I think Rand Paul's problem, and many other peoples' problem, is that they pick a political philosophy and either take it to extremes or refuse to consider anything else.

I'm a moderate who leans a little toward libertarianism. I think it's important to constantly ask, "Is this something that the government should do?" or "Is this something that is best done by the government?" This is probably seen as "typical behavior" for a libertarian or conservative. The difference is sometimes I think the answer is yes.

Spending 2 billion up front may keep us from having to spend 5 billion on the back end. I don't think Paul is out of line for questioning that statement. I'd want to see the numbers that prove this out if I were on this committee. Where I think he gets ridiculous (as Franken correctly calls him on) is in suggesting that anyone has claimed this will scale perfectly to unlimited heights. He's constructed a strawman claim that spending more money always leads to more savings.

Let's say you have an office and you need to buy pens. You can buy pens for $0.50 a piece or $0.60 a piece, but the 60-cent pens last twice as long. Let's say 5 cases of 50-cent pens will last a year, so 5 cases of 60-cent pens lasts 2 years. You'll obviously see savings in year 2 because you won't have to buy pens at all that year. I don't think I'm saying anything that's not obvious.

But what Paul says essentially is, "Then why not buy 5000 cases of pens?"

If he was asking honestly and out of ignorance, well that would still be somewhat concerning, but it's more irritating to me that he's being snarky about it. There are lots of reasons not to buy 5000 cases of pens. Who knows if the office will even exist in 200 years, let alone still need pens?

So yes, I feel it was entirely appropriate for Franken to call his question absurd. But at the same time, I don't see it as bad that someone (Paul in this case) is getting in there and asking "are we sure this is a good idea?" I just wish he was more rational about it.

The other aggravation this video, and others like it, cause for me is the reaction they get which I might categorize as, "LOL! Libertarians/Conservatives are stupid! Vote Democrat!"

If this is the point you want to make, tell me why I should vote Democrat rather than why I shouldn't vote Republican. Voting for the idiots who will do the least damage is not all that appealing, no matter which party it is.

Hah, reminds me of the joke: "If olive oil is made from olives, what is baby oil made from..?

>> ^KnivesOut:

So you're telling me that there are no babies in baby-food?
RIPOFF

>> ^KnivesOut:

So you're telling me that there are no babies in baby-food?
RIPOFF


You should try my "Vegetarian Soup".

>> ^KnivesOut:

So you're telling me that there are no babies in baby-food?
RIPOFF


You have to specify "baby" when you get your baby food.

Your video, 50 Cent Versus A Grapefruit, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I don't think the Rocky Mountains are in Rocky Mountain oysters either

>> ^Sagemind:

As there are no grapes in grapefruit,
There's also no cheese in head-cheese.
There's also no apple nor pine in pineapple
There's also no egg in eggplant.
There's nothing sweet about sweetmeats.
And Rocky Mountain Oysters. aren't seafood!

>> ^chilaxe:

Prosperity is a big part of human welfare, and if we take $10 from one person so another person can think it costs them $.50 to send a letter, many citizens will feel justified in reducing any further altruism on their part toward society.


But that's the thing, we're not "taking $10 from one person so another can person think it costs them $.50 to send a letter." We're telling everyone it costs 50 cents to send a letter, regardless of whether the actual cost is 1/10th of a cent or $10, and making sure we set the flat rate so it covers the actual costs.

Which is to day, people don't think they're engaged in altruism when they're sending a letter, they think they're buying a service with a flat rate. Just like when I get RoadRunner from Time Warner and pay a flat rate for bandwidth, I'm buying a service, I'm not engaging in altruism towards other people on the service who might use more GB of bandwidth per month than me...

More generally, I think that people should understand that paying taxes is paying for services they've been rendered while living & working here (most of which resemble insurance), not engaging in "altruism," especially if they're in denial about the services they're benefiting from.

>> ^chilaxe:
Sending books by mail was probably important in the time of the founding fathers, but nowadays people have access to the sum total of human knowledge from their homes, or they can drive or bike to somewhere that does have internet. I'd imagine most of the mailed media that now takes advantage of the reduced media rates isn't very impressive.


Ah, but does everyone have that access? For example, do rural communities all have easy, free access to internet?

I'm definitely in agreement that mail delivery is no longer filling the role the founding fathers had in mind when they put it into the Constitution. The question is, what's the right change to make to the USPS? Dismantle it and abandon its objectives, or reinvent it so it uses modern technology like the Internet to achieve its original mission?

I say the latter makes more sense than the former.

I remember being on my very first date. I didn't know the guy very well.

I was 13-14 years old. It was a matinee at the double feature at the Lompoc Movie Theater.

Tickets cost 50 cents.

I remember standing there, awkward as hell, thinking -- why is this guy I barely know paying for my ticket? I have my own money. (I worked in the biology lab at the junior high, cleaning petri dishes and test tubes, nasty with sprouting moldy agar. I doubt I made $1 per hour -- I can't remember.)

I never was any good at dating. I certainly never asked for, expected, or accepted any shoes.

50 Cent didn't mistype the tweet. He had to rewrite it because the original was longer than 140 characters.

>> ^silvercord:

http://videosift.com/video/DJ-Got-Us-Fallin-In-Love-USHER
I put this one up a month ago. Not as epic as 50 cent showing up in your bedroom, but the kid does a great job with Usher.


I think the USHER video is more enjoyable!

Quick, before 50 cent takes it down. *promote

http://videosift.com/video/DJ-Got-Us-Fallin-In-Love-USHER

I put this one up a month ago. Not as epic as 50 cent showing up in your bedroom, but the kid does a great job with Usher.

>> ^Payback:

Ya know, if I was going to get 50 Cent as backup to my video, I think I would CLEAN UP MY FUCKING ROOM FIRST!


Would he carE?

Ya know, if I was going to get 50 Cent as backup to my video, I think I would CLEAN UP MY FUCKING ROOM FIRST!

/headdesk
Even without the fearmongering angle, this is stupid. You know what else hasn't gone expensive genetic modification? 50 cent seed packets at your local supermarket.