Future Important Thread (Maybe)

[ShowtekGER]

http://www.freep.com/article/2012061...you-say-again-

apart from what scottie said, i'd add a point from the perspective of the generation lamented which i belong to. service jobs suck and you can bet that i won't be motivated when i work at starbucks serving coffee 8 hours a day. perhaps it's true that people doing these jobs 40 years ago where more motivated and they didn't perceive them as something negative. but times change naturally. and what you view as a sad reflection of our society and the slow degeneration of it, as you have argued before, i view as normal and not necessarily harmful: people get used to wealth and comfort. being able to feed one's family isn't like winning the lottery anymore. it is normal now and people have higher needs.

in a society that continuously requires people to work dull jobs the decline of motivation is to be expected. we can afford higher needs. people are increasingly educated to work in ways that allow them to self-actualize. that's not the downfall of western civilization.

[Pedal2Metal]

that's not the downfall of western civilization.

As the bias article showed, we are intrinsically the source of our own downfall, not anything external like education, jobs, etc.... So we agree although probably from different angles. That article illustrates why arguments about how everything is poverty, education, etc..., while relevant, fall short of the ultimate truth: We are our own worst enemy intrinsically. Ironically, as the article discussed, the more capable we are, the more capable we are of deceiving ourselves. Anyhow, I'll never buy the argument that external things are the ultimate issue, which is why I think utopia is naturally impossible. It's always the internal things that ultimately drive & corrupt us in my view. External things are merely convenient scapegoats for an naturally incurable internal cancer that plagues us all.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Pedal2Metal]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...CoV_story.html

Civ V expansion. Sounds good!

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Zefelius]

interestingly, everyone outraged in the pedophilia discussion was girls. my theory was that they are less critical and willing to deviate from the mainstream than boys, whether that be due to evolution or socialization, while my male friend's theory was that pedophilia is associated with rape and that rape is largely a female issue. both may be part of the truth.

but you're absolutely right. if you want access to girls you most often need to adhere to established social standards and keep your unpopular opinions to yourself. i am sometimes too proud for that though.

You could be right about the male/female divide. In my experience men can be just as emotional in their analysis, but that usually has to do with their egos. Whereas, in my experience, women are defensive for different reasons, usually ethical ones. That makes sense, prima facie, since they have been more historically responsible for raising families than men---at least in the domestic sense. Of course all that could be changing.

I totally agree on your second point. I remember in high school a friend of mine once said that he didn't like any of his trendy, cool skater clothes which he wore, but he did it because he realized girls dated him more after he dressed like that. Men probably do all sorts of things like this to attract women!

Too bad we don't have a female Civ player here to give us the other perspective...

[ITZ DENI3D]

Digression:
I think most people have genuine dissonance sometimes with accepting the simultaneous reality of the beauty & severity of humanity, life, & even the notion of God. In my view, this duality exists within every single one of us, without exception, whether we admit it or not. Ironically, I think this inability to accept the beauty & severity simultaneously is what makes most people unable or unwilling to accept, understand, & know Christ & His teachings effectively or to even understand the crucifixion properly. Most people opt for one version without the other in equal measure & genuinely can't seem to fathom the simultaneous existence of both in equal measure. I'm not sure why exactly. Perhaps it's more disturbing for most to think in these terms. It probably is but that doesn't make it invalid imo. Sorry I digressed a bit... shutting up now...

thanks & best regards,
Pedal2Metal

This is your reality, not mine or anyone else's. Everyone has their own reality. I've been watching a lot of Stephen Hawking shows lately for some reason... I don't want to sound condescending in any way and if it does I'm sorry but why do you believe in Christianity? Is it because you want it to be true or because you believe it to be? Simply curious and I'm not asking you to prove their is a god or anything. But coming from someone who, from my perspective, seems to think logically, I would think you wouldn't believe in that kind of stuff... I guess its kind of impossible to word the question properly without being disrespectful in some manner, sorry

[ShowtekGER]

It's always the internal things that ultimately drive & corrupt us in my view. External things are merely convenient scapegoats for an naturally incurable internal cancer that plagues us all.

if that is the case the religion of islam and its teachings can't be held responsible for the actions of radical muslims, can they?

unfortunately, external circumstances have an impact on human behavior and sometimes absolutely determine it, depending on how strong they are. for example, in the version of the classical milgram experiment which provided the strongest form of authority and the greatest detachment from the victim, the percentage of test persons admitting deadly shocks to those fake victims rises to over 90%. when people put on masks they are demonstrably more likely to commit crime and hurt others because they feel anonymous. i think it was you who reminded me of the third wave experiment. these are all irrefutable proofs of situation and the external dominating individual behavior.

the power of the individual, or the "internal", is grossly overestimated in western culture. to me it is quite clear that it is the external that creates human behavioral depravity, war crimes, genocide, sadistic abuse, etc. it is the external that corrupts us.

[ShowtekGER]

of course, ontologically, the distinction between the internal and the external does not exist. it's a purely practical, pedagogic distinction which helps further insight into some aspects of humanity. but fundamentally, the internal and external are indiscernible and don't make sense without reference to one another. without the internal, there are no external ideas and constructs, etc. without the external, there can be no internal. the internal is kept alive by constant exchange with the external; breathing, food, human relations, studying, gravitation, and so on. the internal underlies the same rules as the external as they are both physical matter.

so in the face of this view, i don't absolutely think that asking the question of which dominates the other makes much sense. the internal and external are ontologically indiscernible.

