Here is a much more pragmatic argument against Obamacare.
___________________
These last few posts on force versus choice have reminded me of a common political philosophy argument that one of the skills of government is to legitimately control a monopoly of the use of force in a certain geographical district.
But, if you look back at the history of man, it was never serial killers who have struck any real fear into any large group of people.
Here are the top 3 serial killers (and the number of proven victims):
Harold Shipman (218)
Luis Alfredo Garavito (138)
Pedro Alonso Lopez (110)
While here are the top 3 governmental killing groups (and number of victims):
Soviet Russia (61,911,000)
Communist China (35,236,000)
Nazi Germany (20,946,000)
*Note: These numbers are talking about people killed by their own government, not on a battlefield.
Parsing the numbers, it would take 283,995 Harold Shipman copycats to accomplish what Soviet Russia did.
As Sheppard Book quoted from Captain Malcolm Reynolds and I would add to, "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned" in their ability to kill large numbers of people.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
On Force (2)
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that Obamacare was constitutional. Republicans are justifiably angry about it. How can the federal government force us to buy a service that we may or may not want to buy?
But, have my Republican friends looked at their payroll statements lately? Here's a few of the major deductions you'll find there:
1) Social Security:
When did I decide I wanted to receive this "service" provided by the federal government? Never. Now, you may argue that:
a) But, Matt, it is a good idea for people to save for retirement. This is, of course, true. But, I have still been forced to join this "service" which makes it immoral. And, I will never in a million years receive the same value when I am old that I put in when I was young, which makes it an impractical choice for me to choose even if I were inclined to.
b) But, Matt, Social Security was a system designed and implemented by Democrats. Don't blame us. That is true. It was started by Democrats, but show me any Republican who is committed to demolishing Social Security. I don't mean just "putting Social Security on a sound fiscal basis" like it says in the GOP platform. So, if you are unwilling to demolish it then what is the difference between you and the Democrats? They started it and you just keep going along with it?
2) Medicare Taxes:
Again, why would I agree to the services provided by these taxes? I will stand by basically the same arguments I made for the two objections to Social Security. With one additional point:
In 2003, President George W. Bush and a willing Congress (Republican majority in the House and the Senate) passed the Medicare Modernization Act which implemented Medicare Part D (the prescription drug program). If I remember correctly, George W. Bush was a Republican.
3) Federal & State Taxes:
Now, this one is a bigger one. Because we pay for a whole lot of "services" with just one payment. It is kind of like when you buy your TV, phone, and internet service all from the same provider. Without the possibility of naked people...which is a good thing...can you imagine Nancy Pelosi...naked:
Anyways, here is the breakdown of the budget by departments, according to wikipedia:
Department of Health and Human Services--$940,900,000,000
Social Security Administration--$882,700,000,000
Department of Defense--$672,900,000,000
Here is a Republican favorite. But, why would I pay for this "service"? When was the last time the United States was actually attacked by those countries where the United States is engaged? North Korea never actually attacked the United States (except when the United States got itself in the middle of a fight), but the U.S. is still here after 60 years. Japan attacked the United States about 70 years ago, but the military is still there. How long do I have to wait before the occupation of another country becomes oppressive of the other country and a worthless "service" for me to pay for?
Net Interest--$246,000,000,000
One of the most popular Republican proposals for balancing the budget, the Ryan Plan, would not balance the budget until 2035. And, from what I can see, he doesn't plan to end federal deficits for at least a few more years. So, how are you going to balance the whole budget after 23 years, if you don't even plan on balancing the yearly budget this year?
Department of Agriculture--$154,500,000,000
Why the hell do I have to pay farmers for soybeans, wheat, rice (Really? Who is growing rice in the U.S.?), cotton, peanuts, dairy before I pay them at the grocery store? And, considering I try to avoid eating soybeans, wheat, rice, peanuts and dairy in my diet. Why am I forced to pay for them?
Department of Veterans Affairs--$139,700,000,000
I feel a little sympathetic for veterans who were forced to join the military. They should be compensated for their slavery. However, those people who willingly joined to go kill people in Somolia, Iraq, Kosovo, and any other U.S. military conflict that involved attacking a country that never threatened the U.S.'s actual borders should have considered more carefully who they were fighting for. The decision making process about the morality of an invasion should not just be undertaken by the commanders on top, but by each an every soldier participating in the conflict. If this happened, there would be far less conflicts in the world.
Department of the Treasury--$110,300,000,000
Why does a department that is basically about balancing the books have such a large budget? I don't know. But, I have 3 little letters that should make everyone hate this department. IRS.
Department of Labor--$101,700,000,000
1) Unemployment Benefits--Why should I be forced to pay for unemployment benefits? They may be a good idea. But, if I choose not to pay for the "service" because of any number of reasons, I should have every right to say...go away.
2) Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)--If I want to work in a job where I have to balance a pot of molten iron on my head while driving a forklift lifting a rickety tower with a chicken on top, who is the government to tell me I can't. It is my life, I will do with it whatever the hell I please.
And, those are just the parts of the budget that are over $100,000,000,000. Within the federal budget, there are tons of "services" that I am forced to pay for. Which one of them did Republicans cut when they were in power?
Until they show some moral backbone, I wouldn't be throwing stones at Obamacare from within your glass house.
But, have my Republican friends looked at their payroll statements lately? Here's a few of the major deductions you'll find there:
1) Social Security:
When did I decide I wanted to receive this "service" provided by the federal government? Never. Now, you may argue that:
a) But, Matt, it is a good idea for people to save for retirement. This is, of course, true. But, I have still been forced to join this "service" which makes it immoral. And, I will never in a million years receive the same value when I am old that I put in when I was young, which makes it an impractical choice for me to choose even if I were inclined to.
b) But, Matt, Social Security was a system designed and implemented by Democrats. Don't blame us. That is true. It was started by Democrats, but show me any Republican who is committed to demolishing Social Security. I don't mean just "putting Social Security on a sound fiscal basis" like it says in the GOP platform. So, if you are unwilling to demolish it then what is the difference between you and the Democrats? They started it and you just keep going along with it?
2) Medicare Taxes:
Again, why would I agree to the services provided by these taxes? I will stand by basically the same arguments I made for the two objections to Social Security. With one additional point:
In 2003, President George W. Bush and a willing Congress (Republican majority in the House and the Senate) passed the Medicare Modernization Act which implemented Medicare Part D (the prescription drug program). If I remember correctly, George W. Bush was a Republican.
3) Federal & State Taxes:
Now, this one is a bigger one. Because we pay for a whole lot of "services" with just one payment. It is kind of like when you buy your TV, phone, and internet service all from the same provider. Without the possibility of naked people...which is a good thing...can you imagine Nancy Pelosi...naked:
Anyways, here is the breakdown of the budget by departments, according to wikipedia:
Department of Health and Human Services--$940,900,000,000
Social Security Administration--$882,700,000,000
Department of Defense--$672,900,000,000
Here is a Republican favorite. But, why would I pay for this "service"? When was the last time the United States was actually attacked by those countries where the United States is engaged? North Korea never actually attacked the United States (except when the United States got itself in the middle of a fight), but the U.S. is still here after 60 years. Japan attacked the United States about 70 years ago, but the military is still there. How long do I have to wait before the occupation of another country becomes oppressive of the other country and a worthless "service" for me to pay for?
Net Interest--$246,000,000,000
One of the most popular Republican proposals for balancing the budget, the Ryan Plan, would not balance the budget until 2035. And, from what I can see, he doesn't plan to end federal deficits for at least a few more years. So, how are you going to balance the whole budget after 23 years, if you don't even plan on balancing the yearly budget this year?
Department of Agriculture--$154,500,000,000
Why the hell do I have to pay farmers for soybeans, wheat, rice (Really? Who is growing rice in the U.S.?), cotton, peanuts, dairy before I pay them at the grocery store? And, considering I try to avoid eating soybeans, wheat, rice, peanuts and dairy in my diet. Why am I forced to pay for them?
Department of Veterans Affairs--$139,700,000,000
I feel a little sympathetic for veterans who were forced to join the military. They should be compensated for their slavery. However, those people who willingly joined to go kill people in Somolia, Iraq, Kosovo, and any other U.S. military conflict that involved attacking a country that never threatened the U.S.'s actual borders should have considered more carefully who they were fighting for. The decision making process about the morality of an invasion should not just be undertaken by the commanders on top, but by each an every soldier participating in the conflict. If this happened, there would be far less conflicts in the world.
Department of the Treasury--$110,300,000,000
Why does a department that is basically about balancing the books have such a large budget? I don't know. But, I have 3 little letters that should make everyone hate this department. IRS.
Department of Labor--$101,700,000,000
1) Unemployment Benefits--Why should I be forced to pay for unemployment benefits? They may be a good idea. But, if I choose not to pay for the "service" because of any number of reasons, I should have every right to say...go away.
2) Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)--If I want to work in a job where I have to balance a pot of molten iron on my head while driving a forklift lifting a rickety tower with a chicken on top, who is the government to tell me I can't. It is my life, I will do with it whatever the hell I please.
And, those are just the parts of the budget that are over $100,000,000,000. Within the federal budget, there are tons of "services" that I am forced to pay for. Which one of them did Republicans cut when they were in power?
Until they show some moral backbone, I wouldn't be throwing stones at Obamacare from within your glass house.
Monday, July 9, 2012
On Force (1)
What is the difference between these situations?
1) A man takes medicine.
