11 ms·

“I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct, than about being morally right”

faissaloo 8y ago
But she's right. Alot of people will spend hours arguing over semantics that in the grand scheme of the debate don't actually affect the outcome, largely because people have become so uncharitable in their characterisations of 'the other side'.
- fuzz4lyfe 8y ago
  The previous discussion prior to this quote was about how she was going to fund her estimated 40 trillion dollars of policy (over ten years), and how her purposed tax hike would only cover roughly two trillion. The facts really do matter in that case. She disagrees. TAPPER: “Your platform has called for various new programs including Medicare for all, housing as a federal right, federal jobs guaranteed, tuition free public college, canceling all student loan debt. According to nonpartisan and Left leaning studies friendly to your cause, including the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities or the Tax Policy Center, the overall price tag is more than $40 trillion in the next decade. You recently said in an interview increasing taxes on the very wealthy, plus an increased corporate tax rate would make $2 trillion over the next ten years. Where is the other $38 trillion going to come from?” OCASIO-CORTEZ: “One of the things we need to realize when we look at something like Medicare for all, Medicare for all would save the American people a very large amount of money. What we see as well is that these systems are not just pie in the sky. Many of them are accomplished by every modern civilized democracy in the western world. The United Kingdom has a form of single payer health care, Canada, France, Germany. We need to realize that these investments are better and they are good for our future. These are generational investments so that they are not short-term Band-Aids but they are really profound decisions about who we want to be as a nation and how we want to act as the wealthiest nation in the history of the world.” TAPPER: “Right. I get that. But the price tag for everything that you laid out in your campaign is $40 trillion over the next 10 years. I understand that Medicare for all would cost more to some wealthier people and to the government and to taxpayers, while also reducing individual health care expenditures. But I am talking about the overall package. You say it’s not pie in the sky but $40 trillion is quite a bit of money. And the taxes that you talked about raising to pay for this, to pay for your agenda, only count for two [trillion dollars]. We’re going by left-leaning analysts.” OCASIO-CORTEZ: “Right. When you look again at how our health care works, currently we pay — much of these costs go into the private sector. So, what we see, for example, is, you know, a year ago I was working downtown in a restaurant. I went around and I asked how many of you folks have health insurance? Not a single person did. They’re paying — they would have had to pay $200 a month for a payment for insurance that had an $8,000 deductible. What these represent are lower cost overall for these programs. Additionally, what this is, it’s a broader agenda. We do know and acknowledge that there are political realities. They don’t always happen with just a wave of a wand but we can work to make these things happen. In fact, when you look at the economic activity that it spurs — for example, if you look at my generation, millennials, the amount of economic activity that we do not engage in. The fact that we delay purchasing homes, that we don’t participate in the economy as purchasing cars as fully as fully as possible is a cost. It is an externality, if you will, of unprecedented amount of student loan debt.” TAPPER: “I am assuming I won’t get an answer for the other $38 trillion. We’ll have you back and go over that.”
  - faissaloo 8y ago
    Of course she's wrong here since America needs a radical overhaul of its economy to accomplish these things and taxing income more isn't going to help with that. But the statement in isolation is correct.
arcaster 8y ago
But to be "morally" right you have to have an ample understanding of what is and is not explicitly fact that's actually based in reality. Otherwise, the consensus of what fact is becomes irrelevant and the guise of morality simply becomes little more than barbed wire or nails wrapped around the baseball bat of which ever narrative or ideology our leaders intend to pursue... Even as a very progressive young person, AOC's lack of composure and basic logic is deeply troubling.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  > what is and is not explicitly fact that's actually based in reality It's incredibly difficult to split apart explicit fact from our own biases though. There wasn't a time too long ago that facts, as certain national and cultural groups understood them to be, were used to commit terrible atrocities.
  - arcaster 8y ago
    Thanks for replying in a civil way - while I agree that scientific and academic consensus is an evolving ever moving target - to dismiss our current state of the art or state of fact because "we might be wrong compared to the future" is a moot point at best. Consensus never seeks to define absolute truth - there is no such thing as absolute truth - consensus seeks to normalize bias and maximize benefit for those involved in a given decision.
    - arcaster 8y ago
      I genuinely thank you for your civility - HN seems to only be cheeky in one direction - it's the kind of thing I usually hope to avoid when reading news / comments from people I would generally think have a better handle on what being decent / civil means :(
macspoofing 8y ago
Interesting point, where were you when Ted Stevens was made fun of for analogizing the Internet to a 'series of tubes'. As an analogy of bandwidth restrictions 'series of tubes' is not too bad.

