6 ms·

Or government is absolute out of control; the system on the whole needs an enema. Wherever you stand on social/ideological issues, we need to be united in the f

by M_Grey 10y ago

Or government is absolute out of control; the system on the whole needs an enema. Wherever you stand on social/ideological issues, we need to be united in the face of this, as well as other basic issues like police with MRAP's on city streets, and the need to maintain our infrastructure.

lettergram 10y ago
"Everyone wants a dictator in charge, as long as they agree with them"
- M_Grey 10y ago
  I'd just take a group of assholes who can pass a budget and understand the issues, they don't even need to agree with me on them.
  - lettergram 10y ago
    I think with the advent of the internet, we probably will have less and less moderates every year (at least until some major disaster brings us together). I'd recommend checking out the libertarian ticket - at least they seem willing to negotiate and can admit when they are wrong. Hell they are both Republicans from Democrat states running on a libertarian platform.
    - M_Grey 10y ago
      The ticket as it stands, with a guy who thinks that vaccinations should be optional, and can't think of any world leaders? That's not a ticket, that's a joke.
      - lettergram 10y ago
        "Everyone wants a dictator in charge, as long as they agree with them" Not getting a vaccine only hurts you (and arguably others who don't get vaccines, based on herd)... Wanting to force it, is kind of contrary to the whole quote. Also FYI I'm highly allergic to the stuff in vaccines and they still try and make me soooo I kinda want to point out that the freedom to choose what to put in your body should be an inalienable right.
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Not getting a vaccine only hurts you (and arguably others who don't get vaccines, based one herd)... That's incorrect. Vaccines are effective, but (like most things in the real world) not 100% effective. So not getting a vaccine increases everyone's risk of getting the disease the vaccine protects against.
        lettergram 10y ago
        Totally agree, if the assumptions made on that theory were correct. The fact is, many of the diseases we get vaccinated against: rabies, polio, small pox, chicken pox, etc. Are not spread through the air. And pretty much everyone was voluntarily vaccinated for those. Meaning the less people around you who have the disease the better, as you pointed out this is the general idea. That totally breaks down for air born pathogens that aren't spread via feceal matter, saliva, etc. one sneeze on a railing a train station can spread across 10000 people. We will always come in contact with it, vaccines may help, but yeah... it doesn't spread node to node as chicken pox, more like node to 100 X node. We haven't even come close to solving air born pathogens. Also, I'd argue that many of the reductions in disease rates have more to do with better plumbing and teaching people to stay home as opposed than vaccines. Both help, but the theory is just that a theory, with some pretty large holes and ignores the easy international travel, air born illness, and the evidence doesn't really have enough behind it to say "everyone has to be vaccinated"
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > The fact is, many of the diseases we get vaccinated against: rabies, polio, small pox, chicken pox, etc. Are not spread through the air. Whether a disease is airborne or not is somewhat irrelevant here (its obviously relevant to how easy it is to spread, but as long as a disease is communicable by some kind of contact, the increased danger from unvaccinated members of the population is qualitatively similar.) > Meaning the less people around you who have the disease the better, as you pointed out this is the general idea. That totally breaks down for air born pathogens that aren't spread via feceal matter, saliva, etc. No, it doesn't; it changes the shape of the "increased risk" curve resulting from changes in vaccination compliance, but it doesn't change that there is such an increased risk. > Also, I'd argue that many of the reductions in disease rates have more to do with better plumbing and teaching people to stay home as opposed than vaccines. Yes, that those things have reduced disease rates for many diseases is a well-established fact, not really a point in any kind of contention.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > I'd recommend checking out the libertarian ticket - at least they seem willing to negotiate and can admit when they are wrong. That may be true in some ways that aren't helpful to your case, including the apparent loss of faith in the campaign by the bottom of the ticket: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bill-welds-plans-the-future-raise-eyebrows http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bill-welds-plans-the...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
minikites 10y ago
The government is complex; which parts need to be "flushed out" (to extend your metaphor)?
- M_Grey 10y ago
  Elected officials primarily, although I'd take a long hard look at the bureaucratic "lifers" as well.
  - minikites 10y ago
    How would you deal with the loss of institutional knowledge/experience?
    - M_Grey 10y ago
      There would be challenges, but given the rampant combination of corruption and incompetence that exists, perhaps not many more than we already face.
rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
My common response to this line of reasoning: 1: How can one "flush the system" while preserving the necessary stability to maintain a nation's credit rating? 2: If the credit rating cannot be maintained, how can stability and access to basic needs such as food, water, and health care be met? 3: If above needs cannot be met, how will the inevitable hoarding eventually result in a fairer society in the future than the one we have now?
- M_Grey 10y ago
  They're called "Elections".

