You rely on the government for national defense, you idiot. You know why? Because in the real world you can't defend yourself from foreign armies and terrorists. You depend upon the police for protection no matter how many guns you might have.

Where the disconnect here is the idiotic notion that we don't need government for things like health care regulation. The reality is ACA didn't just come out of the blue. It came from an obvious systemic problem within the overwhelmingly market controlled system.

You can keep mindlessly babbling all you want that government intervention is always bad, but that is turning an idiotically blind eye to basic US history, where there are ridiculous number of examples the government getting involved to effectively regulate industries are undeniably good, like the Meat Inspection Act, Food and Drug Administration, making it illegal to put lead in paint, regulations for car safety, regulations on buildings so you can't for example put asbestos in the walls, requiring labels on food so you know what ingredients are in them, so you could avoid nuts if you have a deadly nut allergy.

You know why? Because, despite your delusions, you can't inspect all your food, wear a mask when you walk into every building you go into to protect from asbestos, know that the tires you are buying don't have an excessively high chance of blowing off your car and killing you, ensure the air you breathe doesn't have too much lead in it, etc. etc. etc.

You're dependent on the government for all that, and it has massively improved your quality of life, and it has nothing to do with your self pride or dignity, so cut the utter bullcrap.

newt,

Paying $500/mo and getting what you want/afford is not the same as getting what we say you can have. Your such a stooge.

Why would anyone want to rely of government if they don't have to? I was taught better than that. Obviously you don't have any self pride or dignity. Your such a stooge.

In essence the VA is a single payer system. The government pays. Not the Veterans. Your such a stooge.

Blah Blah .. military, Interstate Highway department, police,, Public utilities. All proper Government functions , Granted they are slow, inefficient, for good reasons, as intended by the founders. Your such a stooge.

ACA still doesn't cover all. But will penalize and imprison those who fail ( or cant ) pay premiums. Yea for total government control..Hand over total control of you life to them. Your such a stooge.

Once again you prove that Your such a stooge.


Your friend,
bk33

Ok you can un-friend me.

i think some here are missing the point of this short video.
while we can all argue the particulars of religion,it's failings and its successes,the fundamental reasons for its existence remains.

the militant atheist will argue holy text with the very same literalism that a fundamentalist exhibits,all the while ignoring the massive contributions to humanity in the realms of:art,philosophy,politics and even science.

while this dynamic of the argument is not necessarily wrong,it is,however,inaccurate.one cannot ignore,nor dismiss the positive contributions of religions,which have been legion.this does not mean that religion is above reproach nor criticism,just that a militants argument is incomplete without acknowledging this vital facet of human history.

the problem gentlemen,is fundamentalism,of ANY flavor.
religion is not going anywhere,much to the chagrin of atheists,but the reasons why humanity gravitates towards religion,or a search for the divine and sacred,remain a very powerful influence.

religion must,and has over the centuries,evolve to incorporate the paradigms that are added daily.the religion that is rigid in its interpretations and implaccable in its philosophy...dies.human history is littered with the remains of lost religions that refused to evolve with humanity.

a good example is the dark ages.which was partially perpetrated by a rigid understanding of christian theology (and an abuse of power and authority)affecting millions.it halted human progress and imposed a suffering and misery that is still remembered to this day.then the church experienced a philisophical shift and the reformation was exacted,ending the dark ages and introducing the 'age of enlightenment"...and human progress was allowed to proceed.

interestingly enough,while this was all happening in europe and human misery was a direct result of religious rigidity,the muslims were carrying the torch for human progress.making such additions as algebra and other huge strides in the sciences.

how is that for irony?

fundamentalism,in any form,must be fought at every level.so on that note i tend to side with atheists who are on a constant vigil in revealing the utter hypocrisy of a fundamentalist theosophy,but i will not ignore the wonderful and fantastic contributions that religion has added to human history.

because the fundamental reason why humanity gravitates toward religion is still there and it is not going anywhere.so religion,like man,must evolve to encompass the new paradigm in order to express our humanity,inspiration and awe in the face of the divine.

i am not an overly religious man.
that form of theosophy is not my path,but i recognize the importance of religion and its positive contributions.the challenge is to allow the more archaic and atrophied theosophy to fall away and dissolve like a vestigal limb.keep the parts that inspire and exalt humanity and allow the unnecessary and irrelevant to die with dignity,to become a footnote in our history.

which is what i gathered this video was attempting to convey and why i found it interesting.

