Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Out of the Blue

I had along-overdue visit with the eye doctor yesterday, though it turns out my glasses prescription hasn't changed (I'm nearsighted), so the delay was of no consequence. I forgot, however, to try to satisfy my curiosity when he asked me if I had any questions, because I wanted to ask him his thoughts on that LASER eye surgery (I'm guessing he gets that a lot). I will follow-up with him on this directly soon enough, but I decided to lay some groundwork on the web... searching for "LASER eye surgery problems" (naturally the aspect of this I am most curious about) turned up enough of an abundance of results to turn anyone off to the prospect. A more refined search for "Custom LASIK problems" was much less pessimistic, though, with the majority of hits from eye doctor sites discussing potential complications. Along the way I learned that the Custom LASIK is also capable of coping with astigmatisms too (though mine is considered quite mild to start with), so it's possible I'm a candidate for this. At this point I admit to still being a bit doubtful about all this... I'm not much of a gambler, and I'm reluctant to risk my vision in order to take the chance on improving it, but I am still tugged by curiosity, so if anyone has any links or information about the pros and cons of this procedure, I'd be very interested.

Links of the Day: An Analysis of Netflix's DVD Allocation System. Thanks Bronco.
By Popular Demand: Eyeball jewelry new fashion trend. Thanks all one million of you.
Stories of the Day: Actors Whip Easter Bunny at Church Show. Thanks Halsy.
Man to bet all on Vegas roulette spin.
The forgotten story behind IBM's 'first mainframe'.
Science!: Dangerous space rocks under watch.
Media of the Day: Spider-Man 2 Trailer. Thanks Ant.
Thanks Mike Martinez

View
151. Re: redefining marriage Apr 14, 2004, 08:01 Tango
 
Still wrong. Democracy doesn't require elected representatives. Otherwise the term "representative democracy" would be redundant.

I'm sorry, but this is just wrong. Trying not to sound like too much of an academic/twat, I have spent a long time in academic study, reading US democracy, and feel fairly confident I know what I'm talking about. While moral issues such as those we are discussing are not always easy to argue scientifically, the terms we use are clearly defined. Demorcracy, in the political science sense, is not majority rule. Please read a textbook if you wish to argue this point, I can't be bothered.

Who says everyone needs roads? Who says everyone needs a safety net?
Common sense / inbuilt morals / ... I hate the "they just do" argument, but it is so obvious. (yes, it's obvious to me but that's a circular argument, don't bother) I admit the lack of web sources I can point you to, but again, do some kind of reading on the subject and you will see there are almost certainly 'natural' laws that mean in the absence of law we still know it to be 'wrong' to beat our neighbour to death with a club.
Further, your argument that "if I don't pay for X then it doesn't infringe on your liberties" etc. is also flawed. There are two ways to think about this: the practical way and the theoretical way. Neither have anything to do with gay marriage, but more just to try and show you why liberty has nothing (in this sense) to do with income tax.
First, the theory:
This is an intro to 'Olson's Freerider Problem.' Jim lives in a city. He doesn't like walking home at night in the dark, so he wants a streetlamp outside his house. But if he buys one, his nextdoor neighbour Bob gets the benefit, having not paid for it - he is a freerider. Unless Bob chips in, Jim will not buy it. Therefore the government steps in, takes $5 off Jim, $5 off Bob, and plonks a streetlight down. This is basically why you pay taxes towards defence, roads etc - they would be underprovided if everyone else bought them themselves. It would be unfair not to point out that Olson's theory doesn't apply in every case you can think of, but in the case of public goods, it almost certainly does.
The practical explaination:
Imagine everyone except Jim pays taxes, and they all have roads, defence and all the yadda yadda. Jim decides not to pay, arguing that by not doing so, it doesn't infringe on Bob's liberties. But Bob is pissed off - he paid for these roads, the soldiers and every time Jim uses them, there is less for everyone else. Effectively, Jim is stealing from the rest of the country.

Oh? Because children cannot provide consent, right?
See JediLuke's comments below.

Right, I am tiring of this argument, and usually come here for a gaming discussion. Morlock, I hope we can agree to disagree, and enjoy some form of gaming discussion on some future messageboard.