by M_Grey 10y ago

lettergram 10y ago

"Everyone wants a dictator in charge, as long as they agree with them"

M_Grey 10y ago
I'd just take a group of assholes who can pass a budget and understand the issues, they don't even need to agree with me on them.
- lettergram 10y ago
  I think with the advent of the internet, we probably will have less and less moderates every year (at least until some major disaster brings us together). I'd recommend checking out the libertarian ticket - at least they seem willing to negotiate and can admit when they are wrong. Hell they are both Republicans from Democrat states running on a libertarian platform.
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    The ticket as it stands, with a guy who thinks that vaccinations should be optional, and can't think of any world leaders? That's not a ticket, that's a joke.
    - lettergram 10y ago
      "Everyone wants a dictator in charge, as long as they agree with them" Not getting a vaccine only hurts you (and arguably others who don't get vaccines, based on herd)... Wanting to force it, is kind of contrary to the whole quote. Also FYI I'm highly allergic to the stuff in vaccines and they still try and make me soooo I kinda want to point out that the freedom to choose what to put in your body should be an inalienable right.
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Not getting a vaccine only hurts you (and arguably others who don't get vaccines, based one herd)... That's incorrect. Vaccines are effective, but (like most things in the real world) not 100% effective. So not getting a vaccine increases everyone's risk of getting the disease the vaccine protects against.
        lettergram 10y ago
        Totally agree, if the assumptions made on that theory were correct. The fact is, many of the diseases we get vaccinated against: rabies, polio, small pox, chicken pox, etc. Are not spread through the air. And pretty much everyone was voluntarily vaccinated for those. Meaning the less people around you who have the disease the better, as you pointed out this is the general idea. That totally breaks down for air born pathogens that aren't spread via feceal matter, saliva, etc. one sneeze on a railing a train station can spread across 10000 people. We will always come in contact with it, vaccines may help, but yeah... it doesn't spread node to node as chicken pox, more like node to 100 X node. We haven't even come close to solving air born pathogens. Also, I'd argue that many of the reductions in disease rates have more to do with better plumbing and teaching people to stay home as opposed than vaccines. Both help, but the theory is just that a theory, with some pretty large holes and ignores the easy international travel, air born illness, and the evidence doesn't really have enough behind it to say "everyone has to be vaccinated"
        dragonwriter 10y ago
        > The fact is, many of the diseases we get vaccinated against: rabies, polio, small pox, chicken pox, etc. Are not spread through the air. Whether a disease is airborne or not is somewhat irrelevant here (its obviously relevant to how easy it is to spread, but as long as a disease is communicable by some kind of contact, the increased danger from unvaccinated members of the population is qualitatively similar.) > Meaning the less people around you who have the disease the better, as you pointed out this is the general idea. That totally breaks down for air born pathogens that aren't spread via feceal matter, saliva, etc. No, it doesn't; it changes the shape of the "increased risk" curve resulting from changes in vaccination compliance, but it doesn't change that there is such an increased risk. > Also, I'd argue that many of the reductions in disease rates have more to do with better plumbing and teaching people to stay home as opposed than vaccines. Yes, that those things have reduced disease rates for many diseases is a well-established fact, not really a point in any kind of contention.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > I'd recommend checking out the libertarian ticket - at least they seem willing to negotiate and can admit when they are wrong. That may be true in some ways that aren't helpful to your case, including the apparent loss of faith in the campaign by the bottom of the ticket: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bill-welds-plans-the-future-raise-eyebrows http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bill-welds-plans-the...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

minikites 10y ago

The government is complex; which parts need to be "flushed out" (to extend your metaphor)?

M_Grey 10y ago
Elected officials primarily, although I'd take a long hard look at the bureaucratic "lifers" as well.
- minikites 10y ago
  How would you deal with the loss of institutional knowledge/experience?
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    There would be challenges, but given the rampant combination of corruption and incompetence that exists, perhaps not many more than we already face.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago

My common response to this line of reasoning: 1: How can one "flush the system" while preserving the necessary stability to maintain a nation's credit rating? 2: If the credit rating cannot be maintained, how can stability and access to basic needs such as food, water, and health care be met? 3: If above needs cannot be met, how will the inevitable hoarding eventually result in a fairer society in the future than the one we have now?

M_Grey 10y ago
They're called "Elections".