tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post211355947850432759..comments2024-03-29T00:39:31.629-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Should facts and successes matter in economics? Or politics? David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger85125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-92223135112856018112021-09-12T20:25:51.878-07:002021-09-12T20:25:51.878-07:00Agreed, the Confederacy was 100 percent evil. Whic...Agreed, the Confederacy was 100 percent evil. Which is why it was right to pull down Confederate statues—as it was for central and eastern Europeans to take down statues of Stalin.Alan Brookshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17996922923136240709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-49738559595494623472021-09-10T18:53:47.531-07:002021-09-10T18:53:47.531-07:00onward
onward
onward<br /><br />onward<br /><br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-55254774564879809462021-09-10T17:42:13.161-07:002021-09-10T17:42:13.161-07:00Paradoctor:
Re abortion. If the embryo has rights...Paradoctor:<br /><i><br />Re abortion. If the embryo has rights and the woman has rights, then we'll have to compromise. Perhaps a compromise where the rights of the embryo increases through the pregnancy, one trimester at a time. Lucky us: that compromise already exists! It's call Roe vs Wade.<br /></i><br /><br />If law and custom were not so blatantly anti-woman, this would make perfect sense: Start with the assumption that a woman must give <b>consent</b> for her body to be used as an incubator. One might even stipulate that certain acts, such as marriage or consenting to sex constitute implied consent for the likely consequences. But being raped is clearly not consent. And girls of a certain (lack of) age cannot be said to legally consent in any case. So if you put a fetus into the body of a non-consenting woman who has a right to terminate her indenture as incubator, then <b>you</b> are guilty of murder, just as you would be if you put a baby inside a burlap bag and threw it into the river.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-57417003235365786622021-09-10T14:57:23.812-07:002021-09-10T14:57:23.812-07:00There are members of my family that are excellent ...There are members of my family that are excellent models for the proposal that inheritances should be heavily taxed. They are not rich enough to make a difference. I’ve studied cases involving trust fund babies who never contribute anything to society and are constantly arguing with the trustees about getting more money. But that actually makes my point. One strategy for avoiding the estate & gift tax (“EGT”) is to put property into irrevocable trusts as early as you can. If you do it the right way, your exposure to the EGT is reduced. Problem is, the gift is irrevocable so you can’t take it back, even if the beneficiary is a complete disgrace.GMT -5 8032https://www.blogger.com/profile/04677459423995332529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63596492473365511242021-09-10T13:51:13.905-07:002021-09-10T13:51:13.905-07:00Paradoctor:
I tried the Krugman link. Paywall. Pl...Paradoctor:<br /><i><br />I tried the Krugman link. Paywall. Please quote more.<br /></i><br /><br />Well, I gave you the "money shot" already, but continuing on...<br /><br /><br />https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/09/opinion/how-sept-11-gave-us-jan-6.html<br /><i><br />...<br />True, in the past there were a few mitigating factors. To his credit, President George W. Bush tried to tamp down the anti-Muslim backlash, visiting an Islamic center just six days after the attack and calling on Americans to respect all religions. Try to imagine Donald Trump doing something similar.<br /><br />It’s also notable that some of the most prominent neocons — intellectuals who promoted the invasion of Iraq and called for an even wider set of wars — eventually became eloquent, even courageous Never Trumpers. This suggests that their belief in spreading democratic values was genuine even if the methods they advocated — and the political alliances they chose to make — had catastrophic results.<br /><br />But it’s not an accident that Republicans today have left both tolerance and respect for democracy behind. Where we are now, with democracy hanging by a thread, is where we’d been heading for a long time.<br /><br />America was viciously attacked 20 years ago. But even then, the call that mattered was coming from inside the house. The real threat to all this nation stands for is coming not from foreign suicide bombers but from our own right wing.<br /></i>Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-71889150509742996722021-09-10T12:59:13.594-07:002021-09-10T12:59:13.594-07:00David, I agree with you 100% on your worldwide dec...David, I agree with you 100% on your worldwide declaration of ownership.GMT -5 8032https://www.blogger.com/profile/04677459423995332529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2629022760580101942021-09-10T12:08:42.147-07:002021-09-10T12:08:42.147-07:00Robert: "The Marxian Paradox... also applies ...Robert: "The Marxian Paradox... also applies to epidemics."