Do you tend toward the scientific realist end of the spectrum or the instrumentalist side?

GregorMendel

Yeah, I was a philosophy minor in college. I started out as a phil. major, but when I realized that philosophy rarely accomplishes anything but supurious and useless debates regarding semantics, I went into neuroscience (which of course, has it's own semantics to be sure).

But these two definitions have no utility, no way to enhance understanding or to guide our understanding of the world. This goes back to William James' analogy of chasing a squirrel around a tree, but never seeing the squirrel. Why have this 'debate'?

GregorMendel

It only looks like a rip off if you assume goldline sponsored Glen Beck first. If you invert the arrows, it looks like someone making claims and then receiving interested investors.

GregorMendel

Remaining? Aren't these really the only protections?

GregorMendel

That might be more silly than the sarf thing.

might be.

GregorMendel

I think a rigid understanding of personal liberty, rather than 'free-market' is the hallmark of a good libertarian...

GregorMendel

care to define either of those positions? I'm a scientist, I make predictions and test them. This builds my understanding of the world.

Where does that put me?

GregorMendel

hooray for the constitutional scholar!

GregorMendel

That all depends on how you plan to quantify improvement.

GregorMendel

Just throwing it out there. Otherwise, you may want to activate other gliotic responses through various inflammatory methods if you want to 'thicken' your pfc.

GregorMendel

Destroyed? Last I heard, on NPR, everything is moving along better than expected.

GregorMendel

yeah, i did a 'healthy fast food' dinner which one day, WILL be posted on my blog. I'll submit a link later.

GregorMendel

yeah, open up your skull and get an infection in your frontal cortex. Just jab something into your eye, the bone is thin back there. wiggle it around a bit, and sit back, relax, and wait for everything to 'thicken'.

GregorMendel

Great! Mine just asked me if I wanted a 2 or 1 tap kegerator for my homebrew, because I've been working so much recently.

Good relationships are very good things.

GregorMendel

I had a NY strip of bison last night for dinner. Delicious.

GregorMendel

That was be excellent indeed.

GregorMendel

I think the house-buying initiative (at least the recent and strong one) dates back to the Clinton admin, which was trying to increase home ownership, notably among minorities. This initiative was more of a federal 'suggestion' for banks and lender, including govt owned ones like Fannie and Freddie, to promote loans to ever more risky homebuyers.

When the govt needed another bubble to inflate, since Clinton had laid down this initiative and the groundwork for it on a smaller scale, Bush 2.0 found it a non-trivial way to stimulate the economy.

But this aside, how exactly would Bush have improved the economy? Currently we have Obama, who was handed a deflating bubble from Bush, who was handed a deflating bubble from Clinton, who had received a bubble from Bush 1.0.......

GregorMendel

Then there is no way to get around this_barb's problem.

GregorMendel

Really? Arriving on the scene 5 years into the great depression and perpetuating the same economic policies, just on a slightly larger scale than Hoover, Roosevelt simply reaped the benefits of any recovery efforts that were forthcoming.

Imagine, if you will, the current state of affairs. Bush 2.0 was here at the start of the massive financial crisis. He initiated many government bailout and spending bonuses (remember too, in the spring before this happened all the citizens got actual checks in the mail from the govt. So, his admin gave money to the people as well as big business...). Obama arrives on the scene and continues, expands these initiatives. Obama loses an election, and lets just say for shit's sake, Palin wins the 2012 election (god, allah, or spaghetti monster help us all).

In 2014, the effects of these spending programs starts to really be felt (if we can ever make such a claim). Large businesses and corporations are hiring again, and profits are on the rise. Small businesses are getting loans, people are buying houses nad cars and taking vacations.

Would Palin economics have won the day? Obama economics? Or Bush economics? By this conclusion, Palin might be the one who would most readily receive your praise, while Bush paved the legislative and precedent path to start 'saving' the economy that Obama picked up and continued.

though the moral of the story here is probably the following. Presidents dont command the economy, which is larger and far more ambiguous than any of us will understand, so we need to stop these senesless blame/praise games for presidents regarding economics and start doing some other shit.

GregorMendel

That is not an excuse. If anything, it's worse. If you are aware that you have a preconceived bias and yet are trying to gain an objective view of a topic, you need to understand that your views are biased and work hard at objectivity.

One should also, then, strive to look at the law in terms of legality, contracts, legislation and precedent. Using the letter of the law will help guide you towards a more objective conclusion, which may later be tempered by jury/judge interactions.

Simply saying that you're human, and acknowledging your faults while not trying to fix them is not an acceptable quality of an adult.

GregorMendel

I think you're approaching the subject from a biased point of view to start.

GregorMendel

That's not my point. this_barb's comment was regarding the

decision of others directly increases my risk of death

My distinction is that there is only one way to solve this problem. Almost any action by any other person may directly increase his/her risk of death.

GregorMendel

How would you stop this, except by killing all others?

GregorMendel

I'm sure the issue pertained more to understanding where, if at all, the ship, company, oil, and operators were within international and national regulatory standards, as well as the internal company standards. Then assessing the damage and understanding the broader impact before ruling.

Those along will take years to sort out, and they did (all other issues aside that i'm missing here). So, if you really want justice, as you claim, you're going to have to operate within the law and accept that this is the case.

If not, form a lynch mob and head out of town looking for people to hang and rob for your own arbitrary feelings on what justice is. But just remember, that you're not operating within the laws of the land then, you're simply a criminal.

GregorMendel

The current system involves an interaction between an already created regulatory agency and a series of companies, whereas the new system would more directly involve the consumer (as well as create a constant 'shake-up' of the agency so as to minimize familiarity and thus, corruption).

GregorMendel

I doubt that was actually the issue...

GregorMendel

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login