Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread - Page 176 - Miata Turbo Forum -Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-18-2012, 04:39 PM   #3501
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
What more is there to understand than correlation?
Go read the abstract and then come back and discuss it instead of just trying to score points in whatever debate you think this is.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 07:48 PM   #3502
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: finger lakes NY
Posts: 444
Total Cats: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
Go read the abstract and then come back and discuss it instead of just trying to score points in whatever debate you think this is.
lol. Fair enough Mr. Chairman. Please accept my apology.

Meanwhile, would someone else please help me improve myself. I don't know what abstract Mark is referring to and I don't dare ask him to clarify after I've shown such a lack of respect.
DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 07:57 PM   #3503
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

The one you skimmed over previously. Actually, read the abstract, and then the rest of the page, too.

PLOS ONE: Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others

It's not simply correlation between people taking psychoactive drugs and people who act out on suicidal/homicidal urges. They are looking for statistical significance in the number of violent incidents and comparing it to various baselines to isolate the effect of psychoactive drugs.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 10:16 PM   #3504
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,659
Total Cats: 1,567
Default

Most of the recent commentary, both on this thread and in the world at large, seems to be predicated on an underlying assumption that we* have an obligation to attempt to prevent acts of large-scale violence from occurring, and that preventing individuals from committing violent acts is inherently good.


Am I interpreting this correctly?


* = "we" can be interpreted to mean society as a whole, the federal or state governments, or any other abstraction which functions as a proxy for "all of most of the citizens of the US."
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 10:24 PM   #3505
Elite Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,184
Total Cats: 321
Default

I would say that's a pretty good inference.
rleete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 10:58 PM   #3506
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rleete View Post
I would say that's a pretty good inference.
I agree with your summation.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 11:12 PM   #3507
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,659
Total Cats: 1,567
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rleete View Post
I would say that's a pretty good inference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
I agree with your summation.
So, the prevention of violent acts is universally more important than the protection of individual liberty.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 11:16 PM   #3508
Elite Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,184
Total Cats: 321
Default

That is, apparently, the direction most have been leaning. I, personally, happen to disagree with it, but it's getting harder to be heard without being called names by those leading the charge.

I am not the most eloquent of speakers, which doesn't help.
rleete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 11:51 PM   #3509
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
So, the prevention of violent acts is universally more important than the protection of individual liberty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rleete View Post
That is, apparently, the direction most have been leaning. I, personally, happen to disagree with it, but it's getting harder to be heard without being called names by those leading the charge.
I'm assuming you mean that you disagree with it in this instance, but shouldn't we recognize that it's not an either/or decision* -- the safety/liberty question is something of a continuum.

We accept police monitoring our driving speed in order to maintain safe travel on public roads.

We accept the FDA restricting our choices in order to prevent dangerous or harmful foods or drugs from being sold.

We accept all kinds of taxes (a restriction of our financial liberty) to pay for safe road construction, fire departments, water standards, and so on.

In fact, most of what the government does can be seen as a restriction on individual liberty; we just don't mind it because we believe that, for the most part, we're getting the better end of the deal -- some measure of safety or some mitigation of risk that individually we could not accomplish.

The efficacy of these efforts can be debated, certainly, but the fact that we frequently and willingly give up our individual liberty in exchange for the promise of safety is pretty uncontroversial, I'd think.

So I'd shift the language a bit -- it's not that the promise of safety is "universally more important" than individual liberty. It's that the trade-off between the promise of safety and individual liberty is hard to calculate, and different groups calculate it in accordance with varying priorities.




*Anarchists may disagree, obviously, as they fully embrace the notion that it is an either/or decision.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 10:09 AM   #3510
Elite Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,184
Total Cats: 321
Default

mgeoffriau, that's a very good point. But, you have to admit that it's gotten a bit out of hand in the past decade. It's very hard to argue against "for the children" or "for the safety of the public". Patriot act, anyone?

I'll give you an example. School busses are now required to stop at all train crossings. Complete stop, lights flashing. Every damn time. Even when there's crossing gates, because, you know, it's for the children. What kind of monster would risk their lives for only a simple stop? Maybe the guy that gets stuck behind the buss that has to stop 3 times on the way to work, when no trains EVER come through at that hour?

We constantly errode the freedom and resonsibility of the individual for the public good. Guns used to be available in hardware stores when I was a kid. Used to be you could mail order them from Sears, and I dreamed of the day i could finally get that .22 I wanted. But now we "restrict" guns, and the shootings get more frequent.