[Zefelius]

of course, ontologically, the distinction between the internal and the external does not exist. it's a purely practical, pedagogic distinction which helps further insight into some aspects of humanity. but fundamentally, the internal and external are indiscernible and don't make sense without reference to one another. without the internal, there are no external ideas and constructs, etc. without the external, there can be no internal. the internal is kept alive by constant exchange with the external; breathing, food, human relations, studying, gravitation, and so on. the internal underlies the same rules as the external as they are both physical matter.

so in the face of this view, i don't absolutely think that asking the question of which dominates the other makes much sense. the internal and external are ontologically indiscernible.

Many people in cultural studies have argued that your view--the one which collapses the distinction between interiority and exteriority--is deeply connected to oppressive, totalitarian tendencies. The reason why they argue this is because totalitarianism, as with fascism, only enters into reality insofar as its power coarses through all aspects of social life. This is how, for example, Hannah Arendt (perhaps the greatest political philosopher of the 20th century) is able to distinguish tyranny from totalitarianism, since the former is more focused on the abrogation of political rights as opposed to breaking down the barriers separating the individual from extreme social unity or fusion.

P.S. But I don't really think you're a fascist.

[ScottieX]

Too bad we don't have a female Civ player here to give us the other perspective...

There are a few good ones on PS3.
they dont post here though. apparently thy spend all their time viewing jacks videos.

[Zefelius]

if that is the case the religion of islam and its teachings can't be held responsible for the actions of radical muslims, can they?

Seems like a great point. Perhaps Pedal could respond that the teachings don't cause such bad behavior on the part of radicals, but instead manifest their inward sickness. Hence, there would be a connection between the inside and outside, but this connection would run the other way, from internal states to external religious culture. But that's a difficult position since these kinds of connections tend to go both ways as opposed to just one way.

[Zefelius]

Heat got their championship... and already hedlines read that James now has redemption, validation, and the like. I had a hunch that would be the narrative.

I was looking at Bosh's numbers just before the Heat took him, and he was scoring around 25 points and hitting over 10 rebounds per game. That's better than what Pippen was doing back in the day of Jordan and the Bulls. And Wade is even better then Bosh. So the heat have put together a team comparable to Jordon, Pippen, and then someone as great as Patrick Ewing. Everyone says that OKC is going to be competing for the next 10 years, but you have to wonder what kind of team it will take to compete against another team comparable to Jordon, Pippen and Ewing.

[Zefelius]

Hey guys... I just moved into a hotel! I've never done that before. I'll be here for about 4-6 weeks until I move to Oklahoma. Has anyone else lived in a similarly weird situation???

[Zefelius]

So far Egypt's new president, Morsi, seems to be making some wise choices---as with his VP selections.

[ScottieX]

Hey guys... I just moved into a hotel! I've never done that before. I'll be here for about 4-6 weeks until I move to Oklahoma. Has anyone else lived in a similarly weird situation???

I used to live in a hotel. we had amazingingly cheap rent because we got the room with a window that faced a wall.. design fault
the coolest thing was having acess to the hotel's sky (cable tv) for the tv at the end of the bed despite it being super cheap.

[Zefelius]

I used to live in a hotel. we had amazingingly cheap rent because we got the room with a window that faced a wall.. design fault
the coolest thing was having acess to the hotel's sky (cable tv) for the tv at the end of the bed despite it being super cheap.

ha! it's funny that you mention the tv... i haven't watched tv in years, except for netflix and that sort of thing, so last night i was actually excited to surf the cable chanels! but after a while i found myself watching everything for no longer than 1-2 minutes before surfing to the next channel.

a wall for a window sounds pretty cool...

[ScottieX]

ha! it's funny that you mention the tv... i haven't watched tv in years, except for netflix and that sort of thing, so last night i was actually excited to surf the cable chanels! but after a while i found myself watching everything for no longer than 1-2 minutes before surfing to the next channel.

a wall for a window sounds pretty cool...

You miss the natural light a bit... But it was Ok. I also think it was pretty close to the enterance if i remember correctly.

[Zefelius]

Looks like we've got universal health care in the States... I'm still not sure what I think, mostly b/c I'm ignorant. I've read articles on it, but I realize that the details go beyond my range of knowledge. My guess is that most people in the States have a gut reaction to the idea of it based on where they stand politically---either for the needy or against big government. Both of those rallying calls make sense to some degree. So what counts is implementation: can we pull this off effectively or not? That's where the details count, and I'm betting that 99% of people here don't have time to read the specific legislation, along with careful analyses of it. In other countries they have a better idea of it when they already have it, because they can see for themselves how it directly plays out in their lives. Most of us here won't know for sure about concrete consequences until 2014 and beyond.

[asmodeios]

They threw everything but the kitchen sink in here. It looks to improve private system, current public system, and private pathways for future directions either way. I can't say I like everything in here, but its quite the reform attempt. Healthcare in this country has problems that are complex and multi-faceted. That is reflected in this reform. Its not trying one thing or one direction. It appears to attempt many different pieces.

My thinking is that most of the dislike of this reform is ignorance and politics. Am I wrong?

What in here do you dislike in particular?


