tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post7441494788245787886..comments2024-03-13T14:21:41.243-05:00Comments on The Retirement Project: ImpsTJhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03459069175481821975noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-87894623503166977792017-10-23T11:28:10.656-05:002017-10-23T11:28:10.656-05:00pfrymier, thanks again, I will have to check that ...pfrymier, thanks again, I will have to check that one out. You can count me in as one of those who doesn't get the idea that authority is somehow related to morality, though I'm not sure I buy the idea that it is "just" oppression. Some authority structure is usually required when any group of people try to work together. What that has to do with morality is vague. Sometime people work together to help themselves and others. Sometimes they work together to help themselves without much thought to others. And sometimes they work together with the explicit purpose of doing as much harm to others as they can.TJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03459069175481821975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-78098480329546076412017-10-22T12:54:51.095-05:002017-10-22T12:54:51.095-05:00On the subject of fairness, I was listening to the...On the subject of fairness, I was listening to the program "On Being", which is syndicated on NPR stations, today. The host was interviewing Jonathan Haidt, who is the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership at NYU's Stern School of Business. Much of the discussion centered around what could be done to inject civility into political discourse, which Dr. Haidt is a proponent of. There were a lot of interesting discussion points, but there were two things he said that stuck with me. First this: "People who are liberal and conservative, he says, value two of these in common, compassion and fairness. But conservatives simultaneously juggle three other moral values — of loyalty, authority, and sanctity." <br /><br />And then this: "...in one study that I did with my former graduate student, Jesse Graham, we asked liberals and conservatives to fill out our main surveys, pretending to be the other, and also as themselves, for different people. What we found is that conservatives and moderates were very accurate at filling it out as though they were liberals. But liberals were not accurate filling it out as though they were conservatives, because they just couldn’t get their mind into the idea that authority is somehow related to morality; they think it’s just oppression."<br /><br />If you are interested and have the time, you can read the transcript or listen at:<br />https://onbeing.org/programs/jonathan-haidt-the-psychology-of-self-righteousness-oct2017/<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18017992806652294546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-73408166178214223372017-10-21T13:06:56.704-05:002017-10-21T13:06:56.704-05:00Interesting thoughts pfrymier, thanks. My basic vi...Interesting thoughts pfrymier, thanks. My basic view is that we, as a people, have (or perhaps had) such huge potential. Civil rights, human rights, liberty, peace, compassion, responsible living, the pursuit of knowledge and understanding; these were (or had the potential to be) our national focus. That is mostly lost now, and I see little hope it can be regained.<br /><br /><br />I don't actually think that federal or states have any rights...they exist only to protect, expand, and balance the rights of citizens. The balance is the hardest part. I am an atheist and (for example) regard marriage as a personal choice sanctioned by the legal system. Gay people have every right to make that personal choice and enjoy the sanctioning of the legal system offered to all citizens. But no religious organization should be required to marry gay people if they think that offends their god. (And none that I know of are suggesting that they be so required.) They certainly shouldn't be forced to attend gay weddings. (None that I know of are suggesting that either.) But if they make wedding cakes for a living, should they be required to make a cake for a gay wedding? Kosher shops are not required to sell bacon, but they can't refuse to sell chicken to a Muslim or a Christian. Would we let a Nazi wedding cake maker refuse to service African American citizens? Should we? After all, it wasn't that long ago that we let American Christians refuse service to other American Christians, all in the name of religious freedom. <br /><br />Balance. For me, IF your company's business to provide wedding services, and if you think your god will be horribly offended and likely send you to hell for providing such services to gay people, you should have the right to refuse; along with refusing service to everyone whose beliefs you regard as offensive to your god...Muslims, Jews, Christians, whatever sect or cult you think lives in "sin". Is that fair to gay people? Not at all and I would never patronize such a place even though I am not gay. But "fair" is not always attainable and is never available at the beginning of social change. Progressive social evolution is about moving toward "fair."<br /><br />In any case, I think the system set up by the Constitution had a lot of weak points, places where the system could be (and has been) gamed to the point of failure. Late stage, corrupted, predatory capitalism being the final nail in the coffin. What happens next is anyone't guess.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />TJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03459069175481821975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-2095213442432326492017-10-20T19:23:58.028-05:002017-10-20T19:23:58.028-05:00TJ you are so absolutely correctTJ you are so absolutely correctAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14860881819638371173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-54474394092552237802017-10-20T10:26:13.585-05:002017-10-20T10:26:13.585-05:00(con't).
