Phi for All

Now I want to see the public reaction to the two of us, downtown somewhere, arguing about science. Every few seconds, you blast the horn, and I call you a son of a bitch, then we go back to arguing. Son of a bitch! That was REALLY funny.

Is it? Behavior isn't like an argument until it becomes the argument. If I'm talking to you, and you're honking one of those really loud air horns every five seconds, you can argue it's the horn that's the problem, but if you keep doing it, is the horn to blame? Should I still love you and hate the horn?

! Moderator Note Actually, would you mind doing a copy/paste of the relevant excerpt? We had to remove the commercial link to ancestrydotcom in the OP to comply with the rules. Just so people can participate without clicking, would you mind?

Then you should appreciate a more socialistic approach to certain aspects. The merits of many social programs are unquestionable. Investing in educating our children has always been one of the most profitable things we've ever done as a country, even though it's paid for by non-profit funding. The National Parks system. Museums. Non-wealthy people would rarely get to see this kind of stuff if we didn't make these part of social funding. Airports. Do you realize how much it would cost to fly on an airplane if commercial airlines had to build their own? Actually, flying probably wouldn't be a viable business concern without subsidization by taxpayers. For welfare, I'm going to guess and say you fall into the "I don't mind my taxes helping a widowed mother of three get back on her feet, but I'm not going to pay for somebody to buy liquor with their food stamps and ride their jet ski all day" camp. This is usually the impression many conservatives have of the welfare system. And it may be that way in some cases, but if it is it's because a lot of these programs get reduced to that by those nasty capitalist filters our lawmakers have been influenced to use. So if you're looking for merits, be sure to look beyond the capitalism. I think a lot of our social programs start out well-intentioned, get filtered through the for-profit opportunity legislative mill, and end up holding down those who are supposed to be helped up. While simultaneously ridiculing them for being on welfare.

Not. In. Shatner. As long as the person isn't doing the activity anymore, this becomes possible.

This saddens me so much, to hear that there are smart people out there who completely misunderstood a fairly simple, heartfelt message. And who don't really understand how the different economic systems can play valuable parts in society. Who think everything is about buying a nail to hit with the hammer you also bought. Who disparage things like public education, or paying for a goddamn swimming pool so people who can't afford to buy their own can teach their kids to swim.

And even people who THINK they favor non-government solutions haven't been exposed to many government solutions that haven't been put through the capitalist filters through the years. I love capitalism, but it's going to find every loophole, every influence, and every possible penny it can take from any other economic policy. That's what it does. Bills that aim to help socially get mixed with business/political concerns and the bills suffer for it. We shouldn't be so surprised capitalism is able to grow so well. Socialism needs to be carefully tended to work properly. Communism probably more so. Capitalism is like the kudzu of economic policies. You need to keep cutting it back or it takes over. Too many people thinking like companies, and not enough people thinking like People. I truly wish the Sanders Movement could resonate more in Clinton's campaign, and that we could push through some smart reform aimed at solutions that don't involve profit.

You should take a step back and go blog somewhere if you're just going to post pure opinion with nothing in support. This kind of stuff is pretty worthless in a discussion, don't you think?

You don't think I should have used more spacing between the words?

This is a complete strawman. Nobody, Bernie Sanders included, EVER pitched for "a fully socialized economic system". I think our problems stem from not recognizing the importance of socialism in the mix of economic influences, but I would NEVER espouse relying 100% on any single system. It wouldn't be workable. Our brand of socialism isn't effective because it gets passed through capitalist filters before becoming policy. It's the stupidest way to run an economy, imo, because there are very important reasons why some things need to belong to the People, some things need to belong to the State, and some things need to belong to private enterprise. It's my hope that Hillary's mix between capitalism/socialism/communism is more heavily weighted to fixing our damaged social concerns with taxes from the capitalist concerns that have enjoyed such record profits and privilege for the last 60 years or so.

Would a man who pushed himself hard enough on the campaign trail to develop pneumonia get such harsh criticism? Or is this another case where the man is seen as rugged and tough (shake it off! push through!), but the woman is seen as frail and vulnerable, for the exact same behavior?

Shiny! I see they make an electric version. I like my stovetop, but I love the efficiency of the electric kettles. Especially when it's 35C in the summer here. Grazie mille, I know what I want for Christmas! The smile will come over time. O, be thou damned, inexecrable dog! And for thy life let justice be accused! [/dramatic flourish] That same theater tried to put on Merchant of Venice, and on opening night, nobody knew their lines because they'd all fallen asleep while memorizing them. The troupe fell into disrepute, and later moved to France where they were forced to become mimes. Those. Poor. Actors. [/shatner]

Yes, forgive me for not going into much more detail in the limited time and context. Good to know you're out there watching to make sure major issues are taken into consideration. Probably better for another thread. Isn't this the premise for the movie Dave? And isn't Dave the one we really want to be POTUS, the common guy who uses common sense? The one who puts his own accountant to work unravelling the federal budget? It would be my hope that Hillary, if POTUS, would get advice from as many people as she can. That was a negative for me with Reagan. He could have had dinner with anyone in the world just about every night, but he chose to watch TV alone.

What do you mean you don't support a "socialized economic framework"? You don't like public highways, parks, museums, recreation centers, monuments, airports, seaports, and other public-owned assets? Do you think the People could afford these things if they were run capitalistically? I had a great idea the other day. There was a story about an inventor who's come up with a refrigerator for vaccines that doesn't use electricity, keeps a perfect temp just above freezing for 30 days, and is fairly inexpensive. It's the perfect thing for developing nations who don't have reliable power infrastructures. My idea was to take some of the funds we send as foreign aid, and hire unemployed American workers in the US to build these vaccine refrigerators, so we can donate those as part of our foreign aid packages. Good utilization of our workforce, efficient manufacture for a reason other than profit, efficient use of public resources, win win win. And it will probably never happen because someone (with your outlook) will probably point out that it's based on communist economic principles. We should be more open to smart solutions, and not just assume capitalism is the answer to all questions. That's Bernie's message to Hillary. Don't be an idiot with just a hammer in your toolbox.