1) Providing Small Business Health Insurance Tax Credits

Effective Jan. 1, 2010
Up to 4 million small businesses are eligible for tax credits to help them provide insurance benefits to their workers. The first phase of this provision provides a credit worth up to 35% of the employer’s contribution to the employees’ health insurance. Small non-profit organizations may receive up to a 25% credit.

2) Allowing States to Cover More People on Medicaid

Effective April 1, 2010
States will be able to receive federal matching funds for covering some additional low-income individuals and families under Medicaid for whom federal funds were not previously available. This will make it easier for states that choose to do so to cover more of their residents.


3) Relief for Four Million Seniors Who Hit the Medicare Prescription Drug “Donut Hole”

Program applied only on 2010.
An estimated 4 million seniors reached the gap in Medicare prescription drug coverage known as the “donut hole” in 2010. Each eligible senior received a one-time, tax free $250 rebate check.


4) Cracking Down on Health Care Fraud

Many provisions effective now
Current efforts to fight fraud have returned more than $2.5 billion to the Medicare Trust Fund in FY 2009 alone. The new law invests new resources and requires new screening procedures for health care providers to boost these efforts and reduce fraud and waste in Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP.

5) Expanding Coverage for Early Retirees

Applications for employers to participate in the program available June 1, 2010.
Too often, Americans who retire without employer-sponsored insurance and before they are eligible for Medicare see their life savings disappear because of high rates in the individual market. To preserve employer coverage for early retirees until more affordable coverage is available through the new Exchanges by 2014, the new law creates a $5 billion program to provide needed financial help for employment-based plans to continue to provide valuable coverage to people who retire between the ages of 55 and 65, as well as their spouses and dependents.

6) Providing Access to Insurance for Uninsured Americans with Pre-Existing Conditions

National program established July 1, 2010
A Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) provides new coverage options to individuals who have been uninsured for at least six months because of a pre-existing condition. States have the option of running this new program in their state. If a state has chosen not to do so, a plan has been established by the Department of Health and Human Services in that state. This program serves as a bridge to 2014, when all discrimination against pre-existing conditions will be prohibited.

7) Putting Information Online

Effective July 1, 2010
The law provides for an easy-to-use website, HealthCare.gov, where consumers can compare health insurance coverage options and pick the coverage that works for them.


8) Extending Coverage for Young Adults

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
Under the new law, young adults are allowed to stay on their parent’s plan until they turn 26 years old. (In the case of existing group health plans, this right does not apply if the young adult is offered insurance at work.) Check with your insurance company or employer to see if you qualify


9) Providing Free Preventive Care

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance.
Learn more about preventive care benefits


10) Prohibiting Insurance Companies from Rescinding Coverage

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
In the past, insurance companies could search for an error, or other technical mistake, on a customer’s application and use this error to deny payment for services when he or she got sick. The new law makes this illegal. After media reports cited incidents of breast cancer patients losing coverage, insurance companies agreed to end this practice


11) Appealing Insurance Company Decisions

Effective for new plans beginning on or after September 23, 2010
The law provides consumers with a way to appeal coverage determinations or claims to their insurance company, and establishes an external review process.


12) Eliminating Lifetime Limits on Insurance Coverage

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
Under the new law, insurance companies are prohibited from imposing lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays.


13) Regulating Annual Limits on Insurance Coverage

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
Under the new law, insurance companies’ use of annual dollar limits on the amount of insurance coverage a patient may receive is restricted for new plans in the individual market and all group plans. In 2014, the use of annual dollar limits on essential benefits like hospital stays will be banned for new plans in the individual market and all group plans


14) Prohibiting Denying Coverage of Children Based on Pre-Existing Conditions

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010 for new plans and existing group plans
The new law includes new rules to prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to children under the age of 19 due to a pre-existing condition.


15) Holding Insurance Companies Accountable for Unreasonable Rate Hikes

Grants will be awarded beginning in 2010
The law allows states that have, or plan to implement, measures that require insurance companies to justify their premium increases to be eligible for $250 million in new grants. Insurance companies with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to participate in the new Affordable Insurance Exchanges in 2014.

16) Rebuilding the Primary Care Workforce

Effective 2010
To strengthen the availability of primary care, there are new incentives in the law to expand the number of primary care doctors, nurses and physician assistants, including funding for scholarships and loan repayments for primary care doctors and nurses working in underserved areas. Doctors and nurses receiving payments made under any state loan repayment or loan forgiveness program intended to increase the availability of health care services in underserved or health professional shortage areas will not have to pay taxes on those payments.


17) Establishing Consumer Assistance Programs in the States

Grants Awarded October 2010
Under the new law, states that apply receive federal grants to help set up or expand independent offices to help consumers navigate the private health insurance system. These programs help consumers file complaints and appeals; enroll in health coverage; and get educated about their rights and responsibilities in group health plans or individual health insurance policies. The programs also collect data on the types of problems consumers have, and file reports with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to identify trouble spots that need further oversight

18) Preventing Disease and Illness

Funding begins in 2010
A new $15 billion Prevention and Public Health Fund invests in proven prevention and public health programs that can help keep Americans healthy – from smoking cessation to combating obesity.


19) Strengthening Community Health Centers

Effective 2010
The law includes new funding to support the construction of and expansion of services at community health centers, allowing these centers to serve some 20 million new patients across the country.


