Not RE related - left or right?

Do you really mean euthanasia, or right to help someone terminally ill end their life?

I'm in favor of not prolonging life when life is miserable even if there is no living will, no family around to say what you would have preferred. I'm sick and tired of hearing about 80+ year olds given treatment for stuff that doesn't contribute to their quality of life.

nyc10023,

I agree with most your RIGHT. Can you explain 6).

#5 doesn't work. they will use foreign objects :(.
this is why i advocate for beheadings ;)

little one just woke. this is interesting. will get back to it...

Sitting at a desk, 8:30-3 is not for most teens, especially boys. Historically, teens have worked and worked hard. What is the point of trying to teach to a bunch of unmotivated hormone-filled teens? Have them do something useful that won't derail them from going to college if that's what they want at 22. Let them make some money mending potholes and learning useful skills.

#1-3 are pretty "left", no?

(6) is what is the norm is most other countries which track kids very early - that is why there is such feverish studying in Japan, China, England, etc.

My husband, born overseas, always says that it is only in the US that it is considered a "right" that every kid can go to college.

need to read up on slippery slope. that's the problem with stuff like this. i am no fan of politicans but in the world you're positing, it would suck to be on the wrong side of any issue.

You are in favor of tyranny. It's not a left wing/ right wing divide, more a philosophical bent.

I'm joining your party as soon as you:
1. ditch the castration crap(5) just lock'em up.
2. I know where your going with #8 but, little to invasive for my taste. How about free federal funded abortions for all 3rd children plus if you get in before the third trimester you get a toaster or a waffle iron or a makeover. if the right can't go with the abortions then, they get the babies to take home and raise as their own and they get the toaster or what ever insentive gift we decide, maybe a snuggie with the American flag on it.
If we all work together we can make this country great!

These proposals tend toward neither right nor left, but toward a society that would resemble a horror film.

In particular, where you advocate Government power to mutilate or remove sexual or reproductive organs (points 5 and 8).

If you are even slightly serious about either suggestion you should seek therapy.

Except those countries don't have a good re-entry point if you burned off all those hormones by age 22 and want to go back on an academic route. That would be the difference.

CC: we're all dead in the end anyway.

re: (8) why not just cut off welfare totally at that point - economic reality might work almost as well.

Oh, I forgot, this is New York - can't put the 22 year olds with 4 children out om the street.

"we're all dead in the end anyway?"

so...lets line up all the people who we don't approve of and take them out of their misery?

gee...what does that sound like?

This might help:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html

Pro-castration: increasingly, they're finding that pedophilic tendencies are so genetically driven that I'm not sure what you could do about it. Yes, we could lock them all up, but our society is running out of $ to feed all those convicts.

Falco: if I have to see another pregnant 15yo on the subway feeding her toddler fries, I might be incited to violence.

I am in favor of a system where I can push a button and transmit a mild electric shock to Streeteasy posters whose posts annoy me. Nothng too serious, just enough to stand up their hair and shoot them out of their chair. No permanent damage but a little smoke aftereffect would be a nice touch.

but how about the person who feels the way you do about 15 yo about you? you do see the problem, yes?

CC: I know what you mean, but hey, in my system, you have the opportunity to do wrong before you get whacked. Also, I don't believe in adult sentencing for juveniles.

CC: fair enough. But right now, I'm paying the taxes for those g-dd-mn french fries.

Since nobody reads we can use those old 'book mobiles' and convert them to mobil 'pro-choice' clinics.
We'll get a theme song like the Mr. Softy truck. Needless to say the theme music will have to be different. They can drive through neighborhoods and pregnant women can run from their home to the street and wave down the truck like kid's waveing a quarter at the ice cream truck in the summer. It's a kinda shovel (speculum) ready idea don't you think? Nothing manditory, want to decrease the burden on the enviornment? ZERO POPULATION GROWTH and racial deconstruction(everybody marries someone of a different race).

Oh, and people who bring their babies/toddlers out to 10pm movie showings.

I find it puzzling that we get so pissed off about a 15 yr old mom and her kid receiving a small amount of federal money so that they can have a roof over their heads, food and clothes. What a scam!

But yet it's totally OK for an AIG executive to award himself many, many, many times as much federal money for their bonuses? Should they be sterilized too?

Why not! How about everyone who cheats on their taxes, or doesn't work very hard at their job, or drives an SUV, or litters, or picks their nose should be castrated, or at least have a finger amputated.

hey...i think what you describes sucks as well. and you're not the only one paying for it. but, the answer is much more complex and i believe requires a complete change in attitude across the board. why can't a soda tax pass? why was bloomberg pilloried for fighting to show calorie counts? advocating that the US become more like japan or germany is the ultimate irony. what a damn shame.

