Welcome to The Duncan Trussell Family Hour Center for Self-Optimization

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

pattmayne

Hrair
  • Content count

    1,152
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Community Reputation

429 Purple Pope

6 Followers

About pattmayne

Recent Profile Visitors

685 profile views
  1. And yet, you haven't proposed an alternative. You want to explicitly prevent the means to food, proposing no alternative, which would result in starvation and/or riots, but you're upset that I'm phrasing it that way. Your image of the libertarian future includes people starving. You want to cut out that part of the picture without saying why it would not be. Let me re-phrased it then: In a libertarian future, would there be more starvation in the country?
  2. I just saw the first one. Hilarious. He's still got it.
  3. This isn't enough to convince me that poor people have a place in a libertarian society. Who is this "overwhelming majority?" Are they rich people who just can't wait to help poor people, but the mean old government is in their way? Or are they the very powerless people who need help, but lack the funds to make a change? You're still not suggesting any concrete responses to poverty and the cycle of poverty. You're still just saying "It will be better for poor people when we stop feeding them. Trust me." I kind of wish someone would just say, "I don't fucking care about those losers. If you don't work you deserve to die." I'm not just complaining about the obvious fact that the welfare state would disappear without government and taxation. Libertarians (including DS) specifically cite "the welfare state" as one of the reasons we need libertarianism. They would begrudge poor folks those funds. And this is their specific argument. They prefer to not feed the poor. When they're interviewed they turn it sort-of nice for the camera and say, "well, someone could still feed them, if they want" (ie. if they have the extra money). So my argument is that libertarianism is a step backwards at least when part of the platform is de-funding welfare and vaguely assuming that maybe somebody will still help the poor. It's not complicated. People would starve, or riot.
  4. u nasty
  5. While we have taxes I want those taxes used to help poor people. If you want to get rid of taxes I only support that if you've got a replacement for the welfare state. The welfare state is a big part of what keeps western countries from the depths of 3rd world poverty. Capitalism helps the gainfully employed to step far away from poverty, but welfare is a specific system with specific benefits for the most vulnerable. What is a specific response to the poverty problem? Not vague "freedom to help the poor," which I interpret as "freedom to starve to death." I think the market can only be "free" if its parts don't rust. With basic income you could get rid of minimum wage and consolidate some government departments.
  6. That's a great video. Really well written and performed and good animations too. My hope is that science can help us build mythologies that are relevant to the modern environment. It bugs me when a scientist says that matter "creates" consciousness, without giving any credit to the underlying ingredients (occult living universe).
  7. Would anybody else feel more libertarian if they had some kind of consideration for the poorest of the poor? Concern for the weakest has to be of primary motivation in speculating about alternative economics, or else I don't care!! I'm jealous of his passion though. Imagine believing in something to that extent! He seems like a good guy, but there is never a satisfactory response to poverty when I hear a libertarian speak. They are people whose lives are awesome, complaining about the system, but not for those that suffer under the system... just for those whose lives could be even better?? Edit: I also just listened to the latest Sam Harris podcast where he quotes somebody saying that running out of dollars is like running out of inches. Libertarians could still run out of dollars and starve while there is lots of food.
  8. I think he's bait. Look at him wriggle.
  9. I'm going under the sea.
  10. As a MAN I have the right to that sweet ass.
  11. I'm glad they're keeping the franchise alive. Pumping energy into it and keeping us aware of it. So now it's more likely that someone will have an opportunity to do something interesting with Star Trek. I stick by my previous complaints though. I'm about to watch "Beyond." I don't think I've seen it yet. Directed by Justin Lin.
  12. But I think we might over-medicalize personal-development and spiritual problems and we need some way to demonstrate when a doctor isn't the one to turn to. When a mental state should be "cured" or embraced or whatever. What the treatment or response should be. You're right about my "brain-serotonin" example, there are non-medical responses for that. But it's conceivable that someone could be born with physical damage in that part of the brain, worse than learning or plasticity can overcome, in which case drugs could counteract it and all is well. But if you live in a gloomy place that makes you feel gloomy should you fight it or embrace the gloom? It could even be about emotional authenticity. How many "childish things" should you let go of to become a more efficient adult? Abnormal psychology is more interesting, legit modes of being in their own right. When it gets in the way (of employability) it becomes a health problem. It could be two sides of the same coin.
  13. Somebody can have a bad few years which form negative pathways in the brain, where unhealthy or morbid thinking becomes habitual. This can effect behaviour (less exercise, less socializing, bad eating habits), deepening it all into depression. Is that a mental health crisis or a spiritual problem? Alternatively, if it's a pure brain-problem, like you can't produce enough serotonin, then only medical intervention can correct the "problem." What if you simply feel like the world is evil? That God must be a sadist, all feeling is a form of suffering, even all love is manipulation... would you go to a psychiatrist about that? How often does one get mistaken for the other? Or is it an arbitrary distinction? Is somebody's morbidity a legit philosophical perspective? Or do they need some prozac? Is medicine a legit replacement for gurus and priests?
  14. They should make a 3D iMax special movie where it's just two hours of him dancing.
  15. Yeah, I'd also like to see Idris Elba as Bond.