20) Payments for Rural Health Care Providers

Effective 2010
Today, 68% of medically underserved communities across the nation are in rural areas, and these communities often have trouble attracting and retaining medical professionals. The law provides increased payment to rural health care providers to help them continue to serve their communities.


21) Prescription Drug Discounts

Effective January 1, 2011
In 2011, seniors who reach the coverage gap will receive a 50 percent discount when buying Medicare Part D covered brand-name prescription drugs. Over the next ten years, seniors will receive additional savings on brand-name and generic drugs until the coverage gap is closed in 2020


22) Free Preventive Care for Seniors

Effective January 1, 2011
The law provides certain free preventive services, such as annual wellness visits and personalized prevention plans, for seniors on Medicare

23) Bringing Down Health Care Premiums

Effective January 1, 2011
To ensure premium dollars are spent primarily on health care, the new law generally requires that at least 85% of all premium dollars collected by insurance companies for large employer plans are spent on health care services and health care quality improvement. For plans sold to individuals and small employers, at least 80% of the premium must be spent on benefits and quality improvement. If insurance companies do not meet these goals because their administrative costs or profits are too high, they must provide rebates to consumers.

24) Addressing Overpayments to Big Insurance Companies and Strengthening Medicare Advantage

Effective January 1, 2011
Today, Medicare pays Medicare Advantage insurance companies over $1,000 more per person on average than is spent per person in Original Medicare. This results in increased premiums for all Medicare beneficiaries, including the 77% of beneficiaries who are not currently enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan. The new law levels the playing field by gradually eliminating this discrepancy. People enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan will still receive all guaranteed Medicare benefits, and the law provides bonus payments to Medicare Advantage plans that provide high quality care.


25) Improving Health Care Quality and Efficiency

Effective no later than January 1, 2011
The law establishes a new Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation that will begin testing new ways of delivering care to patients. These new methods are expected to improve the quality of care and reduce the rate of growth in costs for Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

26) Improving Care for Seniors after They Leave the Hospital

Effective January 1, 2011
The Community Care Transitions Program helps high-risk Medicare beneficiaries who are hospitalized avoid unnecessary readmissions by coordinating care and connecting patients to services in their communities

27) New Innovations to Bring Down Costs

Administrative funding becomes available October 1, 2011
The Independent Payment Advisory Board will begin operations to develop and submit proposals to Congress and the President aimed at extending the life of the Medicare Trust Fund. The Board is expected to focus on ways to target waste in the system, and recommend ways to reduce costs, improve health outcomes for patients, and expand access to high-quality care.

28) Increasing Access to Services at Home and in the Community

Effective beginning October 1, 2011
The new Community First Choice Option allows states to offer home and community based services to disabled people through Medicaid rather than institutional care in nursing homes.


29) Encouraging Integrated Health Systems

Effective January 1, 2012
The new law provides incentives for physicians to join together to form “Accountable Care Organizations.” In these groups, doctors can better coordinate patient care and improve the quality, help prevent disease and illness, and reduce unnecessary hospital admissions. If Accountable Care Organizations provide high quality care and reduce costs to the health care system, they can keep some of the money that they have helped save.

30) Understanding and Fighting Health Disparities

Effective March, 2012
To help understand and reduce persistent health disparities, the law requires any ongoing or new federal health program to collect and report racial, ethnic, and language data. The Secretary of Health and Human Services will use this data to help identify and reduce disparities.


31) Providing New, Voluntary Options for Long-Term Care Insurance

The law creates a voluntary long-term care insurance program – called CLASS -- to provide cash benefits to adults who become disabled.


32) Reducing Paperwork and Administrative Costs

First regulation effective October 1, 2012
Health care remains one of the few industries that relies on paper records. The new law institutes a series of changes to standardize billing and requires health plans to begin adopting and implementing rules for the secure, confidential, electronic exchange of health information. Using electronic health records will reduce paperwork and administrative burdens, cut costs, reduce medical errors and, most importantly, improve the quality of care.


33) Linking Payment to Quality Outcomes

Effective for payments for discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2012
The law establishes a hospital Value-Based Purchasing program (VBP) in Original Medicare. This program offers financial incentives to hospitals to improve the quality of care. Hospital performance is required to be publicly reported, beginning with measures relating to heart attacks, heart failure, pneumonia, surgical care, health-care associated infections, and patients’ perception of care.


34) Improving Preventive Health Coverage

Effective January 1, 2013
To expand the number of Americans receiving preventive care, the law provides new funding to state Medicaid programs that choose to cover preventive services for patients at little or no cost

35) Increasing Medicaid Payments for Primary Care Doctors

Effective January 1, 2013
As Medicaid programs and providers prepare to cover more patients in 2014, the Act requires states to pay primary care physicians no less than 100% of Medicare payment rates in 2013 and 2014 for primary care services. The increase is fully funded by the federal government.

36) Expanded Authority to Bundle Payments

Effective no later than January 1, 2013.
The law establishes a national pilot program to encourage hospitals, doctors, and other providers to work together to improve the coordination and quality of patient care. Under payment “bundling,” hospitals, doctors, and providers are paid a flat rate for an episode of care rather than the current fragmented system where each service or test or bundles of items or services are billed separately to Medicare. For example, instead of a surgical procedure generating multiple claims from multiple providers, the entire team is compensated with a “bundled” payment that provides incentives to deliver health care services more efficiently while maintaining or improving quality of care. It aligns the incentives of those delivering care, and savings are shared between providers and the Medicare program.