A man is held down by psychologists and "given" medicine.
2) A man receives a TV as a gift from his neighbor.
A man steals a TV from his neighbor's house.
3) A man engages in a boxing match.
A man starts a fight with someone else.
4) A man receives help from a doctor to end his life.
A man randomly receives a hollow point bullet to the head.
5) A man has sex with a woman.
A man rapes a woman.
The difference is force.
Is anyone willing to stand up and argue that the second example from each pair is justifiable?
Here is a simple and relatively entertaining video about the nature of liberty, ethics, and the failure of almost every government mandate that exists:
1) A man takes medicine.
A man is held down by psychologists and "given" medicine.
2) A man receives a TV as a gift from his neighbor.
A man steals a TV from his neighbor's house.
3) A man engages in a boxing match.
A man starts a fight with someone else.
4) A man receives help from a doctor to end his life.
A man randomly receives a hollow point bullet to the head.
5) A man has sex with a woman.
A man rapes a woman.
The difference is force.
Is anyone willing to stand up and argue that the second example from each pair is justifiable?
Here is a simple and relatively entertaining video about the nature of liberty, ethics, and the failure of almost every government mandate that exists:
Thursday, July 5, 2012
On Friendships
You know it is difficult to maintain friendships with people that you have "abandoned" on the other side of the ocean. I never really felt like I abandoned anyone, but leaving with the purpose of returning and leaving without the purpose of returning looks pretty much the same to those that have been left behind.
I am not one to write a Christmas letter to all of my friends and family. And, I don't feel put off because only a few people have sent me their Christmas letters.
I do feel bad that I miss out on birth announcements, family losses, and changes in everyone's lives. But, I am proud that I have grown in ways that others may not ever attain. When you move to the other side of the world, you supposedly abandon your "life". But, I never felt like I abandoned my life. Instead, I feel like I "unabandoned" the new parts of my life.
In obtaining a new part of my life and especially a wife, I realized what it really means to "leave your father and mother and cleave to your wife." We have all had the chance to recognize what happens when friends get married. They pull away even more because cleaving takes time. When that happens on the other side of the ocean, the rare times, when communication is possible between separated family and friends, become even rarer.
Today, I was reading a blog, The Altucher Confidential, that I really enjoy. The writer does an excellent job of speaking to my soul for some reason. Here is the snippet about friendship that I was reading today:
I surely hope this is true because it is still my intention to move back to the U.S. someday and I don't want to have to "unabandon" all new friendships in the U.S.
I am not one to write a Christmas letter to all of my friends and family. And, I don't feel put off because only a few people have sent me their Christmas letters.
I do feel bad that I miss out on birth announcements, family losses, and changes in everyone's lives. But, I am proud that I have grown in ways that others may not ever attain. When you move to the other side of the world, you supposedly abandon your "life". But, I never felt like I abandoned my life. Instead, I feel like I "unabandoned" the new parts of my life.
In obtaining a new part of my life and especially a wife, I realized what it really means to "leave your father and mother and cleave to your wife." We have all had the chance to recognize what happens when friends get married. They pull away even more because cleaving takes time. When that happens on the other side of the ocean, the rare times, when communication is possible between separated family and friends, become even rarer.
Today, I was reading a blog, The Altucher Confidential, that I really enjoy. The writer does an excellent job of speaking to my soul for some reason. Here is the snippet about friendship that I was reading today:
"It’s ok to not return an email. Sometimes people get offended. But once you get back in touch with them, all is quickly well. It’s hard to keep in touch with everyone. Even good friends. But they are good friends because once you get back in touch again then all is well. One time I didn’t get back in touch with someone. I felt really bad about it. And the worse I felt about it, the harder it was for me to return phone calls and emails. I lost touch then for five years. But then I got back in touch with him and we got together. Now he is, once again, one of my closest friends. That’s how friendship often works. Those people are your real family as you climb through this life." --James Altucher
I surely hope this is true because it is still my intention to move back to the U.S. someday and I don't want to have to "unabandon" all new friendships in the U.S.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
What if...? (Education)
What if you never really studied anything in college?
What if you just listened to your professor?
What if all you ever did was accept what the professor had to say?
What if you woke up one day and realized that most people around you don't do anything related to their major?
What if that worthless piece of paper you got at college did not really prepare you for your job more than the training your employer gave you at the beginning of your job?
What if to get that piece of paper you have to take out a $80,000 loan at 5% interest during your four year stay at college?
What if the average person without that piece of paper can make $120,000 in the same time period?
What if the difference between plus $120,000 and minus $80,000 is $200,000?
What if that difference is not counting the interest payments that will be required to repay that loan?
What if by the time computer science majors are out of college, their professors' information is so out of date, the students have to be retrained by their employers?
What if this was also true for doctors, nurses, scientists and others?
What if we were to change this paradigm?