It may simply be the nature of the b...(con't).<br /><br />It may simply be the nature of the beast. I think all developed cultures become more progressive over time, but it is awfully hard to say. There are certainly short term fluctuations that make it difficult to see a trend in a mere 200 years or so. Anyway, the US is where I live and work and it is better than many places I've been although maybe to my taste, not as progressive as I'd like. It is a big place that struggles with figuring out how to deal with big issues that require national level organization and resources. We often fall back on the rugged individualism that built the early US and forget those exploited in the process. The continual struggle between federal, state, and individual rights is perhaps the tension that defines the US for all time. Perhaps we are asymptotically approaching a local maximum while forever prohibited from finding the global maximum by our nature, if one exists.<br /><br />It is difficult for me to keep my perspective. I have health insurance that is the envy of the free world. I'd probably pay less for a case of good beer than for an ultra-sound. The disparity is mind-boggling. We are certainly a nation of contrasts.<br /><br />But these are just some thoughts. Anyway, certainly glad things turned out for the better in this case. I hope those with the intelligence to solve big problems are brought to bear on the problem of health care. In the most simple sense, it looks trivial: We have the infrastructure and the expertise to solve so many medical problems. It is a matter of bringing them together. On a system that requires a profit, money is always going to get siphoned off to bring the solutions to the problems. If this adds value and solves the most problems, then it works. But the system is only as good as its rules; for every smart person out there burning the midnight oil to be the best radiologist in the world, there are two figuring out how to get the most money out of the process of bringing together the problems and the solutions. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18017992806652294546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-13428878725439770342017-10-20T10:20:10.172-05:002017-10-20T10:20:10.172-05:00Well, I have to agree with your statement that per...Well, I have to agree with your statement that perhaps this is as "good as it gets". The documents that define our basic rights were at once cleverly and frustratingly vague. I don't think we have the system of governance to optimize quality of life above a certain level. The founding principles in the Declaration were unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The country was founded (well, actually the land was mostly stolen, but let's not quibble) by people with a strong sense of self-sufficiency. There are pluses and minuses. I've done well, for the most part. I am nearly perfectly insulated from people I don't like or who make me uncomfortable whenever I like. I have managed to get myself to a a place where there is virtually no one to whom I answer either in my personal or professional life. I am the perfect example of the American Dream, in some ways, free to fail spectacularly or succeed gloriously. At this point, it if virtually impossible for me to fail. I'm insured against nearly every catastrophe, real or imagined. The worst thing that could happen perhaps is that I would die and leave my heirs with a pile of money so large they'd have a hard time spending it all. Partly by virtue of birth and partly because I like to do things other people don't or can't, I've managed to be considerably more toward the later than the former.<br /><br />I believe some countries manage to do a better job at securing a better quality of life for their population, but often the circumstances make it difficult to replicate here. For example, some of the smaller European countries appear to be virtual paradises on first blush. The streets are so clean and the homes and buildings in the entire country so well maintained, it is hard to believe they exist in the same world as, for example, Haiti. However, often the populous is extremely xenophobic and becoming a citizen if not born there is impossible. Immigration is extremely tightly regulated. In the US, by comparison, we have built our entire civilization on looting the rest of the world for the best and brightest. Although perhaps change is in the wind, we have been historically, to many, that shining beacon on the hill with unlimited potential for economic benefit for the educated and/or ambitious. People will leave everything they'd ever known and risk all just to get here. However, our very strength through our diversity to some extent limits the ability to get along and function to some higher goal of quality of life. Where we succeed, on average (with a massive standard deviation), with quantity of life, we struggle with mean quality of life. There is always some group to scapegoat as taking advantage of the system or gold-bricking that politicians can use to their benefit to divide the population and gain power. <br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18017992806652294546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-54449288280611159442017-10-18T21:08:56.488-05:002017-10-18T21:08:56.488-05:00That sad thing Marc, is that it doesn't have t...That sad thing Marc, is that it doesn't have to be this way. Hell, we don't even have to invent some kind of new system, just borrow one from pretty much any of the first world nations who figured out health care years ago. I don't know if their politicians are just slightly less corrupted than ours or if their citizens are (collectively) just a little smarter than us. It isn't even that we are stuck in place, we are actually going backwards when it comes to healthcare. Then again, "backwards" seems to be the general direction the country is taking when it comes to a lot of issues. TJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03459069175481821975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-20245715548897639492017-10-18T19:12:35.065-05:002017-10-18T19:12:35.065-05:00It is good to hear your "Imp" is okay an...It is good to hear your "Imp" is okay and you are right our medical system is a for profit only which makes it a little on the sucky side.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14860881819638371173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6552422419133819877.post-43537930031767759162017-10-15T20:39:13.922-05:002017-10-15T20:39:13.922-05:00Hugs,,from the sisterHugs,,from the sisterAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07870030473254877055noreply@blogger.com