37) Additional Funding for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)

Effective October 1, 2013
Under the new law, states will receive two more years of funding to continue coverage for children not eligible for Medicaid
38) Establishing Affordable Insurance Exchanges

Effective January 1, 2014
Starting in 2014 if your employer doesn’t offer insurance, you will be able to buy it directly in an Affordable Insurance Exchange. An Exchange is a new transparent and competitive insurance marketplace where individuals and small businesses can buy affordable and qualified health benefit plans. Exchanges will offer you a choice of health plans that meet certain benefits and cost standards. Starting in 2014, Members of Congress will be getting their health care insurance through Exchanges, and you will be able buy your insurance through Exchanges too.

39) Promoting Individual Responsibility

Effective January 1, 2014
Under the new law, most individuals who can afford it will be required to obtain basic health insurance coverage or pay a fee to help offset the costs of caring for uninsured Americans. If affordable coverage is not available to an individual, he or she will be eligible for an exemption

40) Ensuring Free Choice

Effective January 1, 2014
Workers meeting certain requirements who cannot afford the coverage provided by their employer may take whatever funds their employer might have contributed to their insurance and use these resources to help purchase a more affordable plan in the new Affordable Insurance Exchanges. These new competitive marketplaces will allow individuals and small businesses to buy qualified health benefit plans

41) Increasing Access to Medicaid

Effective January 1, 2014
Americans who earn less than 133% of the poverty level (approximately $14,000 for an individual and $29,000 for a family of four) will be eligible to enroll in Medicaid. States will receive 100% federal funding for the first three years to support this expanded coverage, phasing to 90% federal funding in subsequent years

42) Makes Care More Affordable

Effective January 1, 2014
Tax credits to help the middle class afford insurance will become available for those with income between 100% and 400% of the poverty line who are not eligible for other affordable coverage. (In 2010, 400% of the poverty line comes out to about $43,000 for an individual or $88,000 for a family of four.) The tax credit is advanceable, so it can lower your premium payments each month, rather than making you wait for tax time. It’s also refundable, so even moderate income families can receive the full benefit of the credit. These individuals may also qualify for reduced cost-sharing (copayments, co-insurance, and deductibles).


43) Ensuring Coverage for Individuals Participating in Clinical Trials

Effective January 1, 2014
Insurers will be prohibited from dropping or limiting coverage because an individual chooses to participate in a clinical trial. This applies to all clinical trials that treat cancer or other life-threatening diseases

44) Eliminating Annual Limits on Insurance Coverage

Effective January 1, 2014
The law prohibits new plans and existing group plans from imposing annual dollar limits on the amount of coverage an individual may receive.

45) No Discrimination Due to Pre-Existing Conditions or Gender

Effective January 1, 2014
The law implements strong reforms that prohibit insurance companies from refusing to sell coverage or renew policies because of an individual’s pre-existing conditions. Also, in the individual and small group market, it eliminates the ability of insurance companies to charge higher rates due to gender or health status.

46) Increasing Small Business Health Insurance Tax Credit

Effective January 1, 2014
The law implements the second phase of the small business tax credit for qualified small businesses and small non-profit organizations. In this phase, the credit is up to 50% of the employer’s contribution to provide health insurance for employees. There is also up to a 35% credit for small non-profit organizations.

[Zefelius]

That's quite the cut and paste! ha! Lots of good stuff obviously. I think you already know why the conservative-minded complain, however. You don't need me to tell you! But if someone did, the reply would be that they want to make sure this is something we can afford as a nation. Backers of the legislation will say it pays for itself by keeping down overall costs in this country, and thus whatever investment goes into it will be well worth it. Conservatives, by contrast, are already fixated on how Roberts crafted his deciding vote---by replacing the interstate commerce arguments with a focus on congress's power to tax. Now that I have access to cable (as I'm living in a hotel room!), I can now see for myself how Fox News frames the news in comparison to MSNBC and CNN, and sure enough yesterday morning they were the ones talking about the tax issue much more than the other channels. So I think that's more evidence as to how conservatives see this, and why they grumble.

Are they right to do so? That's why I ruminated above that it all depends on the very fine print. If the answer were obvious, I don't think it could even be debated. The mathematical and economic details are what matter, but they are precisely what most voters are ignorant about. Thus most of the people I've seen interviewed on cable news have said they like all the things you listed (hence such a list isn't exactly what's at issue, imo), but they're worried about paying for it. If they weren't worried about the expenses, then the polling numbers against health care would immediately become favorable. No contest! And if the explanation as to how we're paying for this were simple and straightforward, then the masses would have been able to easily absorb such information as soon as the liberals provided them with it. The fact that the public is unclear on this seems to show once again that the financial details aren't readily comprehensible---thus supporting my claim in the earlier comment that most people will express their opinions on the basis of political instinct rather than informed knowledge.

[ITZ DENI3D]

thus supporting my claim in the earlier comment that most people will express their opinions on the basis of political instinct rather than informed knowledge.

This is how it has been since uneducated people were allowed to vote. IMO our government should be run like an oligarchy with the system of checks and balances that our founding fathers made. We gave "the people" the power and look where that has gotten us.

[Zefelius]

This is how it has been since uneducated people were allowed to vote. IMO our government should be run like an oligarchy with the system of checks and balances that our founding fathers made. We gave "the people" the power and look where that has gotten us.

