Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby rangerone314 » Tue 13 Mar 2012, 18:42:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'T')hat's a whole other thread, but.. problem here is conservatives feel the same as you do that benefits are out of control. Problem there is how can a party be anti-abortion but also anti-services for poor children -- it's illogical, you can't force poor women to have the baby and THEN shame her anyway for then using WIC for formula and food stamps. Pick one, either support a poor woman's right to abort or support the child if she has it.

I got an idea that should please both the cons and the libs: encourage poor women who can't afford children to give birth to them and then throw their babies headfirst into into a brick wall, and then go buy a gun and kill the first rich person or social conservative they can find, before committing suicide.

The cons should be happy because there will be fewer poor people in the country demanding support, fewer abortions and more people exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.

<sarcasm off>
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 13 Mar 2012, 20:06:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR11', '[')b]I'd be more concerned about giving M.D.'s that sort of gatekeeper authority; between the ones that don't like guns, and those that will sign anything for cash; it sounds like a system designed to insure that evil, malevolent crazies get guns, and boring middle class people get denied.


What you're saying is you can't trust our doctors -- because we have for-profit healthcare, it's why we have pill mills and even your friendly family doc has Big Pharma reps wining and dining him (bribes).

Sounds like Dave is right, guns are handled sensibly in France, but it's a total picture we'd need the socialized medicine too so that you could trust the doctors to just be doctors and not Businessmen.

Anyhow this isn't applicable to the US. We have a lot of crazy folk over here, you'd have to take the guns away from most people who have them. :lol: And a huge swath of the population is on some kind of anti-depressant or chill pill. How do you define mental health issues when the whole society has mental health issues?

It's a slippery slope. Just like chipping away at the constitutional right to abortion, once you open that door on your 2nd amendment rights you'll lose that too. Which was the point of my above reply.. gun rights could be eroded the same as they're doing with abortion rights.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby careinke » Tue 13 Mar 2012, 20:30:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')What you're saying is you can't trust our doctors -- because we have for-profit healthcare, it's why we have pill mills and even your friendly family doc has Big Pharma reps wining and dining him (bribes).


You mean like the non for profit military doctors at Joint Base Lewis McChord who took away the PTSD diagnosis for our soldiers? The same ones who declared the recent soldier/killer in Afghanistan fit to fight even though he had PTSD and a head injury. Those doctors?

Doctors can be wrong even in a socialized medical system (the military).
Cliff (Start a rEVOLution, grow a garden)
User avatar
careinke
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5047
Joined: Mon 01 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby rangerone314 » Tue 13 Mar 2012, 20:37:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('careinke', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')What you're saying is you can't trust our doctors -- because we have for-profit healthcare, it's why we have pill mills and even your friendly family doc has Big Pharma reps wining and dining him (bribes).


You mean like the non for profit military doctors at Joint Base Lewis McChord who took away the PTSD diagnosis for our soldiers? The same ones who declared the recent soldier/killer in Afghanistan fit to fight even though he had PTSD and a head injury. Those doctors?

Doctors can be wrong even in a socialized medical system (the military).
I guess that's the pitfalls of a system where some people are assigned to act like God, and then start believing they are.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Wed 14 Mar 2012, 14:51:15

Does it make any sense in the age of Internet where any drug can be bought out of prescription system?
Those not willing to attend counselling will do just that.

Seems like this is an attempt to create more turnover for sex therapists.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby Pretorian » Wed 14 Mar 2012, 18:31:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '[') The state senator is correct, Viagra has risks.


Crossing the street doesn't?
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby Pretorian » Wed 14 Mar 2012, 18:39:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('careinke', '
') Economically, it would probably be cheaper to society if all abortions were funded 100% by the government. We could even add a cash incentive if they elected to be sterilized at the same time.



Or make it mandatory for those without breeding licenses.
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby Pretorian » Wed 14 Mar 2012, 18:48:12

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')How it should be Roy.. it should be like the old days.. a working class job should pay enough to support the worker without government having to do these outright wealth transfers.



