4 ms·

Certainly you realize how silly this is: If there was a simple consensus on what the "right" thing to do was, that would be the law.

pm90 8y ago
> If there was a simple consensus on what the "right" thing to do was, that would be the law. I'm sorry this just isn't true. There is a lot of consensus in the US about things: * legalization of pot * legal status for DREAMERS * bigger taxes on corporations And yet, none of these things (all of which poll very highly) become law.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  The results of the 2016 election would tell me you are mistaken about the consensus of all those things.
  - pm90 8y ago
    > The results of the 2016 election would tell me you are mistaken about the consensus of all those things. What results are you talking about? That the candidate who was for all those things won the popular vote by an unheard of 3 million votes? That fact seems to back up the consensus :)
    - fixermark 8y ago
      Consensus looks a lot more like 66% than squeaking past 50%. You are vastly underestimating the number of Americans who do not think like you do. All other things aside, that's going to make politics (and the necessary work to change laws you disagree with) difficult.
      - pm90 8y ago
        I disagree. In an election with 2 historically unpopular candidates, for one of them to win 3 million more votes sounds like consensus to me.
        oh_sigh 8y ago
        Then you don't understand the word consensus. It's also interesting you quote the raw differental - "a two percent difference" sounds much less compelling.
        pm90 8y ago
        > It's also interesting you quote the raw differental - "a two percent difference" sounds much less compelling. I want to point out the nature of the arguments you are making here. Its either in deliberately bad faith, or you are genuinely confused about these things. The latter is ok while the former isn't. Your comment in response to my statement about the consensus was to state that the 2016 presidential election indicated there was no consensus on these topics. Presidential elections are not a good way to gauge consensus on individual topics, and there have been many studies which have found the reason for choices weren't the issues I pointed out, but more racial fears of immigrants and minorities. I should have probably replied with this to your original comment. Despite this, and unpopular candidates in both parties, the one that supported the issues I mention still won by 3 million votes. That is why I point to it as being "consensus". Now, what you are doing, is to argue on the technical definition of consensus. Sure, that 2% differential does not sound like a compelling consensus if you ignore the context in which people voted. However, like I said, its still not the best way to gauge it. A much better way to gauge consensus is by polling and here are the numbers: * 62% for pot legalization http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-su... * 66% support legal path for DREAMERS https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-support-legal-status-for-dreamers-majority-oppose-building-a-wal https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-sup... * 75% favor larger tax on corporations https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-americans-favor-higher-taxes-for-wealthy-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSL2N1MM024 https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-am...
        sokoloff 8y ago
        Part of your argument is that a Presidential candidate receiving ~48% rather than ~46% of the popular votes cast (~29% vs 28% of eligible voters overall) indicates that there is "consensus" on three isolated elements of disagreement between the candidates/parties? That fails to match substantially any of the definition of consensus, IMO: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus To me "consensus" requires something more like 90+% agreement if there are possibly valid arguments for the opposition. There's consensus that we stop at red lights. There's consensus that we wear coats outside on cold winter days. There's consensus that regularly smoking tobacco is harmful. There's consensus that the Earth is not flat. IMO, there are strong arguments for a lot of things I believe in, but I don't assume/presume consensus on them and would not introduce a 48-46 or 29-28 finding as evidence of consensus.
    - googlryas 8y ago
      Consensus doesn't mean 'about half of the people think one way, and half think the other'. Do you believe Brexit was a consensus in the UK then?
    - bootaccount 8y ago
      ah, yes the popular vote. Let's let the massive population of california lead the way deciding the fate of the country and give it to the hands of a larger criminal. https://www.wnd.com/2015/04/wall-street-analyst-uncovers-clinton-foundation-fraud/ https://www.wnd.com/2015/04/wall-street-analyst-uncovers-cli...
- DannyBee 8y ago
  It's definitely true. 1. Your time scale seems very off. The law rarely changes quickly. 2. None of these things have large scale social consensus, even where there are majorities. The closest is legalization of pot, and it is in fact becoming legal where there is consensus. But right now, surveys show only 62% of people US-wide support legalization of pot[1]. That's not social consensus of the kind that the law represents long term. [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-su... (I chose Pew since they are very independent, and for the record, i'm pro-legalization)
  - pm90 8y ago
    > Your time scale seems very off. The law rarely changes quickly. Not true, especially in the US where it changes pretty quickly. Certainly quickly enough to close tax loopholes that are draining the Treasury. > None of these things have large scale social consensus, even where there are majorities. The closest is legalization of pot, and it is in fact becoming legal where there is consensus. Again, not true: * 62% for pot legalization http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-su... * 66% support legal path for DREAMERS https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-support-legal-status-for-dreamers-majority-oppose-building-a-wal https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-sup... * 75% favor larger tax on corporations https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-americans-favor-higher-taxes-for-wealthy-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSL2N1MM024 https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-am...
    - DannyBee 8y ago
      You seem to have cut out the actual argument i made, which you are in fact proving: 1. The law in the US definitely does not change quickly, and you've cited nothing to say it does. 2. I cited these very statistics and explicitly said they are not the kind of level of social consensus that tends to change the law. You have provided nothing to argue otherwise. I can't tell whether you claim it is not becoming legal where there is large enough local consensus (which is definitely true, and supports my larger point).