To some extent I agree with you: people are apathetic and vote largely on the basis of ignorance.

On the other hand, I think we have to admit that many political topics are inherently difficult, and thus we can't really blame people too much for being ignorant. Economics, for example, is incredibly complex. Foreign affairs requires a subtle understanding of history. Even ethical issues are more nuanced than most people imagine. While some people say they simply know the difference between right and wrong, justice and injustice, that seems rather implausible considering that 2500 years of intellectual debate, from Plato and Aristotle to Hegel and Rawls, hasn't produced definitive knowledge. So perhaps the masses can be forgiven to some extent, although that doesn't negate your conclusion that they're still too ignorant, whether understandably or not, to vote on issues and platforms concerning the direction of the country. I tend to agree with you on that.

[ITZ DENI3D]

To some extent I agree with you: people are apathetic and vote largely on the basis of ignorance.

On the other hand, I think we have to admit that many political topics are inherently difficult, and thus we can't really blame people too much for being ignorant. Economics, for example, is incredibly complex. Foreign affairs requires a subtle understanding of history. Even ethical issues are more nuanced than most people imagine. While some people say they simply know the difference between right and wrong, justice and injustice, that seems rather implausible considering that 2500 years of intellectual debate, from Plato and Aristotle to Hegel and Rawls, hasn't produced definitive knowledge. So perhaps the masses can be forgiven to some extent, although that doesn't negate your conclusion that they're still too ignorant, whether understandably or not, to vote on issues and platforms concerning the direction of the country. I tend to agree with you on that.

They are to blame since they should have the common sense to realize that they don't have the proper knowledge or education to effectively decide on any particular issue. Instead they take their opinions and vote with that instead of the facts. People will vote for what will satisfy them in the short term and fail to see how it will affect them or their children in the future. This will inevitably destroy a country... I think we will see the collapse of capitalism like we saw the collapse of communism. In the end all government is flawed since people are inherently flawed, but we had a great way of overcoming that obstacle when our government was created. But people have a way of messing things up...

[Zefelius]

They are to blame since they should have the common sense to realize that they don't have the proper knowledge or education to effectively decide on any particular issue. Instead they take their opinions and vote with that instead of the facts. People will vote for what will satisfy them in the short term and fail to see how it will affect them or their children in the future. This will inevitably destroy a country... I think we will see the collapse of capitalism like we saw the collapse of communism. In the end all government is flawed since people are inherently flawed, but we had a great way of overcoming that obstacle when our government was created. But people have a way of messing things up...

Which raises an interesting Catch 22: The ignorant should know better than to vote, by your account, but at the same time they lack the self-awareness to make that determination. In other words, their lack of knowledge leads to their lack of awareness about their lack of knowledge. It's often times the ignorant who think they have knowledge---and if they knew better then by definition they'd stop being ignorant! Socrates also talked about different kinds of ignorance, and decided, in his famous formulation, that it is the wise who best understand their own ignorance.

[SVPM]

Which raises an interesting Catch 22: The ignorant should know better than to vote, by your account, but at the same time they lack the self-awareness to make that determination. In other words, their lack of knowledge leads to their lack of awareness about their lack of knowledge. It's often times the ignorant who think they have knowledge---and if they knew better then by definition they'd stop being ignorant! Socrates also talked about different kinds of ignorance, and decided, in his famous formulation, that it is the wise who best understand their own ignorance.

“The Greatest enemy of knowledge isn’t ignorance; it’s the illusion of knowledge”

It goes in the same meaning as Socrate. People often tell people that votes are ignorant, which is true for a big part, but at least those people are more passive. People who have the illusion of knowledge are often more active in politics and will then affect ignorant people.

Both are pretty frustrating though.

Not saying I am better. The best in those debates is to keep an open mind.

[Zefelius]

“The Greatest enemy of knowledge isn’t ignorance; it’s the illusion of knowledge”

It goes in the same meaning as Socrate. People often tell people that votes are ignorant, which is true for a big part, but at least those people are more passive. People who have the illusion of knowledge are often more active in politics and will then affect ignorant people.

Both are pretty frustrating though.

Not saying I am better. The best in those debates is to keep an open mind.

Words of a wise man...

[Zefelius]

This year has been weird as far as playing (i.e., not playing) Xbox goes... I never really played too many videogames until RE4, with a smattering of exceptions here and there (like Ms. Pac Man in the 80s!). Playing Resident Evil 4 was fun about 5 years ago, but once you play through it a couple of times that's about it to it. Then came along Civ Rev 2 on Xbox, and for the first time in my life I obsessively played a game almost every day for more than 2 years.

But after my Spain climb last Fall, this year I finally became exhausted. Now I live in a hotel and my Xbox is packed away for a couple of months, so I'm not even playing Dead Space 2 (I'm mid-way through my fourth time, but it was getting boring even before I packed it up). Who knows what will happen when I arrive in Stillwater, OK?? Hoepfully Civ 5 will catch my attention now that I have a PC waiting for me. But if not, I'm afraid it will be a very long time before another game like Civ Rev will catch my attention.