@shinyblurry
thanks for the link buddy,now i am depressed.

@bobknight33
please do not take offense when i say:your last comment is so riddled with contradictions,fallacies and outright ignorance in the understandings of -religious history,politics and philosophy that i cannot even begin to address a singular point.that comment is just one big mess.

i will say this in regards to your comment.
to assert that atheists have no moral compass due to their lack of faith and/or religion is just patently bullshit.unless of course,you secretly wish to murder,steal and bang your neighbors wife and the ONLY thing keeping you from acting out is your fear of god.
or hell..whatever..judgement.

do you see what a facile and inept argument that is? morality is inherent to each individual.we all develop our own moral code.now religion can help clarify that moral code,but if you take religion away? we still will all have a moral code we live by.

we also rationalize.
ah..now there is something we humans excel at..rationalizing.or better put:lying to ourselves in order to justify poor behavior.here is where the atheist and the religious diverge.because the atheist has no holy text to twist and manipulate in order to justify that poor behavior,they have to own it and take responsibility.the religious person,however,can abdicate responsibility onto an ancient text based solely on their own interpretation (or some authority they have given power).human history is burdened with the mass graves of such justifications.

ok..i am rambling.
i love this subject and rarely get to engage in discussions such as this.if you have made it this far..i thank you for your kind patience with my own proclivities towards verbosity.

@radx

I think the problem with say a 20 year time frame for Greece, is that same lack of trust and political inability to essentially prop up these governments with cash, year on year, for a period of that kind of time frame. I don't see Merkel being able to support this and not get pushed out of government. Functionally money has a time value so in essence, a long time frame is just more money. Rumour is Merkel is considering extending time frames on Greek loans (because most people don't understand that last point) but that will only come with a greater commitment to reform.

As far as collective punishment, it's more an issue that none of the other EU countries are responsible. I wouldn't characterise anything as being forced upon Greece, although I'm sure many feel that way. If they were to leave and reject aid they would be far worse though. The majority of Greece rightly wants to stay in. The Syriza win was about 'dignity' and basically getting better terms. But they won't get it because it would lead to parties in Portugal/Spain emerging and demanding the same thing. Morality doesn't really come in to it, I'm just looking at what's likely and/or possible.

As you mentioned, Germany went through its own period of austerity. It certainly constrained wage growth (which contributed to making its exports particularly competitive and put it in a good position to weather a downturn in the eurozone, when it can export to foreign markets) but I don't believe its inflation rate was vastly off. It was 1-2%, not vastly different to France for example. Either way politically, I don't see the German people being willing to pay these countries out of their troubles in effect.

I certainly agree though that eurozone rules were broken before the euro crisis, e.g. both Germany & France ran budget deficits in excess of agreed terms. Really it came down to the structural weakness of the eurozone's design. You can't have a monetary union (shared currency and central bank policy) without a fiscal union. What they had at best were fiscal guidelines and those weren't followed.

I don't see the eurozone collapsing though. Parties that want to leave are generally still fringe parties (excluding in the UK but it is the least integrated). France doesn't need bailouts, it just lacks growth (due to lack of the reforms Germany went through). The ECB's QE and the loose banking union for bailing out banks that they've developed will mean if Greece collapses these is unlikely to be any serious bank collapses or Lehman moments (or so the theory goes).

I don't really agree at the end with your characterization of a high German savings rate being culpability for inflating bubbles. That fault falls on the lack of domestic bank regulation within the respective countries, the lack of regulation to curb bad lending. In the same way I wouldn't blame China's saving rate for encouraging sub-prime US loans. Cash/liquidity is globally mobile and fungible. It's the responsible of the borrowers and their regulators to ensure they don't dig themselves into a hole. The lenders already stand to lose their investment if the loan goes bad.

This has been a PSA from the Society for Prevention of Public Wedding Proposals.