Maybe, just maybe it isn't the damn guns?
rleete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 10:23 AM   #3511
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Most of the recent commentary, both on this thread and in the world at large, seems to be predicated on an underlying assumption that we* have an obligation to attempt to prevent acts of large-scale violence from occurring, and that preventing individuals from committing violent acts is inherently good.


Am I interpreting this correctly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
So, the prevention of violent acts is universally more important than the protection of individual liberty.
You went from "preventing individuals from committing violent acts is inherently good" to "the prevention of violent acts is universally more important than the protection of individual liberty."

That does not appear to me to be a binary, "yes/no, either/or" type of question, as Mark points out.

I think you can logically affirm the first point without agreeing with the second.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 01:24 PM   #3512
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,334
Total Cats: 43
Default

A Nobel Prize and now Person of the Year.

Can't wait to see my new tax bill!!!

This dude is full of win!!!
Enginerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 02:28 PM   #3513
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by cymx5 View Post
A Nobel Prize and now Person of the Year.

Can't wait to see my new tax bill!!!

This dude is full of win!!!
If you make under $200k MAGI as an individual or $250k MAGI as a household, I will bet you $20 that you will not see your tax bill go up for 2013 apart from an expiration of the temporary payroll tax reduction.

Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 02:31 PM   #3514
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 3,325
Total Cats: 231
Default

I don't agree with everything you say Jack, but I must admit it is fun to watch someone who actually knows tax law shoot down the hyperbole from both sides of the spectrum.
thenuge26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 03:40 PM   #3515
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,334
Total Cats: 43
Default

I hope you're right. I was trying to figure out my taxes for this year and got lost in the mind boggling number of rules and exceptions and exemptions and deductions and credits and limits. This is the first year being able to fully itemize. Last year was just barely over the standard deduction. This year should be 2-3 times it.
Enginerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 04:09 PM   #3516
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by cymx5 View Post
I hope you're right. I was trying to figure out my taxes for this year and got lost in the mind boggling number of rules and exceptions and exemptions and deductions and credits and limits. This is the first year being able to fully itemize. Last year was just barely over the standard deduction. This year should be 2-3 times it.
Everything Obama and the Democrats have presented, to the best of my understanding, has involved leaving all the "Bush tax cuts" in place for 2013 for everyone except very high income earners.

In order for most people to see their taxes go up by anything other than the expiration of the payroll tax holiday, Congress will have to refuse to find a compromise and voluntarily let taxes go up on everyone by doing nothing.

Then, they will go back and retroactively reduce tax rates for the vast majority of people.


Now, if you make over $200k/$250k MAGI, then you are definitely going to see your taxes go up in 2013. The question is "by how much?"


Also note that MAGI = "modified adjusted gross income" and is your wage income plus/minus rental income, capital gains, investment income (like interest earned on CDs or savings accounts), Social Security income, pension income, etc before deductions, except for tax-deductible retirement contributions like 401(k), 403(b), TSP, IRA, etc. It's a little more complicated than that, but that's the gist.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 10:36 AM   #3517
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,121
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

Uncle Sam Books 50% Loss As Government Motors Buys Back 200MM Shares From Tim Geithner | ZeroHedge
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 10:41 AM   #3518
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,121
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

6-Foot-8 Transgender Player Takes Court Against Delta College Women’s Team CBS Sacramento

"be yourself"

says the 51 yo transgender who joined a woman's college basketball team.


I'm sorry, but even if you chop off your ***** and talk in a fake voice, you're still a man. If I was on an opposing team, I'd sue the league.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 10:43 AM   #3519
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,121
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

related: Judge awards more than $700,000 in legal fees to Kosilek

what the hell is this world coming to? the state pays for this convicted murder to have a sex change operation while in prision, and then dolls out a **** ton more money to HIS lawyers.

and you guys wonder why im adamently against paying taxes?
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 10:54 AM   #3520
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,121
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

Unrelated:

Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Project Gemini - Turbo Civic on the Cheap Full_Tilt_Boogie Build Threads 52 08-28-2016 05:18 AM
OTS Bilstein to motorsports ASN conversion stoves Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 5 04-21-2016 04:00 PM
Going back to stock. Need some 1.6 parts. Trent WTB 2 10-01-2015 01:15 PM
Leaky Wilwoods mx592 Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 1 10-01-2015 01:45 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:35 PM.