 
Avatar 18712
 
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
    Date Subject Author
  1. Apr 9, 10:32 LASIK VogelAP
  2. Apr 9, 10:41  Re: LASIK nin
  5. Apr 9, 11:04   Re: LASIK Sphinx
  23. Apr 9, 14:31  Re: LASIK Wraithiis
  44. Apr 9, 22:10  removed langles
  3. Apr 9, 11:00 Uh, hello? PoopStewart
  25. Apr 9, 15:01  Re: Uh, hello? ExcessDan
  4. Apr 9, 11:02 Vision Bronco
  24. Apr 9, 14:40  Re: Vision Dr.Del
  6. Apr 9, 11:15 lasik jeremiah
  7. Apr 9, 11:39  Re: lasik Scottish Martial Arts
  8. Apr 9, 11:39  Re: lasik ZzeusS
  10. Apr 9, 12:09   Re: lasik Devster
  9. Apr 9, 11:48 The most important thing zakk
  11. Apr 9, 12:24 My own 2 cents Tooon
  12. Apr 9, 12:32 LASIK N
  13. Apr 9, 12:52 Get it! Mullen
  14. Apr 9, 12:54 Spider-Man 2 Bunko
  15. Apr 9, 13:02 Damn you LAZTEK! Fausticle
  16. Apr 9, 13:20 Risk Analysis unaloony
  17. Apr 9, 13:32 lazik j.c.f.
  18. Apr 9, 13:38 LASIK WebDemon
  19. Apr 9, 13:44 I thought about it also... Mr. Tact
  20. Apr 9, 13:53 Contacts? Smoove
  21. Apr 9, 14:15 Not for normal use? Mr. Tact
  22. Apr 9, 14:28  Re: Not for normal use? Earthworm
  32. Apr 9, 18:03  Re: Not for normal use? WaltC
  33. Apr 9, 18:29   Re: Not for normal use? Bunko
  40. Apr 9, 21:31    Re: Not for normal use? complicity
  51. Apr 10, 02:06     Re: Not for normal use? Zathrus
  26. Apr 9, 16:04 Lasik Creston
  28. Apr 9, 17:03  Re: Lasik Enahs
  29. Apr 9, 17:34   Re: Lasik nin
  41. Apr 9, 21:39   Re: Lasik Ray Marden
  47. Apr 10, 00:02    Re: Lasik Bronco
  48. Apr 10, 00:29     Re: Lasik amygdala
  61. Apr 10, 14:40      Re: Lasik HoSpanky
  52. Apr 10, 02:10     Re: Lasik Ray Marden
  53. Apr 10, 03:38      Re: Lasik bkg
  55. Apr 10, 11:04    Re: Lasik Enahs
  30. Apr 9, 17:34  Re: Lasik Bunko
  31. Apr 9, 17:53  Re: Lasik Enahs
  36. Apr 9, 20:23   Re: Lasik WarPig
  37. Apr 9, 21:10    Re: Lasik Bronco
  54. Apr 10, 04:53     Re: Lasik WarPig
  38. Apr 9, 21:13    Re: Lasik Halsy
  27. Apr 9, 16:06 Lasik Plus Spampire
  34. Apr 9, 18:37 Some different feedback trog
  56. Apr 10, 11:30  Re: Some different feedback Patrick
  63. Apr 10, 15:32   Re: Some different feedback Dr.Del
  35. Apr 9, 18:54 Come on... Halsy
  39. Apr 9, 21:24 My real issue... Ray Marden
  42. Apr 9, 22:01 Laser Eye Surgery BigSugar
  43. Apr 9, 22:09 Bunny Whuppins BigSugar
  45. Apr 9, 22:42 What amazes me Creston
  46. Apr 9, 23:34 some thoughts halo
  49. Apr 10, 01:33 Highly recommend Lasik babar
  50. Apr 10, 01:56 LASIK Squelch Oil
  57. Apr 10, 14:01 ... Bunko
  58. Apr 10, 14:17  Re: ... JediLuke
  59. Apr 10, 14:21  Re: ... Morlock
  60. Apr 10, 14:34   Re: ... Bunko
  62. Apr 10, 15:00    Re: ... Enahs
  64. Apr 10, 15:48   Re: ... Halsy
  66. Apr 10, 16:41    Re: ... Morlock
  67. Apr 10, 16:57     Re: ... Morlock
  70. Apr 10, 18:11     Re: ... Bunko
  72. Apr 10, 18:59      Re: ... Morlock
  73. Apr 10, 19:07       Re: ... Dantastic
  74. Apr 10, 19:28        Re: ... Morlock
  75. Apr 10, 19:36         Re: ... Dantastic
  77. Apr 10, 19:41          Re: ... Morlock
  78. Apr 10, 20:24           Re: ... Dantastic
  79. Apr 10, 21:13           Re: ... JoeCool
  76. Apr 10, 19:40       Re: ... Morlock
  80. Apr 10, 21:14       Re: ... JediLuke
