Disqus - Latest Comments for nperrin

Re: Three health care questions

nperrin — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 14:40:45 -0000

Why is the fact that “every other industrial nation provide universal health care coverage” considered evidence for its desirability?

johnnyvenom is right. It's not "industrialized," it's "civilized." Don't you want to be civilized? Aren't you just embarrassed by how uncivilized we are???

The assumptions that go into the particular claim are just staggering when you think about it.

Re: The Poor but Unusually Chipper and Long-Lived Index

willwilkinson — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:16:57 -0000

This is a great point. There's a lot that's arbitrary about the index, but leaving out rates of reproduction is very arbitrary. It seems that a country should gain points for a sub-replacement rate of reproduction and lose points for a super-replacement rate. However, birthrates tend to drop with economic growth. And NEF wouldn't want to send mixed messages about growth.

Re: The Poor but Unusually Chipper and Long-Lived Index

nperrin — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:02:00 -0000

“[E]veryone is entitled to the same amount of the planet’s natural resources”

I don't necessarily disagree with Christopher Monnier's point above, but also, this needs to take into account human reproduction. If we all get the same number of global hectares, parents are "stealing" global hectares from the pool to give to their children, and that should really be counted as part of their consumption. I mean, we are all entitled to the same amount of space, except that some people will be able to lower the amount of space you're entitled to.

It's especially distorting if children really do make you happy--or even if they only make you say you're happy--that is a big, environmentally-unfriendly consumption good you are giving away for free in this formula.

Re: Canadian Freedom

JoyflC — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:12:31 -0000

I can relate, Nicole. The first few years I lived here, I constantly felt that my rights and freedoms were being violated because it was 3 AM, dammit, and I had money to spend and no one would let me. Why, back home in Michigan, I remember going to a drug store on my way back home in the wee hours one morning. At 3 AM, I bought tampons, chips, soda, a couple record albums, and some brake shoes for my car. Now that's America!

But I was a kid then, in my 20s, newly married. At that time, I *was* what I bought. My consumerism was my self-esteem. Thank goodness I grew up!

But with respect to people doing as they wish, I'd agree with you -- except for one thing. People who work as clerks and cashiers in stores are often the least able to decide whether they work on a Sunday. The owners, the board of directors, the executives, the upper management of the store might choose to stay home on a Sunday to spend quality time. But the people providing you customer service usually have two choices: work or lose your job.

It's not that Canadians aren't hardworking. I think they just used to be less brainwashed by the cult of consumerism than Americans were. When I first came here, Canadians were their families, their friends, their town.

Sadly, I think you'd be much more comfortable up here now. You can shop 'til you drop. Our loss.

Re: Canadian Freedom

nperrin — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 18:10:01 -0000

Couldn't agree more. Every time a store was closed on a Sunday, or a line at a supermarket was 20 people long because only 5 people are allowed to work in the whole store past 7pm, I wanted to scream and start driving south. And don't even try to get anything done at a bank.

Let people spend time with their families of their own free will, and I will consume, of mine.

Re: Canadian Freedom

nperrin — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:40:46 -0000

I think you might be on to something here. I lived in Canada for five years and I would never want to go back, for exactly such reasons of cultural alienation. The conformity, and especially the conformity as progressives, got to be exhausting, frustrating, and frankly boring. But in terms of actual freedom, and absence of social conservatism, it was nice. Except when I got sick. Then it really did suck.

Re: I’m Back

nperrin — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:27:33 -0000

Congratulations, and excited to have you both back!

Re: Cato Book Forum: Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do

nicole — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 12:58:59 -0000

Religious and secular voters differ no more in America than in France, Germany, Sweden, and many other European countries.

Isn't this misleading, since there are far fewer religious voters in France, Germany, and Sweden than there are in the US? Religion itself may not be more divisive in the US than it is in other places, but as a divisive factor it's effects are far greater, no?

Re: New on Free Will: Bruce Caldwell on Hayek

Greg N. — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 23:11:00 -0000

If nothing else, Will - who probably knows about as much about the implications of evolution and human nature on markets as any libertarian around - could correct some of PZ's misconceptions about libertarianism (particularly because Will is a reasonable libertarian with a soft spot for Rawls, and not a flaming radical anarchist who wants to live on the high seas).

I'd love to see PZ's take on the parallels between the spontaneous orders found in nature, and those found in human societies (and what the role of government should be vis-a-vis those orders), as well as his opinion on group selection at the cultural level. Finally, I'd like to see exactly what beef PZ - who represents as well as anyone the leftist atheist - has with libertarianism (beyond what a snarky paragraph or two in a blog post could tell us).

Will and PZ Myers would be the biggest and best BHTV episode of all time. So Will: Get Bob Wright on the horn, or do whatever it is you do to get these great guests, and let's make this happen!

Re: New on Free Will: Bruce Caldwell on Hayek

nperrin — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:36:02 -0000

In fact, I think you are probably right. I think it would be interesting for Will to find out why so much of the atheist/freethinker community (at least, from my vantage point) assumes progressivism as the "rational" or "rationalist" norm. I find this all over the web and don't completely get it. Of course, there are alternative views, e.g., Overcoming Bias, but this could potentially be a good topic.

Re: New on Free Will: Bruce Caldwell on Hayek

nperrin — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:39:19 -0000

I don't know about PZ, though it might be interesting. But I'd say he goes beyond hostile. I read Pharyngula for years but had to quit after a particularly nasty sequence of posts and comments starting with something about Patri Friedman's seasteading project. Made me really depressed in fact about how much Democrats, who I had been sympathetic to, will turn against an anti-statist.

Re: Class War!

Musa — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:03:12 -0000

I'm not sure if they are included in the graph at all, but if they were, they would probably constitute the non-union line on that graph.

Re: Class War!

nperrin — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:02:59 -0000

I'm not sure why that should be the case, since benefit compensation is included in total compensation. Personally, not knowing enough specifics to do anything but speculate, I would guess it is a correction for the recent period where compensation grew faster than productivity. There are a couple cycles where the lines swap in the graph. If compensation was growing too fast a few years back, it may just have slowed while productivity catches up.

Re: Class War!

nicole — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:44:14 -0000

Unless you think CEOs are unionized, maybe you should take a closer look at that graph.