<br />Very good! In general there's a Paradox of Prediction - i.e. Seldon's. Prediction alters the outcome; so what does it converge on?<br /><br />Larry Hart: Where are the ICUs jammed full of vaccine sufferers? <br />I tried the Krugman link. Paywall. Please quote more.<br /><br />Re abortion. If the embryo has rights and the woman has rights, then we'll have to compromise. Perhaps a compromise where the rights of the embryo increases through the pregnancy, one trimester at a time. Lucky us: that compromise already exists! It's call Roe vs Wade. Paradoctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821968120388981470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-79859362056558427812021-09-10T10:55:36.574-07:002021-09-10T10:55:36.574-07:00Robert:
Sarcasm aside, have the events of the las...Robert:<br /><i><br />Sarcasm aside, have the events of the last half-decade really led you to think that sanity about any issue that negatively affects women, or indeed anyone except pink straight males, is a common trait?<br /></i><br /><br />Despite the clear manipulation by leaders with other agendas, I do expect that many individual citizens oppose abortion because they really do think of it as murder. And that they would have no reason to consider "removal of an already-dead fetus" as being the same thing.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81442908032041662572021-09-10T10:52:00.540-07:002021-09-10T10:52:00.540-07:00Robert:
When public health measures prevent an ou...Robert:<br /><i><br />When public health measures prevent an outbreak everyone bitches about how they were expensive, inconvenient, etc and totally unnecessary because there was no outbreak. If there is an outbreak then everyone bitches about how public health didn't see it coming and prevent it.<br /></i><br /><br />Someone on Stephanie Miller's show today put it, "This is the first <b>voluntary</b> epidemic in history."Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-28719510686632755542021-09-10T10:50:24.891-07:002021-09-10T10:50:24.891-07:00Don't lean too far the other way, Robert. The ...<br />Don't lean too far the other way, Robert. The palpably pragmatic increase in female participation in leadership - at least in democratic nations - has been substantial. And many other litmuses. "It's not enough and needs to accelerate!" is a perfectly fine and justified response. But not: "There's been no progress."David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1720786203379338202021-09-10T10:37:04.958-07:002021-09-10T10:37:04.958-07:00I'd like to think we're sane enough to dis...<i>I'd like to think we're sane enough to distinguish a procedure to remove a corpse vs a procedure that some perceive as murder.</i><br /><br />Your eternal optimism and quaint faith in reason are so endearing :-)<br /><br />Sarcasm aside, have the events of the last half-decade really led you to think that sanity about any issue that negatively affects women, or indeed anyone except pink straight males, is a common trait?Robertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84820244849441628842021-09-10T10:20:15.595-07:002021-09-10T10:20:15.595-07:00The Marxian Paradox
Also applies to epidemics. Wh...<i> The Marxian Paradox</i><br /><br />Also applies to epidemics. When public health measures prevent an outbreak everyone bitches about how they were expensive, inconvenient, etc and totally unnecessary because there was no outbreak. If there <i>is</i> an outbreak then everyone bitches about how public health didn't see it coming and prevent it.<br /><br />At least, that's what happened pre-Trump.Robertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1514296824481655032021-09-10T09:32:40.304-07:002021-09-10T09:32:40.304-07:00LH good one. I reposted it to FB.
GMT, interestin...LH good one. I reposted it to FB.<br /><br />GMT, interesting and depressing stories ! I rank taxes in order of justifiability and the Inheritance tax is utterly the most necessary and proper. Above a certain level it should be huge. 6000 yeas testify to the justice and necessity.<br /><br />And heck yeah a wealth tax is more fair than income tax... but only if we get the most vital thing of all, my worldwide declaration of ownership/property. Without that, it's all a sham.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-57763543608716823072021-09-10T07:21:42.776-07:002021-09-10T07:21:42.776-07:00Have we heard of even one example of a vaccinated ...Have we heard of even <b>one</b> example of a vaccinated person having to issue a tearful <i>mea culpa</i> about how terrible the repercussions of the vaccine were, and how much he regrets listening to those who promoted vaccination.<br /><br />Any deathbed pleas that people please <b>don't</b> get vaccinated the way they did?<br /><br />Just asking the question.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-55189578581948047502021-09-10T05:27:29.672-07:002021-09-10T05:27:29.672-07:00Paul Krugman as Cassandra...