Our own pinned discussion of the Selfish Gene Theory here. I hope this helps.

I'm learning to slow down and take time during the day for myself. Especially if I find myself getting a bit too passionate about something. I don't like making decisions when too much of any emotion is involved. I changed the way I fix what I drink. I switched to a French press instead of an automatic coffee maker. I grind my beans. I don't make coffee anymore, I craft it. And it's freaking delicious, because of the way I do it and the thought I put into it. I'm certainly worth the time it takes to make myself the tastiest beverage I can. And it really doesn't take more time, because I actually drink less this way. We can modify our behavior; I've proven that to myself a hundred times. I think it's easier when we're calmer, and are able to focus on the benefits our modified behavior will bring us. I like to laugh. That usually cancels out the frustration and anger for me, and lets me be calmer and more focused. So if I were you, my friend, the next time you start getting depressed, take some extra time to do something for yourself. Something like you used to do when you rolled your own and had a smoke. I came up with a crazy delicious recipe for a modified Arnold Palmer, using Mio Sweet Tea concentrate and some key lime juice (0 calories, add your own water). And you need to be smiling when you mix it, that's a big part of why the drink tastes so good. Small sips, savor it. Think about how great it will be to do something nice for yourself, instead of having to take your trousers off because you're too mad. You'll smile. Speaking of which, for your avatar pic you should use one where you're smiling. I found this one from your younger days:

Wasn't it you who said at that particular moment one of our helicopters was having trouble? What is wrong with YOU that you think any kind of startle reaction (our helo was hit?) is someone being "petrified"? People who don't consider their whole political outlook "conservative" know that you can show surprise without being afraid, irrational, or petrified. Although Hillary before Sanders was far too conservative for me.

Is there a point to this whole OMG-she's-visually-affected-by-something argument? FFS, the right gets to call her the emotionless ice-bitch, until she starts actually showing facial expressions, then they get to make schoolyard-juvenile jokes about that. Very similar to what conservatives are doing with black protesters. First they claim blacks should find non-violent ways to protest, then they get their panties bunched up when Colin Kaepernick does EXACTLY that. This is the same as the primaries. I was stumping for Sanders, but I was appalled that the right slammed Hillary for raising her voice at her own rallies when Sanders practically screamed at his (and Trump did worse). It's more double standards trying to put a woman down for what men are better known for. Is anyone really saying Hillary didn't deserve to be in that room because she put her hand to her face for some reason?

It's the fear talking. People who call their entire political outlook "conservative" seem to have strong emotional filters that misrepresent most rational arguments. You can state your case precisely, in a limited and reasoned way, and it will get twisted and misshapen by the frustration, hatred, and fear you're trying to get through. You say it's a factor? Well, they heard you say it's the only reason.

That was extremely cathartic. I highly recommend it.

I agree with everyone else, and this is just a stumble. It's not failure. But I also want to plunk your mardy arse down on an overly uncomfortable chair and point out in plain, Pythonesque English that an unrelated matter got you angry enough to forget about all the ripping-out-the-door-to-smoking imagery I gave you, you sodden bag of overpriced monkey parts. You went from "Door? What door?!" to "Gah! I'm smoking!" at near tachyonic speeds, you reeking clump of koala-chewed dog ends. You fell for the oldest nico-trick there is, the I'm-Mad/I'm-Fuming/I'm-Smoking Escalation, you careless pile of freshly-shaved otter bottoms. Next time you're that mad, take your trousers off. Tell everyone you're too mad for trousers. It will be healthier for you, but you won't do it much after the first time. Unlike stumbling and having just half a smoke, which gets... addicting. For now you'll have to carry on with a bit more rigor and dedication, and leave the smoking to the pendulously under-brained weasel-greasers one tries to avoid at the least desirable parties, poker games, and detention facilities. Or do I have to taunt you a second time?

So it's not a choice of the lesser of two evils. It's a choice between a white supremacist who wants to be POTUS, and a qualified woman who doesn't have the kind of poker face you think is appropriate when watching action movies and briefings where our helicopters are under fire.

Genetically engineered mice of that age. Not all mice. AFAIK, the regeneration is something that CAN happen because the mice are at such an early stage of development. From what I've seen, there are problems with the idea of adult regeneration. It's not going to be healing any amputees any time soon.

I've never agreed with your politics, or your views on women. Much of your reasoning has always seemed backwards to me, but until now I didn't realize how hard you have to work at being this unreasonable. Without knowing what's being shown, what was said just before and just after, SOMETHING to put her gesture in context, you're just letting your hate and bias paint this as her being "petrified". There's a lot of reasons why someone puts their hand up to their mouth, most mundane. There's also a lot of reasons why the press might pick this photo out of all the rest to publish. But for you to pick a single scenario and insist she alone in a room of peers is "petrified" shows a bias that makes it difficult to take any of your opinions seriously.

Hoax. https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/science-and-health-news-reporting-the-case-of-the-regenerating-finger/ Regeneration is a slow cellular process we gave up in order to form scar tissue, which is a quicker method of stopping blood flow and healing. It complimented our newly adopted ability to run bipedally to get away from danger. We still have embryonic regeneration, but lose it shortly before we're born.