I can't see many circumstance in our society (other than old-school Mennonites) under which a 15yo should procreate. One mistake, fine. Not two. That Joseph dude at AIG should be punished.

I dislike cheaters on taxes. And people who use their hands at the bread bin disgust me (and are told off).

I like a soda tax, and I find the calorie count very useful.

I agree, most Wall Streeters should be sterilized, preferably their parents too, retroactively.

modern,
you probably already know this but what you are talking about is S&M. No judgements........
they have groups for folks who have similar likes to you as well as professionals who specialize in just such behaviors. Why have fantacies when you can actualize your dreams, just a few short clicks of the mouse away. Then again there is always years of couch time to figure out what mommy did to little modern.
Good luck with all that.

falco, zero population growth might be lovely for the environment, but it sure does kill an economy.

nyc10023: You're brave voicing such contrarian opinions on this board!

pjc: You present a fallacious argument. Two wrongs don't make a right. I can think that it's wrong to bail out AIG execs, yet also think it wrong to enable generations of dependents with our welfare policies. You should read Freakonomics, and get some sense of how economic incentives drive behavior.

Falcogold,

I wasn't aware that there were web sites where I can deliver electric shocks to persons such as yourself. Where are they and how do I sign up? This could be an interesting business model, what do they charge per month?

ps: maybe some people need to be on the couch to find a sense of humor...

You know, there are so many unemployed people these days - this could be a real money-making idea. Give people shocks as a form of recreation. I love it. Want stress relief? Go into a booth and inflict someone pain!

Are you serious? There are elements of libertarian. Then some of it seems like your trying to get a rise out of people. Selling organs and sterilizing people is absurd. Trade school makes sense. Anti capital punishment makes sense (capital punishment is low evolved)...but you replace it with something low evolved.

I think libertarian is the best label. Its neither right nor left. Its left but without the conscience. Its right in terms of being authoritarian. Its authoritarian with regard to punishment and control...yet liberal in terms of what you should be able to do with your body. Its fascist, but without a clear purpose.

Rhino, sounds like a perfect description of Riversider!

None of these are absurd ideas. Some of them (in particular, organ sale over donation) have been espoused by very rational people who argue better than I.

Anti-capital because death is final and the justice system is under-funded and unfair. Castration is less final and also, you would need at least 3 strikes before you get hit with that. Not to mention that they're coming up with ways to detect arousal patterns in pedophiles, so that's another check.

Rhino: selling organs, it's already happening. Selling wombs, ditto. There is a huge and growing market, which is unregulated and detrimental to both seller & buyer. This needs to be regulated - just banning it ain't going to work. If you needed a kidney tomorrow, would you really wait patiently (if all your family struck out as donors)? I would get myself overseas and investigate the situation ASAP.

OnTheMove - I agree that it sucks if the "welfare state" incentivizes young women to have kids, and then they get rewarded with a small federal stipend. But I don't think it's the big moral issue of our time.

In my opinion, the true crime here is the "corporate welfare state", which incentivizes people to lose billions of taxpayer money, and get rewarded with yachts, vacation homes, private jets, and everything else their little hearts desire.

Both forms of "welfare" are unfortunate scenarios, but at least social welfare has a humanitarian element.

I just don't understand why people talk so tough about these bad moms (and by extension, their bad kids). Why we should get all indignant and kick them to the street, while Goldman Sachs steals truckloads of money, the wealthiest 1% control everything, give themsleves tax breaks, start wars to send poor kids to die. Put these things into perspective before we even joke about sterilizing poor women.

I am all in favor of castrating Goldman Sachs partners, as a measure to improve the gene pool. But this is just not true.

" the wealthiest 1% control everything, give themsleves tax breaks"

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24944.html

"Tax Burden of Top 1% Now Exceeds That of Bottom 95%

by Scott A. Hodge

Newly released data from the IRS clearly debunks the conventional Beltway rhetoric that the "rich" are not paying their fair share of taxes.

Indeed, the IRS data shows that in 2007—the most recent data available—the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.

Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.

To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent is comprised of just 1.4 million taxpayers and they pay a larger share of the income tax burden now than the bottom 134 million taxpayers combined.

Some in Washington say the tax system is still not progressive enough. However, the recent IRS data bolsters the findings of an OECD study released last year showing that the U.S.—not France or Sweden—has the most progressive income tax system among OECD nations. We rely more heavily on the top 10 percent of taxpayers than does any nation and our poor people have the lowest tax burden of those in any nation."