pm90 8y ago

> If there was a simple consensus on what the "right" thing to do was, that would be the law. I'm sorry this just isn't true. There is a lot of consensus in the US about things: * legalization of pot * legal status for DREAMERS * bigger taxes on corporations And yet, none of these things (all of which poll very highly) become law.

oh_sigh 8y ago
The results of the 2016 election would tell me you are mistaken about the consensus of all those things.
- pm90 8y ago
  > The results of the 2016 election would tell me you are mistaken about the consensus of all those things. What results are you talking about? That the candidate who was for all those things won the popular vote by an unheard of 3 million votes? That fact seems to back up the consensus :)
  - fixermark 8y ago
    Consensus looks a lot more like 66% than squeaking past 50%. You are vastly underestimating the number of Americans who do not think like you do. All other things aside, that's going to make politics (and the necessary work to change laws you disagree with) difficult.
    - pm90 8y ago
      I disagree. In an election with 2 historically unpopular candidates, for one of them to win 3 million more votes sounds like consensus to me.
      - oh_sigh 8y ago
        Then you don't understand the word consensus. It's also interesting you quote the raw differental - "a two percent difference" sounds much less compelling.
        pm90 8y ago
        > It's also interesting you quote the raw differental - "a two percent difference" sounds much less compelling. I want to point out the nature of the arguments you are making here. Its either in deliberately bad faith, or you are genuinely confused about these things. The latter is ok while the former isn't. Your comment in response to my statement about the consensus was to state that the 2016 presidential election indicated there was no consensus on these topics. Presidential elections are not a good way to gauge consensus on individual topics, and there have been many studies which have found the reason for choices weren't the issues I pointed out, but more racial fears of immigrants and minorities. I should have probably replied with this to your original comment. Despite this, and unpopular candidates in both parties, the one that supported the issues I mention still won by 3 million votes. That is why I point to it as being "consensus". Now, what you are doing, is to argue on the technical definition of consensus. Sure, that 2% differential does not sound like a compelling consensus if you ignore the context in which people voted. However, like I said, its still not the best way to gauge it. A much better way to gauge consensus is by polling and here are the numbers: * 62% for pot legalization http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-su... * 66% support legal path for DREAMERS https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-support-legal-status-for-dreamers-majority-oppose-building-a-wal https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-sup... * 75% favor larger tax on corporations https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-americans-favor-higher-taxes-for-wealthy-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSL2N1MM024 https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-am...
        sokoloff 8y ago
        Part of your argument is that a Presidential candidate receiving ~48% rather than ~46% of the popular votes cast (~29% vs 28% of eligible voters overall) indicates that there is "consensus" on three isolated elements of disagreement between the candidates/parties? That fails to match substantially any of the definition of consensus, IMO: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/consensus To me "consensus" requires something more like 90+% agreement if there are possibly valid arguments for the opposition. There's consensus that we stop at red lights. There's consensus that we wear coats outside on cold winter days. There's consensus that regularly smoking tobacco is harmful. There's consensus that the Earth is not flat. IMO, there are strong arguments for a lot of things I believe in, but I don't assume/presume consensus on them and would not introduce a 48-46 or 29-28 finding as evidence of consensus.
  - googlryas 8y ago
    Consensus doesn't mean 'about half of the people think one way, and half think the other'. Do you believe Brexit was a consensus in the UK then?
  - bootaccount 8y ago
    ah, yes the popular vote. Let's let the massive population of california lead the way deciding the fate of the country and give it to the hands of a larger criminal. https://www.wnd.com/2015/04/wall-street-analyst-uncovers-clinton-foundation-fraud/ https://www.wnd.com/2015/04/wall-street-analyst-uncovers-cli...
DannyBee 8y ago
It's definitely true. 1. Your time scale seems very off. The law rarely changes quickly. 2. None of these things have large scale social consensus, even where there are majorities. The closest is legalization of pot, and it is in fact becoming legal where there is consensus. But right now, surveys show only 62% of people US-wide support legalization of pot[1]. That's not social consensus of the kind that the law represents long term. [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-su... (I chose Pew since they are very independent, and for the record, i'm pro-legalization)
- pm90 8y ago
  > Your time scale seems very off. The law rarely changes quickly. Not true, especially in the US where it changes pretty quickly. Certainly quickly enough to close tax loopholes that are draining the Treasury. > None of these things have large scale social consensus, even where there are majorities. The closest is legalization of pot, and it is in fact becoming legal where there is consensus. Again, not true: * 62% for pot legalization http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-su... * 66% support legal path for DREAMERS https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-support-legal-status-for-dreamers-majority-oppose-building-a-wal https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/583402634/npr-poll-2-in-3-sup... * 75% favor larger tax on corporations https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-americans-favor-higher-taxes-for-wealthy-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSL2N1MM024 https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-tax/three-quarters-of-am...
  - DannyBee 8y ago
    You seem to have cut out the actual argument i made, which you are in fact proving: 1. The law in the US definitely does not change quickly, and you've cited nothing to say it does. 2. I cited these very statistics and explicitly said they are not the kind of level of social consensus that tends to change the law. You have provided nothing to argue otherwise. I can't tell whether you claim it is not becoming legal where there is large enough local consensus (which is definitely true, and supports my larger point).