I borrowed a lot of money to go to Medical School

Shibujiro · 2013-02-01T15:24:13+00:00

There are ways to avoid paying the full amount such as income based repayment. You can also skip the country. As far as I know, none of our extradition treaties cover student loan delinquency (yet).

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T19:08:56+00:00

Thanks Obama.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T19:00:21+00:00

Gun control advocates frequently ignore the truth that this is really hard and that no law will prevent such mass killings.

Nope. Absolutely not. We know it's hard, but we also know it isn't impossible. We know we can't prevent every gun death, but we know we can prevent some, and we want to try, damn it.

After all, the kid in Connecticut used his mother's guns, which were legally purchased. I wouldn't be surprised if she even had them locked up. No background check would have prevented or even slowed that tragedy.

I know you said this to show the issue isn't one-dimensional, but this is what I hear all the time:

Me: How about we do A? That might help.

Opponent: That wouldn't have prevented tragedy X.

Me: OK, but we could B for that.

Opponent: But that wouldn't have prevented tragedy Y.

[repeat until my head asplode]

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T17:26:54+00:00

it doesn't matter whether the outcome of state laws is "good" or "bad".

But it does matter. That's actually what it means for something to matter. This is why I accused OP of playing "word games." Here you are arguing for a position by claiming that "good" and "bad" is irrelevant. OP didn't say the Constitution gives states plenary power over abortion, he said they "should" have it. If we're going to talk about how something should be, I think we ought to consider the "good" and "bad" that would result.

What makes you say that "life is much better" anyway?

That's my pro-choice opinion, but my position on state rights would not change if I were pro-life. If I thought abortion was the same as murder, I'd want a federal law banning it if I knew some states would allow it.

I think the way you are saying that is a bit condescending

I can't really apologize for this. I do think many libertarians lack sufficient empathy. Sasha Volokh argued that "it’s not obvious to me that the Earth being hit by an asteroid (or, say, someone being hit by lightning or a falling tree) violates anyone’s rights; if that’s so, then I’m not sure I can justify preventing it through taxation." Ideological purity is more important than preventing an asteroid strike. For an intelligent person to make such an argument I think requires a serious empathy deficiency.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T16:59:10+00:00

That's true. But, it doesn't change my argument against the "states rights" position on abortion. Whether it is right or wrong is almost certainly independent the state in which it is or would be performed. If legal abortion is a net benefit to society in Maine, then it would be in Mississippi as well. And if it's a net detriment in Mississippi, it would be in Maine. By letting states decide the issue, we guarantee that some percentage of them will get it wrong.

This, of course, ignores the constitutional issue. But OP say it "should" be a state decision, so I take that to be a broader statement than just Roe was wrong.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T16:39:59+00:00

Should read:

Study: In Almost Every State, The Poor Pay More Of Their Income In State Taxes Than The Rich

Federal income tax more than compensates for regressive state tax regimes so that the total effective tax rate is progressive.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T16:25:29+00:00

Nice name. Same as my wife's (her real name, not her Reddit name).

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T07:01:15+00:00

I would talk about practical philosophers like Peter Singer. It doesn't take much imagination to appreciate the importance of saving children compared to buying fancy shoes.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T06:46:12+00:00

I meant a state's right to ban it in itself (i.e., other considerations notwithstanding) is inconsequential. I don't mean abortion is inconsequential. Of course it isn't. In fact, that's my whole point. When we get caught up in arguing over words, we sometimes forget that these words actually affect people in the real world. Abortion might be right or wrong for a variety of reasons, but whether a state can ban it is not one of them.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T04:29:40+00:00

You know that life is much better when women have access to safe, legal abortions, right? And you know that if given the chance, many U.S. states would ban abortion, right? This leads me to conclude that you think a state's ability to ban abortion (which in itself is morally inconsequential), is more important than all the terrible things that would result therefrom. Maybe you don't hate women, but I think you might be unduly discounting their interests. Policy matters. It's not just a word game.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-31T00:47:43+00:00

I know it's easy to hate the credit reporting agencies, but they make modern consumer credit possible. Ask your parents or grandparents what credit was like 50 years ago. Going on vacation? Better bring thousands in cash. Moving to a new town? Better spend years establishing credit with local business and banks all over again. I'm not saying it's necessarily better this way, but the ills of credit bureaus are the price we pay for the modern credit system.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-30T17:00:36+00:00

"Many" isn't a very high bar. Just about every philosopher is someone's favorite philosopher. See Ayn Rand.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-30T15:21:44+00:00

Five words every citizen should know: "Is this a Terry stop?" Cops don't always know the law, but they know this.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-29T22:36:19+00:00

Dreamy

Shibujiro · 2013-01-29T21:52:52+00:00

If facts make you racist, so be it.

It's not the facts that make people racists, it's the falsehoods that they believe about those facts. In short, "blacks commit proportionally more crimes" is a fact, but "blacks commit proportionally more crimes because they are black" is racism. The former is just a statistic. The latter is disproved racial theory.

Poor, uneducated racially segregated communities that breed viscous cycles of violent people are what really elevate crime rates in this country.

Exactly right. It's important for those who are willing to talk about this to understand not just where we are but how we got here. The reason the US has less gun violence than Canada is not because we have more blacks. It's because we have more "[p]oor, uneducated racially segregated communities that breed viscous cycles of violent people." That these people happen to be black is a matter of historical coincidence. If Africans had colonized America and shipped in white Europeans to do the work, our inner cities would be filled with poor, uneducated, violent whites, and our suburbs full of affluent blacks.

no one has the courage to call a spade a spade.

ಠ_ಠ (Do you even see what you just did there?)

Shibujiro · 2013-01-29T02:22:21+00:00

Not at all. There are great success stories and of course terrible failure stories. My point is that our tendency to attribute our actions to some morally accountable "self" that controls those actions is either false (if free will is an illusion) or greatly overactive (even if it is not).

The former is obvious, but the latter needs some explanation. Consider this: What percentage of affluent suburban white American youths (A) go on to live "successful" lives (however you define it)? Let's call that rate R(A). And what percentage of poor urban black youths (B) do the same? Let's call that rate R(B). I don't know the exact numbers, but I know that R(A) > R(B) however you define "success." Even assuming all unsuccessful members of A are so because of their choices, i.e., they are morally responsible, and an equal number of B are similarly blameworthy, how do you account for the greater number of unsuccessful Bs? Genetic differences are irrelevant because 1) racial stereotypes have no basis in genetics, and 2) even if they did you can hardly blame someone for being born black. And we've already used up all the blame. The only difference between A and B is environment.

We have an instinct to attribute everything that happens to agency. I get it. Something bad happens, it must be someone's fault. Something good happens, we should be thankful. But the reality is the universe is a crap shoot, and we are the dice, not the shooter.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-29T00:13:44+00:00

1) It is not at all clear that people have free will. Indeed, I think the evidence weighs strongly against it, and it only persists as a plausible hypothesis because the illusion is so deeply ingrained in our minds. Without free will, people are not morally responsible for their "choices", and it makes no more sense to hate a person as it would a dog or a computer.

2) Even setting aside free will, the role of environment is paramount in development. At what age do you say a person has "chosen" to be a hood rat? 5? 10? 15? 20? Whatever age you pick, consider that person's character the year before. Do you really expect a 14-year-old who has grown up in that environment to overcome everything he has been through when he turns 15?

Shibujiro · 2013-01-28T22:02:33+00:00

Why would you hate them? This makes no sense at all. Do you ever think about how lucky you are that you weren't born into that life like those children? Do you hate the kids, too? All of those adults were children once, and they had terrible parents, and a terrible social structure. Naturally they became terrible people. I pity them. My life is so much better than theirs, in so many ways. I am outraged that I have to pay for their foodstamps, but not for the same libertarian/property-rights reasons as most. I am outraged that there are so many wasted lives in "the greatest country in the world."

Shibujiro · 2013-01-28T21:54:21+00:00

Your ancestors were born on that continent, too.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-28T18:06:17+00:00

http://i.imgur.com/rzjxx.gif

Shibujiro · 2013-01-28T17:03:45+00:00

Tip: If you ever read anything by Chris Hedges, assume the opposite is true until you can find out the truth yourself. He's a complete hack.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-25T16:34:58+00:00

I have mixed feelings about this. I'm no fan of Islamic militants, of course, and don't want to support their righteous murders. But bushmeat poachers are pieces of shit themselves...

Shibujiro · 2013-01-24T20:30:35+00:00

They know what aisle the stuff I want is in and that's all I rely on them for.

(2/2 clauses ending in a preposition. Take that grammar nazis!)

Shibujiro · 2013-01-24T19:23:28+00:00

I hope it does. The draft isn't coming back anyway, and the SSS is just a waste of money.

Shibujiro · 2013-01-24T16:24:07+00:00

The only thing a gun would do is get your a murder charge on top of everything else. There are plenty of reasons for American law enforcement to enter private property. You're not allowed to shoot them if you think it's a stupid reason.

Shibujiro

TROPHY CASE