I lean unicorn, pink preferably.

Coz on a day to day basis I don't run into GS partners on the street, on public transportation.

Modern: That article is simply bullshit.

Modern: Those are very clever statistics. To the extent that the top 1% pay a bigger share of taxes than in "modern history" is precisely because they are now making so much money that it would make the old robber barons blush. Those at the top have become absurdly wealthy compared to the rest of us, but have no shame in trying to grab even more. And, apparently, they have their cheerleaders.

Taxes: The problem with the tax system is that it is unnecessarily complicated and has many (policy-related and lobbying-driven) loopholes. The truly rich (not the $250k "rich") can hire lawyers and accountants to take advantage of the system and end up paying very little (as a percentage) of their net income. The poor end up paying nothing. The schmucks like me (honest, hardworking, single, and childless renters) with an above-average income subject to AMT yet light years away from being in a position to take advantage of the complexities and loopholes in the system end up paying for it all. Am I resentful? Hell yes. Can we have a flat rate please, and stop the policies (even if well intended) and the special interest loopholes that have collapsed our economy?

nyc10023: You omitted your opinions on drugs and prostitution. Legalize both (within reason): safer environment for those involved and tax revenues for the rest.

OnTheM: ah, I guess it was obvious where I was heading with drugs & prostitution. Yep, legalize both (consenting adults).

I would be happy paying a 50% flat tax.

if someone were willing to pay me enough to be in the top 1% income bracket, i would be more than happy to take on my oh-so-high tax burden.

Legalize drugs....you immediately take the profit and crime out of the equation.

Legalize prostitution...you get rid of pimps and help women who choose this profession stay safe and healthy.

They always blame the balls....
Poor maligned orbs, how first they treat you like two unwanted wrinkled shr pei orphans and when the shit hits the fan they blame you and all of a sudden they want to sacrifice you to satisfy the blood lust of early morning car commuters.
Isn't that the reason we have that idiotic death penilty in New York?
it's not the bullits, it's not the guns, it's the idiot with his finger on the trigger.
The one thing we have in the state of New York is space. We can build lots more prisons and create a tiny bump in the upstate economy. we could repeal the Rockefeller drug laws and release all those incarcerated and have plenty of room for the newbies. everyone put down the clippers and the leathel injection needle. If the definition of your social contract is there is NEVER a reason to take a human life then the state can hold it's citizens to the same standard it holds itself.

I am pretty sympathetic to much of what you believe 10023, but as suggested by some of the posts above, last year's debacle makes it pretty clear that most of the government's largesse goes to the guys on Gin Lane not the annoying baby-toting, french fry smacking young gals on the IRT. I would add, what a drag to pay the AMT.

The big problem is not that tax rates are too low, but that billionaires are not paying their fair share of taxes, and the problem is not limited to one political party:

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/luskin200407140830.asp

I believe Warren Buffet's secretary pays more taxes than he does.

The argument in favor of a VAT-type tax is you can tax big spenders who hide their income but have jets, houses, etc.

"Sitting at a desk, 8:30-3 is not for most teens, especially boys. Historically, teens have worked and worked hard. What is the point of trying to teach to a bunch of unmotivated hormone-filled teens? "

Actually, you've hit on the crux of what's wrong with our education system.

The latest sleep research shows us the natural biorhythms of teenagers -- particularly in high school -- has their bodies needing approximately TEN hours of sleep each night, from approximately 11:00 PM - 9:00 AM. 9:00 AM is when they should be waking up, not starting their second class. Whereas the younger kids -- also needing the same amount of sleep, if not an hour or two more, are more naturally inclined to wake up at 6:00 or 7:00 in the morning (after having gone to bed around 8:00 PM the night before -- which is another problem for American school children, whose parents don't enforce these necessary earlier bedtimes.).

School districts should concentrate on getting the younger kids into the schools first, for an optimal classroom start time of about 8:00 AM. HIgh school kids, however, shouldn't be expected to start class much before 11:00 AM -- but of course, should be staying in class until 5:00 PM.

brilliant.

nyc10023, oh kindred spirit. If you have to ask you are obviously neither right nor left. good for you. you actually consider issue by issue! god bless ya! i scored libertarian on that quiz, bordering on centrist. great little quiz.