  81. Apr 10, 23:25        Re: ... Morlock
  82. Apr 10, 23:46         Re: ... JediLuke
  83. Apr 11, 00:16          Re: ... Morlock
  84. Apr 11, 00:27           Re: ... JediLuke
  85. Apr 11, 00:42            Re: ... Morlock
  86. Apr 11, 00:48             Re: ... JediLuke
  87. Apr 11, 00:58              Re: ... Morlock
  88. Apr 11, 01:07               Re: ... JediLuke
  90. Apr 11, 01:26                Re: ... Morlock
  92. Apr 11, 01:32                 Re: ... JediLuke
  97. Apr 11, 02:00                  Re: ... Morlock
  98. Apr 11, 02:11                   Re: ... JediLuke
  101. Apr 11, 02:21                   Re: ... Ray Marden
  103. Apr 11, 02:23                    Re: ... JediLuke
  89. Apr 11, 01:21               Re: ... complicity
  91. Apr 11, 01:31                Re: ... Morlock
  93. Apr 11, 01:42                 Re: ... complicity
  95. Apr 11, 01:44                  Re: ... JediLuke
  96. Apr 11, 01:56                   Re: ... complicity
  99. Apr 11, 02:13                  Re: ... Morlock
  100. Apr 11, 02:19                   Re: ... JediLuke
  104. Apr 11, 02:36                   Re: ... complicity
  112. Apr 11, 15:31                    Re: ... Morlock
  113. Apr 11, 16:13                     Re: ... JediLuke
  114. Apr 11, 22:41                      Re: ... JoeCool
  116. Apr 12, 01:03                       Re: ... Morlock
  117. Apr 12, 01:08                        Re: ... JediLuke
  119. Apr 12, 14:54                        Holy Crap Moog Operator
  120. Apr 12, 15:24                         Re: Holy Crap JediLuke
  121. Apr 12, 15:37                          Re: Holy Crap Moog Operator
  122. Apr 12, 15:52                           Re: Holy Crap JediLuke
  123. Apr 12, 15:59                          Re: Holy Crap JoeCool
  124. Apr 12, 16:03                           Re: Holy Crap Moog Operator
  125. Apr 12, 16:16                           Re: Holy Crap JediLuke
  126. Apr 12, 16:21                            Re: Holy Crap JoeCool
  127. Apr 12, 19:50                             No subject Morlock
  128. Apr 12, 20:48                              Re: No subject JediLuke
  129. Apr 12, 23:12                               Re: No subject JediLuke
  131. Apr 13, 10:11                                Re: No subject Moog Operator
  115. Apr 11, 22:42                     Re: ... JoeCool
  110. Apr 11, 02:59                 Re: ... Zathrus
  65. Apr 10, 16:16  Re: ... HIGH_PING
  68. Apr 10, 17:18   Re: ... nin
  69. Apr 10, 17:37    Re: ... Morlock
  94. Apr 11, 01:44  Re: ... Ray Marden
  102. Apr 11, 02:23   Re: ... Morlock
  105. Apr 11, 02:38    Re: ... Morlock
  106. Apr 11, 02:43     Re: ... JediLuke
  107. Apr 11, 02:52      Re: ... Morlock
  111. Apr 11, 02:59       Re: ... complicity
  108. Apr 11, 02:53     Re: ... complicity
  109. Apr 11, 02:57      Re: ... JediLuke
  118. Apr 12, 12:36     I love trolls, especially bigots Moog Operator
  71. Apr 10, 18:52 The status of this thread... Dantastic
  130. Apr 13, 09:33 $0.02 Tango
  132. Apr 13, 10:44  Re: $0.02 bangersnmash
  133. Apr 13, 11:13   Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  137. Apr 13, 12:20    Re: $0.02 bangersnmash
  138. Apr 13, 12:48     Re: $0.02 Tango