faissaloo 8y ago

But she's right. Alot of people will spend hours arguing over semantics that in the grand scheme of the debate don't actually affect the outcome, largely because people have become so uncharitable in their characterisations of 'the other side'.

fuzz4lyfe 8y ago
The previous discussion prior to this quote was about how she was going to fund her estimated 40 trillion dollars of policy (over ten years), and how her purposed tax hike would only cover roughly two trillion. The facts really do matter in that case. She disagrees. TAPPER: “Your platform has called for various new programs including Medicare for all, housing as a federal right, federal jobs guaranteed, tuition free public college, canceling all student loan debt. According to nonpartisan and Left leaning studies friendly to your cause, including the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities or the Tax Policy Center, the overall price tag is more than $40 trillion in the next decade. You recently said in an interview increasing taxes on the very wealthy, plus an increased corporate tax rate would make $2 trillion over the next ten years. Where is the other $38 trillion going to come from?” OCASIO-CORTEZ: “One of the things we need to realize when we look at something like Medicare for all, Medicare for all would save the American people a very large amount of money. What we see as well is that these systems are not just pie in the sky. Many of them are accomplished by every modern civilized democracy in the western world. The United Kingdom has a form of single payer health care, Canada, France, Germany. We need to realize that these investments are better and they are good for our future. These are generational investments so that they are not short-term Band-Aids but they are really profound decisions about who we want to be as a nation and how we want to act as the wealthiest nation in the history of the world.” TAPPER: “Right. I get that. But the price tag for everything that you laid out in your campaign is $40 trillion over the next 10 years. I understand that Medicare for all would cost more to some wealthier people and to the government and to taxpayers, while also reducing individual health care expenditures. But I am talking about the overall package. You say it’s not pie in the sky but $40 trillion is quite a bit of money. And the taxes that you talked about raising to pay for this, to pay for your agenda, only count for two [trillion dollars]. We’re going by left-leaning analysts.” OCASIO-CORTEZ: “Right. When you look again at how our health care works, currently we pay — much of these costs go into the private sector. So, what we see, for example, is, you know, a year ago I was working downtown in a restaurant. I went around and I asked how many of you folks have health insurance? Not a single person did. They’re paying — they would have had to pay $200 a month for a payment for insurance that had an $8,000 deductible. What these represent are lower cost overall for these programs. Additionally, what this is, it’s a broader agenda. We do know and acknowledge that there are political realities. They don’t always happen with just a wave of a wand but we can work to make these things happen. In fact, when you look at the economic activity that it spurs — for example, if you look at my generation, millennials, the amount of economic activity that we do not engage in. The fact that we delay purchasing homes, that we don’t participate in the economy as purchasing cars as fully as fully as possible is a cost. It is an externality, if you will, of unprecedented amount of student loan debt.” TAPPER: “I am assuming I won’t get an answer for the other $38 trillion. We’ll have you back and go over that.”
- faissaloo 8y ago
  Of course she's wrong here since America needs a radical overhaul of its economy to accomplish these things and taxing income more isn't going to help with that. But the statement in isolation is correct.

arcaster 8y ago

But to be "morally" right you have to have an ample understanding of what is and is not explicitly fact that's actually based in reality. Otherwise, the consensus of what fact is becomes irrelevant and the guise of morality simply becomes little more than barbed wire or nails wrapped around the baseball bat of which ever narrative or ideology our leaders intend to pursue... Even as a very progressive young person, AOC's lack of composure and basic logic is deeply troubling.

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
> what is and is not explicitly fact that's actually based in reality It's incredibly difficult to split apart explicit fact from our own biases though. There wasn't a time too long ago that facts, as certain national and cultural groups understood them to be, were used to commit terrible atrocities.
- arcaster 8y ago
  Thanks for replying in a civil way - while I agree that scientific and academic consensus is an evolving ever moving target - to dismiss our current state of the art or state of fact because "we might be wrong compared to the future" is a moot point at best. Consensus never seeks to define absolute truth - there is no such thing as absolute truth - consensus seeks to normalize bias and maximize benefit for those involved in a given decision.
  - arcaster 8y ago
    I genuinely thank you for your civility - HN seems to only be cheeky in one direction - it's the kind of thing I usually hope to avoid when reading news / comments from people I would generally think have a better handle on what being decent / civil means :(

macspoofing 8y ago

Interesting point, where were you when Ted Stevens was made fun of for analogizing the Internet to a 'series of tubes'. As an analogy of bandwidth restrictions 'series of tubes' is not too bad.