Public proposals: they're cheap, tacky, and attention-seeking. Allow your partner to turn you down with some dignity. Now you know!

i am with @ChaosEngine on this one.

his "short skirt" analogy,from an absolute moral standpoint is correct.

so i am reading most of these comments in the abstract:"while it is a shame how you were raped and those men are deplorable and vicious...you REALLY should not have gone out wearing that skirt".

and as @entr0py noted,it comes across as mysoginistic.

was that the intent?
probably not,but it does explain chaos becoming so frustrated with this thread.something that should be self-evident is being buried under good intentions and a healthy dose of double standards.

as for this being her "revenge"...
i dont see it as revenge but rather as her recapturing her dignity and self-determination.

basically..fuck the haters.
and on that note i say "well played miss holten,well played".

@newtboy
now we are getting somewhere.

let us look at your first paragraph.notice anything?
ideology vs reality.
what you are proposing is the initial intent and ideologically i totally agree but even in your paragraph you concede to the truth,albeit a cynical truth.
(the referencing of the necessity if an informed public).which is only one aspect of a much greater whole which should be criticized and addressed.

understand i am not disagreeing with your assessments of the original intent.what i am pointing out is that what we have now is no where near a reflection of that intent,to which i have added that each right,privilege and dignity has had to be fought for and extracted FROM the government.

the government is "supposed" to represent the people.
it is "supposed" to protect and secure our rights.
but is that what we see play out?
i certainly dont think so.

the case is not exactly hard to make that the federal government no longer serves nor represents the will of the people but rather large corporate and monied interests.

though i will concede that revisionist text books can fascilitate indoctrination.

i am also not trying to make the argument this video is some political masterpiece of criticism.
it is a pandering,condescending,simple-minded piece of work BUT it is the criticism i admire.

i could go on for days on the failures of the public education system and it has very little to do with the teachers but rather the delivery system itself,which has become a machine which comodifies people into class categories.

henry giroux called it punishment creep.

school is not longer about education but rather about learning to obey.

quick story before i totally go off the rails and write you all a book:
i was subbing a history class for a friend and decided to teach shay's rebellion,since he was just completing america's war for independence and the rebellion is vital to understand the debate over federal powers.my friend was delighted with the idea but the administration was,less than enthusiastic.

the next day i was handed my third disciplinary notice and reprimanded for not following curriculum.which was bullshit because i was never given specific curriculum.

they wanted a babysitter...not a teacher.

i have not had a teaching gig since,because i didnt learn the lesson they are drilling into those kids brains.....obey.

sit down.
shut up.
and do what you are told.

do you truly think obedience should be the primary lesson learned at school?

@Jerykk
i cant make heads nor tails what you are trying to convey.
are you making an argument for harsher prisons?
or an assertion that if they were less harsh people would WANT to go to prison?
that recidivism is irrelevant so we should just execute prisoners?

i agree that poverty leads to desperation which can lead to criminal activity.there is plenty of statistics to back that up,though interestingly those numbers are dropping in regards to poverty=crime.

as for your deterrence argument.
yeah..no.the numbers obviously dont add up.
right now there are more american citizens incarcerated than the soviet gulags of the 80's.in fact,america incarcerates more citizens per capita than any other nation in the world.

americas prison population=2.4 million..and rising.

which leads me to my next point.
what is the purpose of prison?
well,it should be to remove those violent elements from society and for the offenders who are non-violent a way to pay a debt to the society they betrayed (fill in the offense here ____).

when their time has been served (paid) then they are free to rejoin society and reintegrate themselves back into society.

but what if that system of punishment strips you of all dignity and humanity?treats you like an abandoned dog at the local animal shelter?physically beaten and spiritually shattered,just HOW to you rejoin normal society?

what then?
do you blame the inmate who was thrown into a inhumane system?or maybe..juuuuust maybe..it may be the SYSTEM which is the blame.

let us look at some stats shall we?
the private prison industry is the 9th largest lobbiest in the country.who lobby for stricter sentencing,zero tolerance and mandatory jail time.a new trend in this area is now regarding teens AND pre-teens.they also make contracts with the local government to have a certain % occupancy.(meaning that even if those beds are not filled,the company STILL gets paid).

and lets not forget those kick backs to the local judges.already 25 judges this year got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

the idea that prison is a deterrence has been debunked.
there are over 5000 federal laws NOT including state and local.so at any given time,in any given day,YOU have perpetrated a federal crime.

the idea the prison is for rehabilitation is utter bullshit,another liberal feel-good "look at the good we are doing" trope.

prison is a business.
based on the mafia principle.
it is about making the poor a commodity and exploiting their lack of resources to fight back.
recidivism?
thats just repeat customers.american prisons care zippo about recidivism.

again i reference the milgram experiment.
treat people like animals and they will soon behave like animals.
treat them with humanity and dignity and the outcome is far more positive for a society as a whole..we ALL benefit.

but the private prisons dont want that..it means less profit for them.

the norden is doing it right and the results are impressive.

To be fair about being fair there are a lot of assumptions in your post. One they did not arrest him on the spot. That leaves a little dignity for the World War 2 veteran. Although the State picking it up at all is a douche move. Two, he probably will not go to jail at all. They say "Up to 60 days" which really means "We just like to give round numbers that won't ever fucking happen because it's sensational."

You could in theory be sentenced to a year in county time for trespassing, but that will not happen the first 40 times or so. (I have seen people sentenced to that much time. And by people I mean "person".)

Off that subject, if law officers obsessed over every immoral law out there then in no world system would there be any law. The laws against crack rock? Extremely, blatantly racist. Pot laws? I think a bit immoral. Laws against effective protest measures, gay marriage, fuck, even public nudity. All these laws are someone else's bullshit of how things ought to be.

The next problem is that of cause and effect. We have banned child molesters from most of the city areas in an attempt to get them away from "our" children. The side effect is that we really haven't solved the issue. The chronically homeless (Not to be confused with the majority of homeless who actually get out of being homeless) are mentally ill and or on drugs. Although not particularly dangerous or volatile, this is Florida, and even our homeless are more dangerous than other parts of the county.

Lastly, there are no moral jobs out there. If you work for a hospital, business, restaurant, power company, phone company, agricultural etc you are working for an evil, evil place. This is America--money keeps us running. And the homeless have no money.

Hmm I think I'm coming around to Harris on profiling. A statistical approach that takes into account all factors (whether it be race or religion, however in/significant they may be) would certainly have the best outcome. Although frankly the sample size mix of confounders would not really be sufficient to draw very strong conclusions.

As a matter of policy I do see the logic in saving lives being placed above political correctness where the cost is inconvenience (and yes some loss of dignity). As far Cenk's point on what profiling leads to, I'm not really sold. It feels too much like a slippery slope argument (a bad analogy would be suggesting gay marriage leads to polygamy).

I guess the problem is though, while in theory at no point should 'Muslim being a contributing factor to selection' be interpreted as that the policy believes all Muslims are terrorists, it is all but certain that this is what people would choose to believe. Even something like a subsidised flight in lieu of inconvenience would not really help here.

But yes, he should stay out of foreign policy. Benevolent dictator, wow.

I think the guy stripped his own dignity when he got drunk.

But what about this possibility? The black cop and the black drunk share a black history, they understand each other, and when the black cop punches the guy in the face, both know that the drunk will understand it.

Anyway, the black cop probably learned from slavery that punching black men in the face is acceptable, and the black drunk knows from slavery that getting punched is what happens.

So...somebody tell the lawyers.

Bottom line...fault lies with white people, who enslaved black people.

Another way to handle it would be for the cops to ignore drunks, and when the drunk falls face first into an alley and the dayshift cop comes across him, he just calls the squad, who pack the guy off to the detox center. No harm, no foul. We just raise taxes to pay for all the additional detox centers and ambulances. People will be happy to pay extra just so there is peace on the street...and the occasional drunk to step over.

If you go to see Kevin Smith, you should know what you're getting into. (that goes for anything you take your children to, you should know what you're taking them to and be sure you're accepting of exposing them to it.) The parents need to have some dignity and be parents, not insert children into adult scenarios then cry 'won't someone please think of the children?!'. If it's inappropriate for children, don't take them, or, hmmmmmmm, here's a crazy thought, maybe actually parent and leave with them when you realize it's inappropriate, don't infantilize the world for the sake of the children. That makes us all children and allows none of us to grow up ever.

Dude there are kids and babies (heard one) in the audience. Have some dignity.

Oh kitty ... where's your dignity?

Ellsberg live at HOPE X right now, epic as always: http://radio.hope.net/feeds/

Edit: Snowden up in 10 minutes

Edit: Ellsberg brought out the big guns, serious dose of dignity and decency here. There better be a bloody recording available for download later.

Edit 07/20: audio recording