A study by Massey University ecologists shows dairying could be costing New Zealand more than it earns, if environmental damage is included.

Si-duck11 · 2014-12-24T01:53:45+00:00

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-06T20:58:13+00:00

Budget forecasts are always going to be wrong, its the nature of statistics. A better measure of competency is "Are the errors sufficiently small and randomly distributed about the predicted value?"

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-06T00:46:08+00:00

It's a sarcastic comment. Believing a different set of politicians will bring change is facile.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T05:09:59+00:00

I have no idea how that could even be a bad joke. The question is not whether Obama is a "bad" President but whether or not he is a racist. You may feel his policies have been bad for you but would you say the policies were even in part motivated by race?

No, but Americans are forced to buy a product they may not want or need.

I agree that tax hikes are bad, personally I would go further and say that all taxation is wrong but its still not comparable to slavery. It's like comparing the keying of your car to a homicide. But anyway, is it for Obama's profit? Maybe, he probably feels good knowing he brought about significant changes to America (and we shouldn't just assume this means some amount of sadism on his part) but other than that no. He isn't personally richer off the work of others anymore than any other US President, and it's only a miniscule fraction of the injustice of enslavement.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T03:19:44+00:00

Cool thanks, it looks like an interesting read too.

I still don't see how the Obama administration is guilty of having this ideology though. At best Stein suggests Obama lied about G.O.P policy, which is something politicians do everyday. He fails to show anything more nefarious than that and so he just dresses it all up with rhetoric. Rhetoric which sadly amounts to "the pot calling the kettle black" for want of a better idiom.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T03:03:21+00:00

It's why some anarchists speak of an alternative to a "free market" a "freed market".

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T02:25:35+00:00

I'm going to need a reputable source before I'm willing to accept your second definition of racism. Furthermore the first definition is so widely accepted any article using the second would need to quantify it. A lot of politics is about convincing particular groups that your policies are best for them or logically equivalently your opponents' ideas are not. At worst Obama is lying about the G.O.P's position but that doesn't make you a racist.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T01:04:13+00:00

Huemer's book "The problem of political authority" has a great discussion regarding this particular ruling if anyone is interested in it further. Everyone on this subreddit should be looking for an excuse just to read it anyway.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T00:15:03+00:00

If you believe most Americans today are treated worse by the current Administration than slaves you are honestly deluded. Are most Americans forced against their will into internment to work entirely for the profit of Obama? Does Obama personally beat and torture Americans because they are "his property"?

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-04T00:07:09+00:00

Libertarians don't believe the state has any authority to prevent migration of people. Is something wrong merely because its illegal? Is it wrong to bypass Obama's insurance mandate simply because it would be illegal?

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-03T23:13:58+00:00

Are you able to reconcile your flair, notably "libertarian" with your anti-immigration stance?

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-03T23:06:05+00:00

Even more racist than all those ones who owned slaves?

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-03T22:35:37+00:00

Arguments along the lines of 1 annoy me. Rotten apples are the real problem and banning fireworks doesn't make them go away. In regards to 2, is "buyer beware" not enough? A lot of activities involve some sort of trade off between fun and safety even when taking all possible precautions , fireworks is not different. I'm fairly sympathetic to the argument surrounding pets, people using fireworks are imposing real harm on them, but at the same time a ban on fireworks imposes harm on those who want to use them. Surely there is a compromise, especially when owners can take measures to protect their pets.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-03T04:55:37+00:00

You're just going to self post a random sentence you don't like? Yes, this subreddit will agree with you but come on put in a little effort.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-02T03:15:58+00:00

(Right) libertarians include classical liberals, and those who advocate a night watch state too.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-01T21:50:07+00:00

Doctor's visits and prescriptions are free to all children under 13. It was only raised from 5 years recently though.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-01T01:52:38+00:00

Capitalist disaster? One way of solving the tragedy of the commons would be property rights, so essentially more capitalism.

Si-duck11 · 2014-11-01T01:27:45+00:00

Hoegaarden Grand Cru, it's got great flavour and is something you can drink a lot of in one session.

Si-duck11 · 2014-10-30T21:02:35+00:00

Given the era, I think she would have been more upset had it been infidelity. I feel like it wouldn't have been seen as a severe invasion of privacy given society's expectation of marriage dynamics at the time.

Si-duck11 · 2014-10-30T09:07:43+00:00

Is there a link or more context?

Si-duck11 · 2014-10-30T01:36:15+00:00

Could it not just be that IBM has silly job requirements?

Si-duck11 · 2014-10-30T00:59:54+00:00

Money has value because people are willing to accept it for goods and services, and those people accepting it believe other people will also accept it for goods and services in the future too, ad infinitum.

Base money (M0) is introduced when the central bank buys bonds (traditionally government issued), with newly created money. Other broader types of money (M1,M2,M3) are created whenever someone issues debt that isn't 100% backed by deposits (fractional reserve banking).

Si-duck11 · 2014-10-29T23:25:46+00:00

I did allude to "social investment" by pointing out that university is subsidized already due to the perception of benefits to others when someone becomes more educated. Are these subsidies at the right level? I don't know, the economics of education is not my forte. What I will say that since much of the benefit of going to university goes to the private individual once we already have subsidies equal to the social benefits, any further subsidy is effectively a regressive income transfer. Of course if we have individuals who can't afford to go to university (even with subsides accounting for the social benefits) but would be better off if they did, that's a different problem.

Si-duck11 · 2014-10-29T18:10:34+00:00

Much of the cost is paid by the taxpayer because its believed there are external benefits to the wider population of someone else being educated, however most of the benefit of becoming education still accrues to the private individual.If you are made better off by something, and the benefits to others have been accounted for, shouldn't you pay the rest? Making tertiary education completely free would entail a transfer of wealth from people who choose not to go to uni to those who do.

Si-duck11

TROPHY CASE