<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for jfcote87</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/jfcote87/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/jfcote87/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:13:05 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Regrettable Prudence</title><link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/07/07/regrettable-prudence/#comment-829857</link><description>&lt;p&gt;More than just mistaken costs and benefits, its very easy to create unreal alternatives.  I would have loved to travel to Europe and have a fling with S____ over my sophomore winter break.  Neither were real alternatives, but the regrets remain.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jfcote87</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:13:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Shrinking</title><link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/30/shrinking/#comment-784520</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Youngstown, OH is trying to do the same thing. &lt;a href="http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1907" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1907"&gt;http://www.metropolismag.co...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Part of the town's justification is that shrinking the city also reduces the cost of providing public services (road maintenance, garbage, sewage, police and fire protection of abandoned buildings, etc.).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I can see a scenario where the municipality could offer the property owner a "choice" of either a buyout or higher fees/taxes.  &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jfcote87</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:57:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Douthat-Carter Continuum</title><link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/19/the-douthat-carter-continuum/#comment-714496</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm a little surprised that Haidt's purity/disgust moral axis has not been discussed here.  On a reciprocity axis, Will's claim that "One’s just wrong, one’s just not" is correct.  However, if infidelity is viewed as a purity (or pollution) issue within a relationship then the Ross' makes some sense.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jfcote87</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:58:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: This Week on Free Will: Jonathan Haidt</title><link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/06/08/this-week-on-free-will-jonathan-haidt/#comment-621482</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I’m a little skeptical of some of the ingroup claims about liberals and libertarians. Good college educated liberals can be very accepting of a bonobo like culture but may blanche at a purity father-daughter dance held by religious conservatives. I’m curious how well Haidt’s work takes into account the liberal problem of tolerating everyone except the intolerant. It’s hard not to see the “ingroup” (perhaps “outgroup” is a better word) processing in Will’s gleeful description of liberal democracy destroying the radical islam. (I’m gleeful too).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Great couple of podcasts, and I hope that you can keep mining the last questions regarding liberal culture.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jfcote87</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:35:56 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>