[HydroDragon]

I wouldn't say I'm getting bored of video games but I basically only play Battlefield 3 on X-box now and not very often. On Playstation however I've been playing only Skyrim for a couple of weeks. It's strange, I have games like Batman: Arkham City, Crysis 2 and Deus Ex Revolution still unopened after sitting on my shelf for months. I just don't have the willpower to take Skyrim out and start playing them, lol. I must really do something about that soon.

[ShowtekGER]

i almost never play anymore. i rarely have the patience to get into a new game. the last title that i will buy for the ps3 will be the next gta game (the last one was civ rev). i'll likely skip the next generation of video consoles.

[Pedal2Metal]

“The Greatest enemy of knowledge isn’t ignorance; it’s the illusion of knowledge”

It goes in the same meaning as Socrate. People often tell people that votes are ignorant, which is true for a big part, but at least those people are more passive. People who have the illusion of knowledge are often more active in politics and will then affect ignorant people.

Both are pretty frustrating though.

Not saying I am better. The best in those debates is to keep an open mind.

Good stuff. I think that genuine wisdom requires humility & self-examination by definition. In other words: "Claiming to be wise, they became fools." is a sure fire way to self-destruction. I know I've been guilty of it many times, upon later self-examination. Ironically, this can be true even when I am right! It's mind-boggling actually. I think wisdom is a spiritual quality rather than merely intellectual quality, which is why it's rare to acquire. I used to have a email signature that went like this:
"Data is not information is not knowledge is not wisdom." I have definitely experienced the truth of it personally.

I have always struggled with the ideas of knowledge, truth, & life. My continual struggle with these things has led me to believe that true knowledge leads us to truth that gives life to ourselves & to others. I've found that "being correct" & truth alone are insufficient to do that. Something else is required & there is no recipe for producing it reliably imo. It is part of the mystery of life that makes life so unique & unfathomable & fascinating.

I rarely visit now but it's nice to see such posts when I do. Thanks.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Pedal2Metal]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/op...erty.html?_r=1

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Zefelius]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/op...erty.html?_r=1

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

I saw this article as well and thought it was pretty good. As far as cultural analysis goes, it seems accurate. My only beef with it is philosophically. While it's true that many people on the right and the left share in a common ethical framework of superficial selfishness, I believe this is only one conception of individuality. So it's not individuality per se which weakens us, but a certain kind of individuality, the kind which doesn't include social awareness. I'm not sure the author would disagree, but he didn't seem to engage the possibility that individual thriving can go hand in hand with social connectedness and responsibility.

[Zefelius]

Right now I'm reading a great book by Henry Kissinger: On China. He has such a formidable amount of knowledge of China's history, culture, economics, technological advances, style of diplomacy, military, etc. He also incorporates philosophers such as Sun-Tzu, Confucius, and Hegel. Yet he writes about all this incredibly lucidly.

Here's just one nice touch in his book which I think gamers would enjoy. In discussing China's shrewd, impressive history of strategic diplomacy, he uses comparisons between wei qi (go) and chess. In China diplomacy operates much like go as the latter depends upon subtle positions of strength which shift incrementally with each move while encircling your opponent's pieces to draw from his own areas of strength. Whereas chess, symbolizing the Western tradition, is about total victory (p. 23) and decisive battles achieved through either attrition or dramatic maneuvers. In the first game it's not always immediately obvious who has won a game (to the untrained eye), but it usualy is for chess.

I would think that Civ Rev works more along the lines of the Western traditions of strategy. I wonder if there would be any way of incorporating other variations of strategy?

[ScottieX]

I saw this article as well and thought it was pretty good. As far as cultural analysis goes, it seems accurate. My only beef with it is philosophically. While it's true that many people on the right and the left share in a common ethical framework of superficial selfishness, I believe this is only one conception of individuality. So it's not individuality per se which weakens us, but a certain kind of individuality, the kind which doesn't include social awareness. I'm not sure the author would disagree, but he didn't seem to engage the possibility that individual thriving can go hand in hand with social connectedness and responsibility.

If you had a demoracy that allowed multiple parties you would probably soom find emerge to the right of the republicans a party that was socially liberal and economically conservative. The "Me" party if you like.

You probably wont however get to the left of the democrats a poor mans conservative party (Imagine a party constructed mostly from poor non white comunities, with the rich liberal elite all syphoned off into other parties). Because in just about any country it is pretty hard to get a liberal party that the liberal elite doesnt take over and thus leave the poor position unrepresented.

[ShowtekGER]

If you had a demoracy that allowed multiple parties you would probably soom find emerge to the right of the republicans a party that was socially liberal and economically conservative. The "Me" party if you like.

isn't that what the libertarian party already stands for in the US?

[Zefelius]

If you had a demoracy that allowed multiple parties you would probably soom find emerge to the right of the republicans a party that was socially liberal and economically conservative. The "Me" party if you like.

You probably wont however get to the left of the democrats a poor mans conservative party (Imagine a party constructed mostly from poor non white comunities, with the rich liberal elite all syphoned off into other parties). Because in just about any country it is pretty hard to get a liberal party that the liberal elite doesnt take over and thus leave the poor position unrepresented.

I like your analysis in the second paragraph. Just the other day I was thinking that there are competing kinds of political philosophy in conservative circles, whereas just one major kind of all-encompassing view in liberal circles. Thus, just as you said, liberal thinking, by its very nature, tends to absorb its sub-groups. For example, religious and economic conservatives are extremely different in their world view. But for liberals there is one major mantra: affirm humanity. In this way there doesn't appear to be a philosophical divide between social and economic liberals: the social liberals want fairness for marginalized groups, and economic liberals want to spread the wealth to as many people as possible. By contrast, economic and social conservatives have very different views of how to approach marginalized groups (e.g., gays).

On your first paragraph I agree with ShowTek...

[ScottieX]

isn't that what the libertarian party already stands for in the US?

OK, so you have the party - it just doesnt do anything..

[Pedal2Metal]

I saw this article as well and thought it was pretty good. As far as cultural analysis goes, it seems accurate. My only beef with it is philosophically. While it's true that many people on the right and the left share in a common ethical framework of superficial selfishness, I believe this is only one conception of individuality. So it's not individuality per se which weakens us, but a certain kind of individuality, the kind which doesn't include social awareness. I'm not sure the author would disagree, but he didn't seem to engage the possibility that individual thriving can go hand in hand with social connectedness and responsibility.

I agree (obviously) as unselfish & unique individuality demonstrated for the benefit of all humanity defines Jesus Christ & His life & teachings. Good analysis on your part. I found the article a good thoughtful message on the dangers of unbridled selfish individuality & how it permeates everything.

I just saw parts of a movie last night called "Lions for Lambs". I found it fairly thought-provoking as well. It made me want to go rent it & watch it in its entirety & digest it more fully.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Pedal2Metal]

Right now I'm reading a great book by Henry Kissinger: On China. He has such a formidable amount of knowledge of China's history, culture, economics, technological advances, style of diplomacy, military, etc. He also incorporates philosophers such as Sun-Tzu, Confucius, and Hegel. Yet he writes about all this incredibly lucidly.

Here's just one nice touch in his book which I think gamers would enjoy. In discussing China's shrewd, impressive history of strategic diplomacy, he uses comparisons between wei qi (go) and chess. In China diplomacy operates much like go as the latter depends upon subtle positions of strength which shift incrementally with each move while encircling your opponent's pieces to draw from his own areas of strength. Whereas chess, symbolizing the Western tradition, is about total victory (p. 23) and decisive battles achieved through either attrition or dramatic maneuvers. In the first game it's not always immediately obvious who has won a game (to the untrained eye), but it usualy is for chess.

I would think that Civ Rev works more along the lines of the Western traditions of strategy. I wonder if there would be any way of incorporating other variations of strategy?

I probably don't have the time to read this book but interesting analysis.

In CivRev, one aspect that many players don't practice, even good players, is the subtle analysis of the situation & determining when a few turns of passivity/expansion/etc... might be preferred to outright aggression/button-racing (or vice-versa) & actually recognizing this situation with enough margin to actually shift & respond accordingly to establish an even greater advantage/response to their opponent. I call this "flow" or "dynamics" of the game. This is probably one of the most critical aspects of being a top-notch/elite player & in many ways, it's not a teachable analytical process imo. The very best players just naturally do this while otherwise good players seem to plateau & never reach this level of strategic proficiency. This doesn't contradict your assessment but rather illustrates the value & power of subtle differences you've commented on & having that strategic range to know when each is more preferable strategically and/or tactically. However, I will say that being hyper-aggressive in CivRev will yield success in about 95% of the time in the hands of a highly-skilled player so perhaps that validates your assessment of CivRevs strategic cultural roots in a statistical manner.

BTW, the movie "Ip Man" illustrates some of the cultural differences in the context of fighting styles that is similar to your comments. It's a loosely historical movie (he was a real Chinese martial artist & did fight such a match) & fairly good. Available on Netflix.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Pedal2Metal]

OK, so you have the party - it just doesnt do anything..

LOL! I bet the libertarians among us love you now...

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

[Zefelius]

I probably don't have the time to read this book but interesting analysis.

In CivRev, one aspect that many players don't practice, even good players, is the subtle analysis of the situation & determining when a few turns of passivity/expansion/etc... might be preferred to outright aggression/button-racing (or vice-versa) & actually recognizing this situation with enough margin to actually shift & respond accordingly to establish an even greater advantage/response to their opponent. I call this "flow" or "dynamics" of the game. This is probably one of the most critical aspects of being a top-notch/elite player & in many ways, it's not a teachable analytical process imo. The very best players just naturally do this while otherwise good players seem to plateau & never reach this level of strategic proficiency. This doesn't contradict your assessment but rather illustrates the value & power of subtle differences you've commented on & having that strategic range to know when each is more preferable strategically and/or tactically. However, I will say that being hyper-aggressive in CivRev will yield success in about 95% of the time in the hands of a highly-skilled player so perhaps that validates your assessment of CivRevs strategic cultural roots in a statistical manner.

BTW, the movie "Ip Man" illustrates some of the cultural differences in the context of fighting styles that is similar to your comments. It's a loosely historical movie (he was a real Chinese martial artist & did fight such a match) & fairly good. Available on Netflix.

best regards,
Pedal2Metal

I'll have to watch Ip Man right before Civ Rev 2 comes out (big IF) for inspiration. I liked this quote from Wikipedia: "Ip's reputation is further enhanced when he defeats an aggressive, rude, highly skilled Northern Chinese martial arts master, Jin Shanzhao, thus upholding the regional pride of fellow Southern stylists and others in Foshan." Playing against so many rude Xbox players it would be fun to reach Ip's status of greatness while maintaining polite equanimity!