  139. Apr 13, 12:57     Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  140. Apr 13, 13:35     Re: $0.02 Moog Operator
  141. Apr 13, 15:06      Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  164. Apr 14, 16:59      Re: $0.02 bangersnmash
  166. Apr 14, 17:26       Re: $0.02 Tango
  167. Apr 14, 17:33       Re: $0.02 Moog Operator
  168. Apr 14, 18:36        Re: $0.02 Morlock
  169. Apr 15, 07:47         Re: $0.02 Tango
  173. Apr 15, 13:41          Re: $0.02 Morlock
  174. Apr 15, 13:54           Re: $0.02 nin
  175. Apr 15, 14:05            Re: $0.02 Morlock
  176. Apr 15, 14:57             Re: $0.02 Tango
  170. Apr 15, 12:26        Re: $0.02 bangersnmash
  171. Apr 15, 13:03         Re: $0.02 Tango
  172. Apr 15, 13:05         Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  177. Apr 15, 15:32         Re: $0.02 Moog Operator
  178. Apr 15, 18:20          Re: $0.02 Morlock
  179. Apr 15, 20:10           Re: $0.02 Tango
  180. Apr 15, 20:46            Re: $0.02 Morlock
  181. Apr 15, 22:35             Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  183. Apr 16, 08:29              Re: $0.02 bangersnmash
  185. Apr 16, 13:32               Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  188. Apr 17, 12:30                Re: $0.02 bangersnmash
  189. Apr 17, 14:19                 Re: $0.02 Morlock
  190. Apr 17, 14:33                  Re: $0.02 Morlock
  191. Apr 17, 20:49                 Re: $0.02 Tango
  182. Apr 16, 07:16             Re: $0.02 Tango
  186. Apr 16, 15:50              Re: $0.02 Morlock
  187. Apr 16, 20:02               Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  184. Apr 16, 10:51           Re: $0.02 Moog Operator
  134. Apr 13, 11:20   Re: $0.02 Moog Operator
  135. Apr 13, 11:26    Re: $0.02 nin
  136. Apr 13, 11:29     Re: $0.02 JediLuke
  142. Apr 13, 15:17      Re: $0.02 Bronco
  143. Apr 13, 16:21       No subject Morlock
  144. Apr 13, 16:38        Re: No subject JediLuke
  145. Apr 13, 17:06        Re: No subject Tango
  146. Apr 13, 17:39        Re: No subject Moog Operator
  147. Apr 13, 19:33 Re: redefining marriage AirWreck
  148. Apr 13, 19:38  Re: redefining marriage JediLuke
  149. Apr 13, 23:05  Re: redefining marriage Morlock
  150. Apr 13, 23:38   Re: redefining marriage JediLuke
>> 151. Apr 14, 08:01   Re: redefining marriage Tango
  152. Apr 14, 10:51    Re: redefining marriage Moog Operator
  153. Apr 14, 10:56     Re: redefining marriage Moog Operator
  154. Apr 14, 14:10    Re: redefining marriage Morlock
  155. Apr 14, 14:46     Re: redefining marriage JediLuke
  156. Apr 14, 15:01     Re: redefining marriage Moog Operator
  157. Apr 14, 15:15      Re: redefining marriage JediLuke
  158. Apr 14, 15:28      Re: redefining marriage Morlock
  159. Apr 14, 15:41       Re: redefining marriage Moog Operator
  160. Apr 14, 15:42       Re: redefining marriage Tango
  161. Apr 14, 16:19        Re: redefining marriage Morlock
  162. Apr 14, 16:35         Re: redefining marriage JediLuke
  163. Apr 14, 16:45         Re: redefining marriage Tango
  165. Apr 14, 17:19         Re: redefining marriage Moog Operator


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo