I have read the paper and will reply @Matt - I just didn’t have the time to do both. Which is probably an indicator of my time poor time management skills.
1 Like
Absolutely right. When I was a kid in the UK, although the benefits system was a shambles and with a father who couldn’t work because of MS and a mother who worked 2 cleaning jobs just to pay the rent (and I found out in later life missed meals herself so she could feed myself and my Dad) the family at least didn’t have the added burden of having to worry about paying for healthcare. In fact, I doubt we’d have survived as a family without free healthcare.
As I grew older I was told by my careers officer at school to forget ideas of becoming a designer and given an apprenticeship application for the local shipyards. Although my parents didn’t have a penny to their name they pushed me instead to go to college to get a degree, which I did - but only because my further education was free. The system was still broken and I couldn’t get a grant and was only offered a small amount towards bus fares (which I refused and walked to college instead most days) so I worked nights.
So things were far from perfect.
But without free education and free healthcare myself and my family would have been completely fucked.
1 Like
I actually suspect you may not need to read the paper at all. I suspect the key question is about faith in the concept of leadership itself: are leaders worthy people performing a necessary function and do they approach it in a spirit of service. If the answer to that question is yes - if we have a shared faith that people in leadership positions are working in good faith and doing their jobs as best they can - then reading that report isn’t really necessary. It’s a research report just like a hundred other reports. It’s a good report with good data. The issue here isn’t really about the data.
If that basic faith in human sincerity and good will isn’t present, I can’t even have faith in the person who manages my local grocery store. Leaders. Bah! Lazy bastards. Don’t do any actual work. Just “lead” while the real workers are stocking the shelves. This is why
Lots of assumptions there @Matt, personally I’m not too keen on blind faith, guess I’m more analytical than acolyte.
Is there a difference between “good faith” and “blind faith”?
You’d have to determine that for yourself.
My reasoned faith in my elected leaders is the same as my reasoned faith in my grocery store managers. They’re both people with jobs to do.
And… you still haven’t hazarded a response to the question. I never said the words “blind faith”. You did.
I didn’t say you did - what I did say was that I had read the paper and would reply, but that I hadn’t had the time to do both.
I didn’t realise that my indicating my interest in reading the paper you provided and assuring you I would respond would have this reaction.
So I think I’ll end my side of the dialogue there - all the best.
Racism is treating people differently for being different right?
What they are suggesting is treating racists different for being different. On the surface it looks not very different from eachother. But like @Blueroom said, when you look into it deeper, the one is hate speech and the other is speaking against moral evil. So forget I said anything
I’ll agree that there is a general problem and overall concern with the way health insurance is provided throughout our country, while I do believe reform is required it is also something that cannot happen overnight
The idea of Obama’s health care plan was there but the layout was terrible, it put more power into health insurance providers hands, pay up or pay a fine, and we still arent paying your bills cause (insert any answer)
However like free university, it’s a responsibility that I swear most young Americans cannot handle, while free higher education can benefit a workforce and society we need to lay it out right, I went to college a bit older mid 20s and held myself accountable while many of my peers at 18 or 19 years old using their parents money where just there to get their parents off their backs, when they failed out of classes, or ended up in academic probation bare minimum effort was put in to get through it.
Is there benefit to both programs 10000% yes, but until we can handle responsibility as a society and do a transition without destroying sectors of our economy. It’s a stalemate
Thanks Charles, (edit) I appreciate that.
Your choice of
in your note above is interesting; like “blind faith” the question of discursive intent comes up.
This analysis doesn’t have to continue now though; reach out if you’d like to discuss and we can dive into it. In the meantime, take care brother.
At the risk of beating a dead horse - forgive me! - but I know analysis is important to you; you said:
Yet you twice (in 683 and 686) evaded answering an analytical question:
It’s nothing but a definition of terms, a key component of all meaningful analysis. You introduced the term “blind faith” to the discussion, and so its meaning and place in the analysis needs to be stated before the analysis can move forward. Since it was you who introduced the term, the burden of definition is on you, and not on me. Yet you said exactly the opposite, above:
Speaking as an analyst, I can hypothesize two possible reasons for your insistence that I define your term:
- You are doing some deep irony (of the same type as, for example, Stephen Colbert did on the Colbert Report), or
- You don’t know (or don’t want to admit to yourself) that the responsibility for clear definition of terms in an analysis rests with the author, and not the audience.
You are certainly a fan of alliteration. You also share links to newspaper articles, in which other people have done reporting (and maybe some meaningful analysis). I don’t know whether you are an analyst or an acolyte. I do know I haven’t seen you do analysis here.
I have dragged you over the coals here and I understand it may have been more than was necessary. I hope it hasn’t created any permanent problems. We live in a world where data and analysis in a spirit of good will, is important to our collective health and well-being. No one is saying that large, complex organizations (like national governments and multinational corporations) do not have responsibilities, or that there are not imbalances in resources and influence. But starting from (for example) an insinuation that leaders in these organizations are
or are not working as much or as legitimately as other humans creates alienation and ill-will that doesn’t help anyone move forward on resolving those imbalances.
Gotta say, I also think it’s a false equivalence.
Racism is treating/judging people differently based on inherited traits. Action against those who defend racism is based on treating/judging people against unjust chosen words and actions.
They are not the same thing.
Laws and rules are there to indicate where we as a society agree lines on behavior need to be drawn to enjoy peace. Personally I prefer changing hearts and minds over adding laws for basic decency, but unfortunately that ain’t always enough.
4 Likes
1 Like
1 Like
G’night Charles. I like you. Consistent. Sweet dreams honey - this has been fun 
Yes I am. And I’m sober. I had big party plans for today for 3 years. Happy New Year!!
2 Likes
It really is the simple things in life. I love this. 