What if companies were to introduce more apprenticeships?
What if instead of veterinary-interested students being forced to sit through art appreciation classes, they were shown the ropes with on the job training?
What if instead of archaeology students learning about Schliemann's Troy, they actually did what they wanted ...get their hands dirty in Troy?
What if all of the extra crap at college is just another way for the government to indoctrinate students in the "proper" way to think?
What if this idea applies to earlier incarnation of schooling as well?
What if almost no one uses the math that we used past the 6th grade?
What if the only education that is every really important is the education that is important to you?
What if any other kind of education should be considered no more than it really is: slavery, theft-of-desire, prison, torture...?
What if you just listened to your professor?
What if all you ever did was accept what the professor had to say?
What if you woke up one day and realized that most people around you don't do anything related to their major?
What if that worthless piece of paper you got at college did not really prepare you for your job more than the training your employer gave you at the beginning of your job?
What if to get that piece of paper you have to take out a $80,000 loan at 5% interest during your four year stay at college?
What if the average person without that piece of paper can make $120,000 in the same time period?
What if the difference between plus $120,000 and minus $80,000 is $200,000?
What if that difference is not counting the interest payments that will be required to repay that loan?
What if by the time computer science majors are out of college, their professors' information is so out of date, the students have to be retrained by their employers?
What if this was also true for doctors, nurses, scientists and others?
What if we were to change this paradigm?
What if companies were to introduce more apprenticeships?
What if instead of veterinary-interested students being forced to sit through art appreciation classes, they were shown the ropes with on the job training?
What if instead of archaeology students learning about Schliemann's Troy, they actually did what they wanted ...get their hands dirty in Troy?
What if all of the extra crap at college is just another way for the government to indoctrinate students in the "proper" way to think?
What if this idea applies to earlier incarnation of schooling as well?
What if almost no one uses the math that we used past the 6th grade?
What if the only education that is every really important is the education that is important to you?
What if any other kind of education should be considered no more than it really is: slavery, theft-of-desire, prison, torture...?
Monday, July 2, 2012
On Good Things in Korea (Music)
You may being asking what is the best music in Korea (You also may not being asking, but then you are on my blog and so I obviously lead the discussion). So, here are my favorites from various coherently (at least in my mind) organized awards:
Best Song:
"I Am the Best" by 2ne1
Why?
It is catchy and the whole independent dirty girl thing doesn't happen often enough here.
Best Teaching Song:
"I Don't Care" by 2ne1
Why?
It is really easy to remember (i.e. it is catchy again) and, when my students are being whining little brats, I can say, "I don't ca-a-a-are."
Best Girl Group:
2ne1
Okay, so I am partial to 2ne1.
Best Use of Harmonica in a K-Pop Song:
"Lalala" by SG Wannabe
Best Song to Make Your Students Dance to If They Are Annoying:
"Sorry, Sorry" by Super Junior
Why?
Because they have to apologize somehow and every Korean student knows this dance, but not as well as they think...
Best Song to Make Students Sing or Dance to if You Really Want to Humiliate Them:
"The Three Bears Song" by I don't know (not the real name...I just really don't know)
Why?
Because humiliating students is sometimes very important and I know this song well enough to know if they are trying to bullshit me...
Lastly...
Best Use of Star Wars/Taps/2001 Style Music in a National Pledge
Note: This is not the anthem. It is just the pledge of allegiance...Korean style.
Best Song:
"I Am the Best" by 2ne1
Why?
It is catchy and the whole independent dirty girl thing doesn't happen often enough here.
Best Teaching Song:
"I Don't Care" by 2ne1
Why?
It is really easy to remember (i.e. it is catchy again) and, when my students are being whining little brats, I can say, "I don't ca-a-a-are."
Best Girl Group:
2ne1
Okay, so I am partial to 2ne1.
Best Use of Harmonica in a K-Pop Song:
"Lalala" by SG Wannabe
Best Song to Make Your Students Dance to If They Are Annoying:
"Sorry, Sorry" by Super Junior
Why?
Because they have to apologize somehow and every Korean student knows this dance, but not as well as they think...
Best Song to Make Students Sing or Dance to if You Really Want to Humiliate Them:
"The Three Bears Song" by I don't know (not the real name...I just really don't know)
Why?
Because humiliating students is sometimes very important and I know this song well enough to know if they are trying to bullshit me...
Lastly...
Best Use of Star Wars/Taps/2001 Style Music in a National Pledge
Note: This is not the anthem. It is just the pledge of allegiance...Korean style.
Sunday, July 1, 2012
On Korean Fashion
Usually, Koreans are very fashionable, but this is the latest in women`s fashion here:
Rain boots: I always knew they were functional, but now they're fashionable, too!!!
Rain boots: I always knew they were functional, but now they're fashionable, too!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)