[ExI] > Taiwan is standing strong

Mon Mar 16 21:51:43 UTC 2020

>…The only way in which Trump can even remotely be said to be directly responsible for the government's response to covid is that he cut the CDC budget…This was not a uniquely Trumpian mistake… Darin

Caution Darin, with such a balanced post, you are likely to be accused of being part of a Fascist plot to slay thousands, possibly millions.

The assumption is that a CDC funded with more money could have done better.  That isn’t clear to me at all, and is based on a number of speculative assumptions.  I keep hearing we didn’t have enough test kits and so forth, but what if… there had been enough test kits.  We test everyone in the USA.  We isolate those who test positive.

Then a few days later cases begin to appear again, so we spend another few hundred billion, repeat.  Then, many of those already tested think they are immune, they catch it, spread it, now a third round of testing for a few hundred billion more dollars.  Repeat until failure is obvious to all.

Test kits were not the answer and might have made the problem worse, after a crushing expense.  Government run medical systems were not the answer (Europe has those, they have been hit harder than the USA.)  More kits were not the answer.  Social isolation is probably the right answer, and the USA was good on that.

I confess I get my news from Reason.com so there are those who would argue I have a warped perspective.  Shrugs.  I don’t think more government is the answer to this kind of thing.  I think more caution and social isolation is the right answer.  

If we assume government action is the solution to a pandemic, the most competent leader is North Korea’s Kim Jung Un, plus a handful of banana republic dictators in central Africa.

We live in unique times.  We can get real information now, without having to have it filtered through the government with its agenda, through news agencies with their own agenda.  We have a number of reliable sources telling us to do something that makes a lot of sense: avoid human contact until this thing blows over.  It really isn’t that hard to figure out.  Sit quietly a minute and think your way out of a situation well-suited for thinking.  And fer cryin out loud, stop with the damn TP, sheesh.

spike

From: extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> On Behalf Of Darin Sunley via extropy-chat
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 2:26 PM
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Cc: Darin Sunley <dsunley at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] > Taiwan is standing strong

In all likelihood, given the same realities on the ground, any hypothetical Republican President [and many hypothetical Democrat Presidents] would have done the same. There is no meaningful sense in which the election result can be said to have contributed to the current health crisis.

Doing so is not, in normal times, an act of particular political or practical significance. No one sounded meaningful alarm bells while it was happening, and it's entirely possible Trump didn't even think about it for any longer than it took to assess the general capability of the civil servant who made the recommendation, if even that. 

He does need to stop shooting his mouth off at press conferences, though. I understand what he's trying to do - reassure a worried nation with confidence and projected power. The problem is that's the wrong emotional posture. That works for military and geopolitical threats, but this is more of a case for calm measured leadership. And, to put it mildly, reassuring a worried nation with calm, measured leadership is *not* Trump's strong suit. At his best he projects power and confidence, and does so very effectively, but *not* precision, measure, or self-control. He should leave that to Pence, who is noticeably better at it.

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 1:43 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> > wrote:

From: extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> > On Behalf Of John Clark via extropy-chat
Subject: Re: [ExI] > Taiwan is standing strong

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:48 AM spike jones via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> > wrote:

John do you see any significant difference between the two mainstream parties

>…GOOD GOD YES! Except that the Republicans aren't mainstream anymore, nowadays they're America's Fascist Party…

Again with the deities.  Putting a different name on them doesn’t change their spending habits.  Apparently we have two fascist parties now, for they are both spending money like the allied troops are approaching from all directions.

>> I don’t accept your notion that borrowing can continue forever either. 

>…Why not?

Because it leads to the obvious next step: if we can borrow forever, why do we pay taxes at all?  Just borrow it all.  Better yet, borrow more than that, buy up things of lasting value, pay back never.

>…It's worked fine for nearly 200 years because improved technology lead to increasing productivity…

Does the scheme fail when technology fails to keep increasing productivity?  What if the markets for all that productivity fails?

>…which means the dollar I borrow today can be paid back tomorrow with a dollar that is easier for me to obtain…

For YOU to obtain?  John didn’t you tell us you retired recently?  You do not need to obtain anything.  The next generation, which is smaller and earns less than you do must obtain those dollars to pay the debt we ran up before we retired.

>…Because the Democrats made a mistake and didn't take computer security as seriously as they should have…

So they were the ones who slew thousands?  Or is it up to millions?

