Levi Bard wrote:
>> I think that we can all agree that there is some screwy stuff going
>> on in our government and indeed, the other powers that be here.
>> However, I think we can also agree that this is the best government that
>> the world currently has to offer.
>
> That's why the US has the second highest poverty rate in the developed
> world,
Really? This is like comparing apples and oranges. "Poor" people in the
U.S. would be considered rich in any other country in the world.
If, aside from gamed statistics, this is actually true, it would be
because other countries in the running have socialist governments which
mitigate against having poor people. Of course, they do so with
confiscatory fees and taxes. Which is why the U.S. leads the world in
entrepreneurship, invention, etc.
Oh, and it just could be that those millions of illegal immigrants are
bringing down our stats. So maybe we should send them home.
>
> the highest private health expenditure in the developed world
> (in fact, we're right up there with Uganda, Cambodia, Lebanon, Bosnia,
> and other 'good governments'),
Naturally. Of course, I don't see people in the U.S. hocking their
condos to travel to other countries to get their operations. Perhaps we
have better health care because we spend more on it.
I'll stipulate this, though. One of the reasons we spend so much on
health care is because the people of the U.S. have become intensely
narcissistic. Remember, all those boob and face jobs are figured into
those health care costs. But with affluence tends to come narcissism. It
causes people to excessively fuss over themselves and be obsessed with
their looks and their health. This, in turn, tends to magnify problems
of health and appearance. Years ago, before health care became so
universal, families had their own remedies, and rarely went to see a
doctor. These days, people tend to see a doctor for the sniffles.
> the highest economic inequality in the
> developed world (in the same area as Iran, Kenya, and Cambodia),
It's called capitalism, and it's one of the faults of this system.
Capitalism (not just free markets) tends to produce a greater inequity
as time goes on. The solution to this is usually socialism. But a better
solution is some limits on capitalism. For example, one of the main
reasons your gas is so high is speculation on the futures markets.
People buy and sell contracts for things they never actually intend to
own, simply to make money. In the end, they haven't actually done
anything of value except siphon money off of transactions going through
the system. This activity adds cost to every other transaction in the
system. And a great many people make a great deal of money for really
doing nothing at all.
> a low
> life expectancy index (with Cuba, Korea, and Kuwait - probably our
> healthcare system is to blame for this one), etc.
We have low life expectancy? There's a surpise. People live longer and
longer these days, but the U.S. is behind all these other countries?
More and more babies make through to viable childhoods, and we're behind
all these other countries? Hmm.
> Your vote only
> counts if you're in the majority for your state,
This is true only in national elections, and only true to some extent.
The Senate was created to mediate this tendency coming from the House of
Representatives. But then again, you live in a representative republic.
You get to vote for the guys who run things. If you happen to be in the
minority, things may not run as you'd like. That's the way it is, and
the way it was intended. It's no use arguing about it; the Founding
Fathers are long gone, and this is the system they set up. Live with it
or move.
> the government has a
> direct feed of all your phone and internet traffic (without due
> process), and considers you a suspected terrorist.
>
I rather doubt the government considers me a terrorist. (You, on the
other hand... ;-)
Any privacy you think you have is really illusory. Every time you swipe
a credit or debit card, rent a hotel room, use one of those little CVS
cards, etc., you're potentially being tracked. You benefit from the fact
that all these entities with data on you haven't pooled their
information... yet. There are cameras at various intersections. If you
have a concealed weapons permit, you're in the system, even if you've
never committed a crime.
That the government has tapped into your communications with Carnivore,
Echelon, et al, shouldn't particularly concern you unless you are in
fact engaged in illegal activities. The only reason it didn't happen
sooner is that the technology didn't exist. Once it came into existence,
the government (or someone else, like Google) would use it to look into
your business. Google keeps track of surfing habits. Tivo keeps track of
viewing habits. Microsoft keeps track of your hardware. Where have you
been? Governments tapped into deep ocean phone cables almost as soon as
they could be laid. Now all they have to do is point a dish up and get
all the data they'd like.
And another point, specifically about the NSA program. This is not a new
capability, and has been exercised by our government for a long time,
through several administrations. Congress, regardless of what they say
now, were well informed on it. One of the problems the NSA has is that
it's virtually impossible to monitor phone conversations and internet
traffic going to or coming from overseas without also picking up
domestic traffic as well. Unfortunately for us, when the NSA picks up
domestic traffic that indicates the commission of a crime or conspiracy
to commit one, they must ash can it. Just because they have no brief to
pursue or turn it over to other governmental agencies.
Also, regardless of what you see on TV, the NSA hasn't the capability to
monitor *every* phone conversation or email. They're good, but not quite
that good.
<snip>
> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin
>
Agreed, but the box has been opened, the barn door is ajar, and you're
out of luck. When Einstein figured out E=mc2 and a bunch of scientists
figured out you could make a really big bomb with this stuff, did you
think someone wouldn't actually do it? And *use* the thing?
Man always wanted to fly. It was only a matter of time before some guys
figured out how to do it.
If technology exists to clone people, how long do you think it will be
before someone does it, laws or no laws?
You can whine and cry about the government using the technology (that
other entities are also using), but you're pissing in the wind. If the
technology exists, it will be used, both for good and evil. It so
happens your government is using it. So get a law passed preventing its
use. Of course, that doesn't mean it won't be. But the problem will be
that if it is used, its *benefits* can't be realized. Which is part of
the reason that the warning signs before 9/11, known by one part of the
government, couldn't be shared with another part of the government.
Great law.
Also, another major factor in this whole debate is profiling. They're
not interested in you, and will do what they can to avoid having
anything to do with your traffic, unless you fit the profile. There is
simply too much traffic to actively watch it all. So they have to
concentrate where it will do them some good-- Hamid calling someone in
Syria on a limited use cell phone meant to be hard to trace.
Personally, if the government wants to spy on me having sex, I can tell
them it's just not going to be anywhere near as exciting as it is with
people who get paid thousands to do it professionally. But they're
welcome to anyway.
-- Paul M. Foster
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:07:43 EDT