[ExI] you'll never see this again

[John Clark]

On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 8:17 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:


> >…1) The US spends far FAR *FAR* more on healthcare than any other country
>> …
>
>
>
> *> These costs include facelifts, hair implants, butt lifts, boob jobs,
> liposuction, gender reassignments and so forth.  *
>

So you've given up on the larger murder rate in the US to explain the
ridiculously high medical costs in the US and now you're going to throw
this at the wall and see if that sticks. It doesn't. People in other
countries also have hair implants, butt lifts, boob jobs, liposuction and
gender reassignments.

*> Filter out the cosmetic stuff, come back when you have numbers.*
>

OK. The US spends 3,500 billion dollars on healthcare each year. The US
spends 16 billion dollars on cosmetic surgery each year. A drop in the
bucket, And as I said the US is not the only country that does cosmetic
surgery, the global bill for cosmetic surgery is 50.5 billion dollars. I
await you finding something else to throw at the wall to see if that sticks
in your desperate attempt to avoid the obvious conclusion that our
healthcare system is fundamentally flawed.

*> The obvious way to reduce spending on health care is to stop requiring a
> qualification process for new medications.  Allow anyone to bring any
> medication to market.  That would reduce drug costs to a fraction of what
> they are now. *
>

I actually think that could be a good idea, but it's irrelevant for this
discussion because none of the 37 countries that spend less but live longer
that I'm talking about does anything like that .


> > *Most countries do not have anything analogous to that process in the
> USA.*
>

Most countries are Third World countries, but I'm not talking about them.

>…Who is protecting those poor second class citizens who get 66.7 times
>> fewer citizenship rights?
>
>
> *> Those are neither second class citizens nor minorities.*
>

Then why the hell do you insist on continuing to treat them as if they were?
You can put all the spin on it you want but if you have 66.7 times as much
voting power as I do then I'm a second-class citizen. It's like the
difference between Berkshire Hathaway Class A stock and Class B; Class A
has 500 times more voting power than Class B.

*> You mention racial data in Wyoming.  Why is that relevant please? *
>

You mentioned that the electoral college protects minorities. How is that
logical please?

*> Filter out the cosmetic stuff, come back when you have numbers.*
>

OK. The US spends 3,500 billion dollars on healthcare each year. The US
spends 16 billion dollars on cosmetic surgery each year. A drop in the
bucket. And as I said the US is not the only country that does cosmetic
surgery, the global bill for cosmetic surgery is 50.5 billion dollars.

> >> I don't even know what "minority" means in this context…
>
> *> I do.  There are fewer people in less populated states.  Minority means
> fewer people.  Minorities should be protected.*
>

There are fewer highly populated states than lightly populated states. So
highly populated states are in the minority. Minorities should be
protected. Stop laughing, my argument is no dumber than yours. And as you
have pointed out more than once human beings have the ability to move, and
they find it's far easier to move than to change their sex or their skin
color. I don't quite see why linear distance from your neighbor turns one
into a minority, especially in an age of instant communication. but if it
does and you don't want to be a "minority" anymore then just move.


> *> The fewer people in a minority state have more control over a state
> government in the United States of America.  So, they have more influence.
> Why is that so hard to grasp?*
>

Why is it so hard to grasp that I'm talking about the federal government
not the state government?

>… And besides as you point out, people are able to move, so those who live
>> in less populated areas can always move to more populated areas…
>
>
> *> Why would they want to? *
>

For the same silly reason you said people in highly populated states should
move to lightly populated states if they want to be treated fairly.

> *Wyoming people are smarter than us.*
>

As I said before that statement is provably false. Wyoming went for Trump
in 2016.


> >…Could the secret sauce be that people who live in Wyoming are 66.7 times
>> as likely to be MAGA Hatter gun nuts?  John K Clark
>
>
> *> You were doing so well right up to the end.  With the revelation in the
> last sentence that everything is STILL all about politics,*
>

Of course it's all about politics!  There is absolutely nothing logical
about the electoral college, nothing, the reason we have it is not because
it makes any sort of sense but because compromises needed to be made 200
years ago to get the constitution approved. So I don't believe for 1
Nanosecond that you'd be churning out extremely lame excuses for the
electoral college at anywhere near your current rate if California was as
right wing conservative as Wyoming and Wyoming was as left wing liberal as
California.

John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200705/ec7e0073/attachment.htm>