>…but if I foolishly forget to lock my front door that doesn't mean it's OK for you to come in and steal everything I have…

Previously you told us it was all just office gossip.  But before that it somehow got whats-his-name elected which has slain thousands and is heading for the millions.  So office gossip was stolen, which no one apparently ever read (did you?  Neither did I) and somehow this influenced an election?

Methinks there are some steps missing in your proof.

>…What are you talking about, when Russia hacked the Democrats…

How do we know the Russians did this?  The “evidence” cited by our FBI was Russian comments inserted here and there.  One of the IT team was Ukrainian and is fluent in Russian.  So we had a few Russian comments in a pile of office gossip which no one ever read, when the party refused to give the server to the FBI.  The FBI got it after the fact from CloudStrike, an IT company headed by a Ukrainian who hates Russia with a passion seldom seen.

So I am back to: How do we know the Russians did this?

>…Putin got something of incredible value, his boy in the White House…

How do we know office gossip had anything to do with either boy?  Are we not overlooking the perfectly obvious please?

>…Assange's actions will result in the death of thousands and perhaps millions of people and I stand by every word of that statement…

> Have you any evidence of that notion?

>…On February 26 Trump said there were 15 cases of COVID-19 …

{…Cutting a full paragraph having to do with covid, nothing to do with Julian Assange.}

>…Did Julian Assange have half a brain?

Do we have a trace of evidence Assange had any role in spreading covid?  Do explain that please, starting with he published some office gossip, then fill in some steps between that and covid slays thousands.

>>…Assange … must have known nobody would perform more incompetently in a crises than Donald Trump…

> Evidence please?  How would he know that?

>…Oh I don't know,... having less inflation adjusted money now then he had decades ago when he was given money by his daddy, owning a casino and failing to make money off of it, and 6 bankruptcies might have given him a clue, or just listening to the man talk for 5 minutes…

Assange’s father has casinos?

John I am not asking about casinos, I am wanting to know how you get from Julian Assange publishing office gossip to a virus slaying thousands.  This is as dramatic a leap as Fermat writing that he had discovered a marvelous proof but it was too large to fit in the margin.

Are we not overlooking the perfectly obvious please?

>…So... do you really think publishers are in the habit of publishing anything and everything anybody sets before them? 

Online publishing is free.  The content is free.  The content was political.  Of course Assange will publish everything he can get his paws on.  That’s what he does.

>>…And although it received far less publicity the fact is the Republican National Committee was also hacked by Vladimir Putin's goons…

> Evidence? 

Russia Hacked 'Older' Republican Emails, FBI Director Says <https://www.wired.com/2017/01/russia-hacked-older-republican-emails-fbi-director-says/>  

Republicans also hacked by Russia <https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/comey-republicans-hacked-russia/index.html> 

Did the Russians give it to Assange?  How do we know?

>…I see nothing contradictory in it and this certainly wouldn't be the first time careers and lives have been ruined by gossip …     

 > Trivial office gossip killed thousand or millions now?  Do break down this line of reasoning step by step please,

Step#1)Trivial office gossip provided by Julian Assange…

Provided BY Julian Assange?  Did you mean TO Julian Assange?

>… 53,650 voters in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan that Donald J Trump was more moral than Hillary Clinton…

I didn’t read any of the office gossip, I have no reason to think it had anything to do with any particular politician’s moral standings.  John the material is public.  Before you go past that step, do quote us something that would indicate the office gossip was about anyone’s moral standings.  Failing that, work that step that 53,650 voters were influenced by office gossip about a particular politician’s moral standings.  I just don’t see it.

>…Step#2) Trump won as a result… John K Clark

OK we need a loooot more detail here.

We need some indication that a far bigger factor was not the material found on Carlos Danger’s laptop computer.

>…Step #3)…

Little point in going past here.  I am still wondering how office gossip (I have never met anyone who claims to have read it) somehow influenced all those voters in those three particular states to vote a certain way.

I can’t think of how these office workers would have had any particular knowledge of any particular candidate’s morals.  If they did, why didn’t any of that material ever make it into the mainstream press?  Juicy gossip sells like hotcakes on the internet.  I don’t recall any of that leaked email ever being quoted.  Do you?  I would suppose it is still around somewhere.  

In step 2, you theorize that office gossip that no one actually read or even quoted, overturned an election, while overlooking the obvious: the voters didn’t like the candidate and most voters did not vote for her.

spike

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> 
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200316/f7013db3/attachment-0001.htm>