https://www.nytimes....Paul Krugman as Cassandra...<br /><br />https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/09/opinion/foreign-terrorists-domestic-extremists.html<br /><i><br />...<br />In short, by the time the terrorists struck, the G.O.P. was no longer a normal political party, one that considered itself only a temporary custodian of broader national interests. It was already willing to do things that would previously have been considered inconceivable.<br /><br />In 2003 I declared that the Republican Party was dominated by “a movement whose leaders do not accept the legitimacy of our current political system.” But many people didn’t want to hear it. Those of us who tried to point out the abuses in real time were dismissed as “shrill” and “alarmist.”<br /><br />The alarmists have, however, been right every step of the way.<br />...<br /></i>Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41355454575876076802021-09-10T05:19:33.950-07:002021-09-10T05:19:33.950-07:00I have been terribly busy the past two weeks. It i...I have been terribly busy the past two weeks. It is a shame because taxation is my field of expertise. My views are a bit hybrid because I don't fit easily into any camp.<br /><br />I want the ultra-wealthy to pay more in taxes. Creating a system that does this is challenging because 1. the ultra-wealthy have great influence in how the laws are written, 2. the ultra-wealthy can afford to pay for top rate legal and financial planning to avoid the taxes, and 3. The ultra-wealthy can afford the best legal representation to fight the government when they get assessed a large amount of taxes.<br /><br />It is frustrating as hell to take a case to federal or state court and try to explain to judges why the taxpayer’s interpretation of the law is incorrect. I had one judge that allowed a taxpayer to take deductions in the absence of any receipts…the judge wrote that a spreadsheet created by the taxpayer who-knows-when was contemporaneous proof that the expenses were incurred. There was no winning with that judge. That same judge later accepted a motion made by taxpayer’s lawyer after the trial had concluded and all arguments heard, that an excise tax was unconstitutional. The judge had earlier denied this motion. The judge accepted the motion and ruled on it without giving the government (ME) a chance to argue in response. This was the area of my greatest expertise and the judge let the taxpayer’s lawyer have his way without letting me argue in response. If you want to read the actual decision I will be glad to email it to Professor Brin.<br /><br />It is one thing to put a tax proposal into law. It is another thing to actually enforce the law and collect that tax. I’ve spent most of my career as a government tax lawyer litigating cases where people owe taxes. Sometimes the case involves innocent non-compliance. Other times you have someone trying to game the system and take advantage of a benefit that they are not entitled to.<br /><br />My expertise is with the Internal Revenue Code, Title 26 of the US Code. It was a long MF when I studied tax law in the 1980s. It is longer now. Probably 1/3rd of that length has to do with capital gains status. That is too much. We need to simplify the tax law. But I mean that in a conceptual sense; it might actually make the law seem more complex to outsiders. The 1986 tax reform act was like that. It wiped away a lot of advanced tax avoidance plans. It made other plans very difficult to achieve (special allocations of items of income or loss between members of a partnership). Avoid imposing taxes where enforcement is difficult and avoidance is easy: the estate & gift tax and the corporate income tax are two of the worst areas. They are devilishly hard to collect. Taxpayers can easily plan around them. <br /><br />Sadly, tax law has become a hot political topic. I try to say my piece and I get bullied by one side or the other because they disagree with me. I know I don’t have all the answers, but I would appreciate it if people would recognize that I am making my points in good faith and I realize that they are not all encompassing. <br /><br />Perhaps we should move away from an income tax to a VAT tax. We could do that in a way that lessens the disproportionate impact on low-income people. My preferred approach would be to try and repeat what the 1986 tax act did…tax revenues went up as the top rate went down. Drastically simplify the code. Focus imposing taxes in a way that it is hard to avoid. <br />GMT -5 8032https://www.blogger.com/profile/04677459423995332529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54686937207108105452021-09-09T19:02:19.934-07:002021-09-09T19:02:19.934-07:00For contemporary Republicans, anencephaly might be...For contemporary Republicans, anencephaly might be a positive. ;)Tim H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12380916635831994159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-51073751992383501132021-09-09T17:54:37.837-07:002021-09-09T17:54:37.837-07:00Dr Brin:
that most "late term abotions invl...Dr Brin:<br /><i><br /> that most "late term abotions invlove anencephaly when it is discovered there's no brain. So what is it that has a heartbeat?<br /></i><br /><br />Remember the Terry Schiavo case? Her brain was liquid mush, but that didn't stop Bill Frist from diagnosing her at a distance and asserting that she was responsive. The Christian fanatics don't trust doctors' "no hope of revival" diagnoses. They literally believe in miracles, and so they expect that despite all evidence, the fetus or the brain-dead relative will awaken to a tear-jerking happy reunion. Or at least that the possibility should be accounted for.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-88233982778676912992021-09-09T17:10:49.621-07:002021-09-09T17:10:49.621-07:00AFR that is related to the fact that libs stupidly...AFR that is related to the fact that libs stupidly never point out... that most "late term abotions invlove anencephaly when it is discovered there's no brain. So what is it that has a heartbeat?David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-31663485889491438942021-09-09T16:24:28.687-07:002021-09-09T16:24:28.687-07:00Locumranch, how does loss of amniotic fluid fit in...Locumranch, how does loss of amniotic fluid fit into your matrix for allowable abortion?<br /><br />A fetus without amniotic fluid can survive in the womb. Or not, depending whether the loss was caused by a tear, which would allow bacteria in. It's iffy, and could cause the death of the fetus and/or the mother.<br /><br />However, once born, the baby will die. 100% guaranteed. Because amniotic fluid is required for a baby's lungs to develop. And no baby survives without lungs for long. :(<br /><br />So, with no chance of the viability of the fetus outside the womb, and with the dangers to the life and/or fertility of the mother, would an abortion be allowed in your system, or by the Texas law? And if not, why not? A.F. Reyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08102355714883828348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-52103157240573913162021-09-09T05:16:57.976-07:002021-09-09T05:16:57.976-07:00Alfred Differ:
Take a deep breath and then fight ...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />Take a deep breath and then fight back using legitimate tools. Don't make your cause illegitimate right out the gate.<br /></i><br /><br />You've heard the expression that Democrats "bring a knife to a gun fight." In that context, you're saying "Just because they have guns doesn't mean you should fight back with guns too. Fight back using legitimate knives." <br /><br />I perceive you failing to distinguish between <b>breaking</b> the rules and <b>making</b> the rules. The Texas Republicans are not doing something illegal--they're making laws which have bad consequences. My goal with the "So, we can do that now, can we?" strategy is to bring those bad consequences home to them so that <b>they</b> have to stop doing what they're doing.<br /><br />I get the argument, "If you think delegating enforcement to private individuals is wrong, then you shouldn't do that yourself." But my goal is not to have all sorts of liberal objectives imposed by the same means that Republicans are doing. It's to force Republicans to insist "You can't do that!", which at least by implication means "That mustn't be done!", and to nullify all such legislation--liberal or Republican.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-79706390957206470962021-09-09T04:56:45.476-07:002021-09-09T04:56:45.476-07:00locumranch:
Instead, I will support and endorse L...locumranch:<br /><i><br />Instead, I will support and endorse Larry's hypothesis that the human fetus is a mere clump of cells, devoid of any basic humanity and a parasite on the body maternal, until it becomes human by achieving the ability to survive without maternal support.<br /></i><br /><br />I didn't argue that the fetus is without humanity. I argued that the mother is also human, and that ones right to an incubator has to be weighed legally against the other's right not to be pressed into service as an incubator. You would have more merit if you limited your admonitions to women who willfully engage in sex--that they implicitly consent to the possibility of forming a human being, but since the Texas law makes no exception for rape, you really <b>are</b> sarcastically suggesting that a woman is required to serve as a life support mechanism for another being which was forcibly implanted into her.<br /><br /><i><br />It is likewise well known that the newly minted human infant (aka 'a mere clump of cells') remains parasitic in nature and entirely dependent on its parental hosts for survival until, more often than not, it approaches the age of human majority.<br /></i><br /><br />See above. But society does have other mechanisms for caring for a child when its biological parents are unable or unwilling to do so themselves. Not so much with a non-viable fetus.<br /><br /><i><br />And, of course, all humans remain 'a mere clump of cells' whether or not they're capable of independent survival.<br /></i><br /><br />Whatever spiritual evaluation one brings to things, there are legal definitions. Citizenship, for example, depends in part upon where one was <b>born</b>. Even in the Bible, life is said to begin with the first <b>breath</b>.<br /><br /><br /><i><br />Paul451 & matthew's contention that the removal of an intrauterine fetal demise is somehow 'illegal' is incorrect, as removal of retained 'products of conception' is a primary rational behind the therapeutic D & C.<br /></i><br /><br />But doesn't the Texas law make D & C illegal? You seem to be arguing that no law <b>should</b> forbid such a thing, which is what we're saying as well, but I'm not convinced you're describing the legal Texas landscape as it really is.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-8546266943115276712021-09-08T23:15:09.521-07:002021-09-08T23:15:09.521-07:00I normally don't engage much with locum, but h...I normally don't engage much with locum, but his argument missed a very obvious distinction. Children are dependent on adults for survival, this is true, but they are not dependent on any particular adult for their survival. The responsibility for them is often transferred to other adults as necessary. <br /><br />A fetus depends explicitly on the mother's body for survival. Until such time as we figure out a way to transfer a fetus to some kind of artificial womb or we figure out a mechanism to transplant one to another woman's womb (aside from at the egg stage), any argument over the rights of the fetus has to consider very heavily the rights of the woman carrying the fetus, because nobody else can take over for them. When a fetus reaches a point that they can potentially survive outside the womb is where the abortion rights discussions get especially murky.<br /><br />Cari Bursteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05812444306433659243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80861757269932719022021-09-08T19:38:22.623-07:002021-09-08T19:38:22.623-07:00…the collective interests of western society overr...<i>…the collective interests of western society override individual autonomy in terms of abortion…</i><br /><br />I knew a doctor in a different online community many years ago who argued against CA prop 4 (2008 election) that would have imposed legal requirements on him to involve a child's parents in certain medical decisions regarding abortion. He didn't argue against the burden on him. He argued that it would lead to teenage girls NOT getting the care and advice they needed when faced with an unwanted pregnancy. He argued that reality was MUCH more complex than the initiative could possibly address and then proceeded to give us examples with names stripped out to protect his patients.<br /><br />After all this material from him, it was quite clear to me that his Hippocratic Oath clearly focused him upon the needs of individual patients AT THE EXPENSE of collective interests of parents and society. I pondered that for a while and then decided I rather liked that outcome. He as inclined to be a grouchy cuss*, but he was very sharp and obviously bought into the vision of protecting life when he could and not harming it when he couldn't.<br /><br /><br /><br />* He explained to us one day that 75% of his work load had to do with obesity and its consequences. He would tell his patients they had to lose weight. They'd demand he produce a magic pill. That got REAL old REAL quick for him. So… many years later when I did manage to drop 70 lbs, I told him I had heard his advice and finally acted upon it. Gained a lot of it back later, but not all of it… and I still fight… because the cuss got through to me.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44092810331280862262021-09-08T19:25:12.260-07:002021-09-08T19:25:12.260-07:00Larry,
…but you're assuming that trust in the...Larry,<br /><br /><i>…but you're assuming that trust in the law survives Republican overreaches in the first place…</i><br /><br />I promise you that I won't and I'm not. It's just that we shouldn't be adding to the damage they are doing. This is the kind of crap Putin wants us to do. Break trust in Rule of Law and he gets millions of us helping HIM achieve Russian geopolitical objectives. I refuse.<br /><br />Take a deep breath and then fight back using legitimate tools. Don't make your cause illegitimate right out the gate.<br /><br /><i>By your logic, Democrats shouldn't filibuster because that will destroy trust in the Senate…</i><br /><br />Well… they shouldn't destroy the Senate doesn't mean they should never filibuster. What they should do (and should have done) is reverted to the old rule that required doddering old men to stand and speak.<br /><br />As for the Senate, though, I'm not opposed to breaking it. That's just a portion of the federal legislative branch. That's no where near as important as THE RULE OF LAW. (Heh. Yah. All caps because.)Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.com