What if, unlike in those old days, workers are not able to produce enough to justify wages like that? You know, the Chinese, the robots, the overgrown hubris of every blue and white collar ...What then?
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby Sixstrings » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 06:55:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pretorian', 'W')hat if, unlike in those old days, workers are not able to produce enough to justify wages like that? You know, the Chinese, the robots, the overgrown hubris of every blue and white collar ...What then?


Socialism.

When the A.I. singularity happens then that's really it for human labor. We're inching that way now step by step -- little things like you call an 800 number and the computer answering you has very good voice recognition software -- brilliant, no need to even hire cheap Indian labor. The US exports a lot of raw goods to China, but there again with automation and efficiency it's not employing many people. Before long we won't even have Mexican fruit pickers anymore:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')img]http://www.wired.com/images/article/full/2007/06/robo_picker_2_350px.jpg[/img]
Image
This is an early CAD rendering of the scout that will drive into a grove and visually scan the apple trees. Each boom has an array of cameras that will stereoscopically image the tree and create a virtual 3D image of the tree and the positions of all of the apples.
http://www.visionrobotics.com/


All this new tech, "crowdsourcing," more and more automation, ever fewer service providers able to serve ever more customers. Jobs for people are under assault from all directions. Even when we do build a factory now, they're so automated it doesn't really add many jobs.

The real problem the country has now is the non-automated (yet) and non-offshored (yet) jobs market breaks down into either: a) depending on government, gov workers and gov largesse, or b) financial sector, Federal Reserve largesse and c) the people who get no help at all, the biggest group, the working working class economy of $10 per hour jobs when gas costs $5 a gallon.

When you think about higher slaried jobs, invariably they're connected to government spending directly or indirectly (medical, education, direct gov workers, gov contractors). Expect more of this in the future, more dependence on government for income.

Now.. what happens when software can *think*? Becomes sentient, creative, can not only recognize human speech but fluently speak it? Well there's goes a massive chunk of jobs, basically ALL the jobs. At that point there would have to a new kind of communism, or very big government socialism, otherwise there'd be no reason to hire a *person* Chinese Indian or American and then you can't have an economy without money circulating and it would all collapse.

Short answer to your question: assuming no dystopian collapse, government's role in our economy will only continue to grow.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 07:58:05

6, there is no such thing as a natural entitlement. Break the word down, it's about a contract, between the entitled and the entitler. The people most outside 'entitlement' systems (ie. those with no connection at all to government) are the most marginalized in the world. Governments are one of those paradoxical constructs, responsible for great benefit to Citizens (another term of Contract), sometimes responsible for great harm, genocide. The whole Government is Bad argument is futile bunkum. The problem is not the government, it is efficiency. Resource efficiency if you want to get technical. $10 bucks an hour is still looked at as 3 steps from heaven by 90% of the world's population. $5 a gallon is a faint memory in many places. Mopeds are sexy. Sharing housing is groovy, home made Chinese is healthy and cheap. Public transport is full of eye candy. Fact is the best thing for America would be a big fat attitude adjustment we all know is impossible, sadly.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 08:37:32

Another point is, taking the automation argument to it's end (all meaningful work is now done by machine) those owning the machines will have to invent some pretend productivity and maintain some form of token system, else who do they sell to? In this case who best own the machine?

Back on topic, one conservative value I like is freedom of contract. I know unions hate it and it can disenfranchise workers in a tight economy with high unemployment. However I have taken this route and been able to develop an amazing mix of careers and hourly rates I am more than happy with, by free contracting with agencies. I also have no problem with people being offered some kind of enticement to safe sterilization. Why not? I think why not is less to do with religious thinking, more the whole growth based fundamentals of our current economic model. Even a total parasite of a human being, of no capability to ever produce anything useful directly, still creates 'productive work' indirectly for a mass of people which often amounts to 400% of the economic activity of a 'normal worker'. Do we really need to encourage these people to breed? Probably better not.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby Sixstrings » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 08:42:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', '6'), there is no such thing as a natural entitlement. Break the word down, it's about a contract, between the entitled and the entitler.


I would phrase it differently -- the social contract is between capital and labor. If labor is pushed too far, if capital abandons its social contract with labor, then in a free country the people eventually revolt. Society should not exist just for the sake of the rich. That's feudalism. That's exactly what the third world looks like.

Nor should society revolve around a class of well paid gov workers and gov contractors -- another feature of third world nations.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he problem is not the government, it is efficiency. Resource efficiency if you want to get technical.


On that we agree, and you say it more succinctly.

My issue here is while our federal government can just print money to pay its workers well and give them fantastic benefits, the states can't do that and the private sector is too damn cheap -- Apple is worth uhm half a TRILLION DOLLARS yet they pay the vast bulk of their American employees like twelve bucks an hour. I know of some millionaire dentists who want to pay their workers $12 an hour, and no health insurance. Doctors are notorious for being cheap and not giving benefits. Ultimately the only motivation of any business is max profit, not what the society around them looks like.

This is where government is *supposed* to step in, but the way things are now our gov is for the rich and gov workers and that's it.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 09:02:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', '6'), there is no such thing as a natural entitlement. Break the word down, it's about a contract, between the entitled and the entitler.


I would phrase it differently -- the social contract is between capital and labor. If labor is pushed too far, if capital abandons its social contract with labor, then in a free country the people eventually revolt. Society should not exist just for the sake of the rich. That's feudalism. That's exactly what the third world looks like.

You are using terms which are fundamentally socialist. I deliberately am attempting to break it down a lot further than that, to households and individuals and their relationship with TPTB as they find it where they live anywhere in the world. Your position assumes an adversarial relationship common to old school unionized workplaces, pyramid structured social systems back to the ancients, looked at with this very severe glass ceiling mentality. In fact this mentality is un-cooperative and anti-productive. Ok so it protects workers rights. When I employ people I want them to put their all into cooperatively making me rich. I am not an a##hat, so I ensure my workers loyalty by looking after their needs. If I don't I can't expect much more than a token effort and a surprise knife in the back, given a chance.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
Nor should society revolve around a class of well paid gov workers and gov contractors -- another feature of third world nations.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he problem is not the government, it is efficiency. Resource efficiency if you want to get technical.


On that we agree, and you say it more succinctly.

My issue here is while our federal government can just print money to pay its workers well and give them fantastic benefits, the states can't do that and the private sector is too damn cheap -- Apple is worth uhm half a TRILLION DOLLARS yet they pay the vast bulk of their American employees like twelve bucks an hour. I know of some millionaire dentists who want to pay their workers $12 an hour, and no health insurance. Doctors are notorious for being cheap and not giving benefits. Ultimately the only motivation of business is max profit, not what the society around them looks like.

This is where government is *supposed* to step in, but the way things are now our gov is for the rich and gov workers and that's it.


I think you have to look at it in minute detail to really know what programs are dead weight and where the dead wood is in the beneficial programs. I get the total shits with people being guilt tripped for being on foodstamps in the USA when there are probably millions of people doing precisely nothing useful, nothing any of us would ever notice not being done, getting paid multiple times what a nurse carer or primary teacher might get. The sickest thing in socialized systems is the nepotism rife at the printing press end of the government payroll.

Of course there is then the issue of what happens to the creditors of all those useless government sponges, given they usually have excellent credit?
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby radon » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 09:34:31

Someone has observed recently here that 1 billionaire consumes less than 1 thousand millionaires. It would also be fair to say that 1 person on welfare (foodstamps) consumes less than 1 employee. So the drive to income polarisation may be a natural adjustment mechanism as the resources are becoming scarcer.

An alternative route is to equalise the resource take more or less uniformly over the population - this is a type of socialism. Everyone would get more than a foodstamper but less than an employee - because the total available resource base shrinks. In order for this system to progress, however, people have to be motivated by things other than greed and fear. The question is whether it is possible.
radon
 

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 10:22:38

I think where it's headed is the system will have to be socialized to the extent that roof, rations, fundamental health care, children's education and basic skills courses for retraining adults are basically mandatory in the long run on the downslide to avoid social catastrophe. Besides this 'free' enterprise is mandatory to maintain a tax base. In reality the social, enterprise and resource economies all intertwine, including the black threads. Remove any thread the yarn falls apart.

I can see the day when welfare will exist but with no cash component, whether a chipped population or eye scanned (as my government in Australia now does when we renew our driving licenses). To have any economic freedom will require work or trade. People will work for things they like but can't get on restricted spending. The guv here has done a halfhearted 50/50 cash and restricted card system for the most indigenous of our states (not actually a state) the Northern Territory. Because it's 50/50 it doesn't work. Plus they let people buy fuel with it, to drive along bus routes, pay for tyres etc. Nope. Beer, gas, smokes, dope, smoked salmon from Alaska etc. are cash money items only.

They are still paying anyone capable of popping out a child $5k here.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 14:35:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pretorian', 'W')hat if, unlike in those old days, workers are not able to produce enough to justify wages like that? You know, the Chinese, the robots, the overgrown hubris of every blue and white collar ...What then?


Socialism.

Unworking fantasy world,
Yeah?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen the A.I. singularity happens then that's really it for human labor.

And what, if it doesn't?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')e're inching that way now step by step

But the goal is where function cotangent crosses OY axis...
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 14:45:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'I') think where it's headed is the system will have to be socialized to the extent that roof, rations, fundamental health care, children's education and basic skills courses for retraining adults are basically mandatory in the long run on the downslide to avoid social catastrophe.

It is impossible to avoid unavoidable...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') can see the day when welfare will exist but with no cash component, whether a chipped population or eye scanned (as my government in Australia now does when we renew our driving licenses).

*Soylent Green* type of welfare?

Socialism is dead.
Forget it.
And if we insist, one day it will be *violently dead* when screwed but still employed workforce refuses to pay, business owners prefer to spend or just destroy proceeds than contribute to state driven robbery and mindless mob still demands.

At that point there will be a sort of *singularity* and collapse to feudal simplicity.... :-D :-D :-D
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby vaseline2008 » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 15:13:48

Speaking of men and their penises, do you guys know that in California we still have Sodomy Laws?

California Penal Code Section 286
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '(')a) Sodomy is sexual conduct consisting of contact between the
penis of one person and the anus of another person. Any sexual
penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime of
sodomy.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '(')m) In addition to any punishment imposed under this section, the
judge may assess a fine not to exceed seventy dollars ($70) against
any person who violates this section, with the proceeds of this fine
to be used in accordance with Section 1463.23. The court, however,
shall take into consideration the defendant's ability to pay, and no
defendant shall be denied probation because of his or her inability
to pay the fine permitted under this subdivision.

Yet I don't see any priests going to jail (for sex with minors) and the porn capital of the US (mostly anal I might add) is in Southern California.

Talk about too much government. Basically we have laws that aren't enforced for whatever reason, so we need to make more laws that aren't going to be enforced.

Take for example the Texting Laws, there are already laws in the California Vehicle code that states that a driver can not engage in any activity in the car that will cause distraction. So texting and other activities fall under this law but they had to make another No Texting While Driving Law. Sure we need to give the Legislative Branch work to do but really? Making laws just for the sake of making laws is just retarded.
User avatar
vaseline2008
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon 28 Apr 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Bill introduced to regulate men's reproductive health

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Thu 15 Mar 2012, 19:07:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'I') think where it's headed is the system will have to be socialized to the extent that roof, rations, fundamental health care, children's education and basic skills courses for retraining adults are basically mandatory in the long run on the downslide to avoid social catastrophe.

It is impossible to avoid unavoidable...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') can see the day when welfare will exist but with no cash component, whether a chipped population or eye scanned (as my government in Australia now does when we renew our driving licenses).

*Soylent Green* type of welfare?

Socialism is dead.
Forget it.
And if we insist, one day it will be *violently dead* when screwed but still employed workforce refuses to pay, business owners prefer to spend or just destroy proceeds than contribute to state driven robbery and mindless mob still demands.

At that point there will be a sort of *singularity* and collapse to feudal simplicity.... :-D :-D :-D


Socialism is growing faster than any other aspect of government worldwide. Far from dead, under continual review and development. You have no evidence contrary. Yes they do 'demand' basic services. Yours is the only advanced country in the world which leaves some of it's citizens with no support whatsoever. Yet it is still determinedly socialist in many areas. In the long run your assertion is correct, but it's a very long way down the track from today. You underestimate industrialism's hold on our ways of life and the sacrifices people and societies will make to retain a hold on it's rewards.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron