nazi style eugenics is morally wrong because it involved murdering people. This does not, so I don't see any moral or ethical problem. How is this any more morally wrong than, say, pregnant women taking folic acid supplements to reduce birth defects, thus "weeding out the undesirables"?
Liberal: "I want someone who'll fight for me."
Conservative: "I want someone who'll leave me the fuck alone."
Liberal: Someone who wants the government to leave people alone unless they are trying to use their wallet.
Conservative: Someone who wants the government to leave people alone unless they are trying to have sex or go to the bathroom.
That's barely a statistical error in China.
If the female deficit was even spread through all ages, then it would be about 2%, which would be no big deal. But it is concentrated among the young, where it exceeds 10% in many areas. That is socially destabilizing. Many Chinese social media comments made about the recent atoll dispute with the Philippines are shockingly jingoistic, calling for war to seize land and defend China's "honor". I doubt if those comments are coming from guys with families or even GFs.
In the US we automate because the costs of Automation is less than labor. However in China Labor is much cheaper.
The cost of Chinese labor is rising rapidly. The cost of automation is falling even more rapidly.
Going towards automation may put China in an economic disadvantage.
It puts them at a cost disadvantage against America and Europe. But it helps them against Vietnam and India.
The sound isn't mandatory.
The sound is mandatory in Japan and Korea.
1. Women there are more likely to wear skirts.
2. Men there are are more likely to be perverts.
3. Crowded trains and elevators offer many photo ops.
Why do you need the watch? Sounds like you only need a headset with a button.
You need the watch to see who's calling.
It is degrading and dangerous.
Prostitution is degrading and dangerous because our laws and institutions have made it that way. It isn't like that everywhere. Many other countries have legalized prostitution, which is safer for both hookers and johns. Less violence, less coercion, less disease, less social decay.
So long as Erdogan does as he is told, nothing. So long as he is our bastard, he can do what he wants.
But Erdogan does not doing what he is told. America would like to see Turkey become more democratic, secular, and bound to European institutions, including NATO, and eventually the EU. We would like Turkey to be tolerant of the Turkish Kurds in the south east, and support the Iraqi and Syrian Kurds in the fight against ISIS. Erdogan is doing the opposite of all these things. He is undermining democracy, arresting judges, and rounding up political opponents. He is promoting Islamic law, and imposing Halal restrictions on pork and alcohol onto non-muslims. He is provoking and attacking the Kurds. He was lukewarm in the fight against ISIS until they started setting off bombs in Turkish cities (which he tried to pin on the Kurds).
Three of the last four times I've seen a doctor, it was for a sore throat, and she didn't even spend thirty seconds with me.
In countries with much lower medical costs than America, routine ailments like sore throats and sniffles are handled by nurses or pharmacists. You only see a doctor if your problem is serious and/or non-routine.
I once switched doctors because he spent most of every consultation oriented towards his screen and keyboard, entering symptoms, treatments, and medication into my medical record, and little time speaking with me face-to-face.
So you switched because your doctor focused on medical issues rather than providing you with emotionally comforting talk therapy?
You are not alone. If you look at doctor review sites, by far the biggest reason for low ratings is a rude receptionist. The 2nd biggest reason is doctors that avoided chit-chat. Actual quality of treatment and medical outcomes are rarely even mentioned.
Here is the root problem: America spends 18% of GDP on healthcare. Other developed countries spend 6-9%, yet mostly have better health outcomes. So if we become as efficient as them, 1/2 to 2/3rds of healthcare workers will be redundant. What interest do they have in destroying their own jobs? Our healthcare system will not fix itself from the inside. They have absolutely no incentive to do that.
When lives are on the line? Fuck off with that bullshit.
I served in the military, and I can assure you that when "lives are on the line", decision making is no less dysfunctional. If anything, it is even worse, as officers who have spent years in a "zero defect" peacetime environment, are suddenly faced with potentially career ending decisions. So they delay, and push the responsibility up the chain of command, to someone who has less information and likely less relevant expertise.
Only if you're one of those oddballs that think "college" should be synonymous with "trade school".
College should provide you with a broad education. It should ALSO provide you with skills needed for employment. If you are a college graduate, and your job is "Uber driver", then you messed up.
There are many statistics about the Millennials being less likely to go to college.
Millennial men are less likely to go to college. Millennial women are more likely to go. Women are more likely to get worthless degrees.
If these remarkable advancements in technology are only giving us 0.4% annual growth in salaries, is it even worth it?
You are mixing up statistics. Lack of growth in median salaries does not mean lack of growth in salaries. Skilled workers have seen plenty of salary growth. Low skill workers (including the median) have seen little growth. Unskilled workers have seen a decline in income. So is automation beneficial? For skilled workers, it certainly is.
I don't suppose you could point me towards a news story about it?
Of course not. When an AC describes a wildly implausible scenario that is almost certainly fabricated, asking for a citation is generally pointless. Apply some critical thinking: If this actually happened, the media would have hyped it to the max, it would have been a HUGE story, and everyone would have heard about it.
Or figure out a way to control population growth. Because you can't continue to "give them money" forever; eventually the well will run dry. Then what?
An obvious solution would be to give people a basic income in return for agreeing to be sterilized.
What if instead of giving money to big banks and businesses via monetary policy, give it to any citizen that wanted it with the string of you must either volunteer, teach, or be going to class to receive that money?
Because you would need a huge bureaucracy to ensure that people were actually volunteering, teaching, or learning. You would soon have thousands of sham "colleges" generating worthless degrees and sucking up the subsidies. We already have a lot of that from the student loans that foolish younglings treat as "free money", until it is too late and they realize they will spend much of their life paying off their debt. The end result of your proposal is that millions would be paid to do nothing productive, while taxes on actual productive people would be cranked up to pay for it.
Everyone can be a billionaire!
Like this guy?
But why stop at only a billion?
There are no longer enough jobs for everyone
That is certainly not true. Try to find a plumbing contractor, or an electrician. The problem is that these are skilled jobs, that often require licensing, and the jobs are often geographically separated from the jobless. There are no assembly line jobs for people that have no ability other than to turn a screw. You can't make a living by trying to compete with a servo motor.
Affordable housing is a great idea, but how is that different from a UBI? Whatever housing subsidy you apply is just part of the UBI.
Affordable housing does NOT require subsidies. It just requires sidelining the NIMBYs and BANANAs that are obstructing construction. If we expand the supply by building new housing, the price will go down.
In my city:
Cost of a Starbucks latte: about $4
Cost of a gallon of gasoline: about $4
Cost of modest-sized house: about $4,000,000
So if you can't afford to buy a house in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the world, then there is just no point in investing at all? I have relatives nearing retirement with $0 in IRA/401k, living in a trailer park, who think exactly the same way. But they can always find the money to go to Starbucks and buy the latest iPhone.
So, you want every home (remember every home is a potential airbnb place) inspected by the Governments?
Of course not. They would only have to be inspected when they are placed on the market. In fact, even that is not necessary. Instead the government could just publicise the requirements, and offer a reward for turning in violators. So, if I stay in an Airbnb, and there is no smoke detector in my room, I can report the violation and receive a portion of the fine.
Disclaimer: I rent several rooms on Airbnb. They all have smoke detectors, as required under California law.
These people are driving up the rents and prices of homes in communities
The rents are driven up by housing shortages. The NIMBYs and BANANAs have stopped nearly all housing construction in most big American cities. In SF, more than 95% of building permits were rejected last year, and most prospective builders didn't even bother to submit a request. So new growth is forced out into the suburban sprawl. Blaming the shortage of urban housing on Airbnb is silly.
Over half this country does not have the money to invest even 1 cent
Yet they have enough money to gas up their SUV and drive to Starbucks everyday. The people that "can't invest" are the same people that failed the Marshmallow Experiment.