1) agree
2) absolutely
3) indeed
4) doesn't this conflict w/ #1? not everyone can afford organs.
5) pro-capital punishment and think sex offenders should have MUCH harsher sentencing. hubby is anti for reasons you outlined (i.e. innocents get killed)
6) absolutely
7) do you mean military service. i disagree w/ this one
8) i'm all for sterilizing all sorts of people, including (watch everyone fall off their seats) MR individuals who live independently.

also w/ you on pro-prostitution, drugs, i presume you would toss gay marriage in there as well.

where have you read that pedophilia is largely genetic. haven't heard that.

i have mixed feelings about the welfare system, but i was a food stamp baby. there are honest people who benefit from the service. it's a tough one.

"Historically, teens have worked and worked hard. What is the point of trying to teach to a bunch of unmotivated hormone-filled teens? "

Prehaps a devise attached to the wrist or forearm of these young men that generated energy when vigoriously shaken could break out dependency on energy from abroad.
the solution: 2 ball with one stone.
I thank you.

"These proposals tend toward neither right nor left, but toward a society that would resemble a horror film. In particular, where you advocate Government power to mutilate or remove sexual or reproductive organs (points 5 and 8). If you are even slightly serious about either suggestion you should seek therapy."
pjc - see, people are just too soft or too concerned about being pc. it's far too easy to have children. i'm not so sure it should be an equal right for everyone, but it will always be....

and if castration actually worked, i'm all for it :)

Thing is, if you have kidney failure (common due to hypertension), it's a one-time fix and whether you're on a universal HC system or not, you're going to fly to India & get a new kidney if you can. Canadians do it, Brits do it, Europeans do it, rich Asians do it. Impossible to end the organ trade so get it organized already.

Absolutely, pro-gay marriage. I'm not against welfare, food stamps. But if you've been on welfare/food stamps for years, you don't get to choose to have more children.

I'm also slightly against anti-polygamy/anti-polyandry legislation. I've already gone down that slippery slope.

The other disturbing thing about pedophilia I've read is the very large proportion of men who are turned on (measured by brainwaves) by child porn. So it would be interesting to study whether or not the proliferation and
accessibility of child porn on the Internet, as well as website for soliciting minors has caused an increase in
incidents.

I don't disagree with capital punishment in principle, just don't see how it's been implemented fairly at all.

I'm also for giving 18yos a free summer-long railpass on Amtrak to see their country.

I'm liberal according to the quiz.

Abso-fu$king-lutely the internet has caused an increase in incidents. there are certain aspects of internet accessibility that are just poison!

With you on marry whoever and how many you want. who cares!

Not everyone can fly to india (or anywhere) for a new kidney. But i'm all for donations/lists and separately, buy and sell at your own will.

it really pains me to write this, but matt is entirely correct about the circadian rhythms of the teen. entirely at odds with the school schedule.

i'm liberal, with a capital L, but there are many areas where i diverge with the party line.

i did find it very interesting (and no criticism here, really) that uwsmom found empathy for people who were experiencing something similar to her prior experience.

i have problems with 5 and 8. for many reasons, including the fact that our conviction history is so poor. and from a simplistic selfish perspective, many of those unwanted children will wind up serving our burgers at mcdonalds and running mail in the back office of law firms. they may not stay for long, but nobody else wants those jobs. read random family by leblanc.

ar - don't quite understand that. i'm pro many things that don't hit home personally.

I would also like to implement a mandatory adoption policy for families who fit the right criteria. well, not really, but i would like to see more "healthy" families adopting children instead of having 3, 4, 5 + kids of their own. I'm working on a hard sell with hubby right now about this one!

Guilty as charged. Bringing up children is hard enough, at least with bio kids I tolerate more because I know where they get their worst bits from.

uwsmom, i'm not being critical in the slightest. just pointing out that having certain life experiences may make some more empathetic regarding those specific issues. oddly, in some cases it does exactly the opposite, with children rejecting any and all things related to struggle. i can't help it, the degree was in cognitive and developmental psych and i still follow the field (yes, i have time for more than just nyc real estate).

and i think your adoption program idea is delightful.

How about women who spend tens of thousands of dollars turning their bodies into science projects just in order to conceive?

jealous?

AR: so what kinds of experiences tend to make one feel empathy or the opposite?

it depends on the person. entirely. and we don't know why adversity of certain sorts creates bitterness in some and empathy in others. sadly for psychologists who would like to believe otherwise it often seems to be an issue of hardwiring. genetics, to use a sometimes dirty word among psychologists.

but it is undeniably true that some people who undergo hardship come out of it feeling sympathy for those similarly inclined, and others feel disdain, thinking that if they were able to overcome obstacles others should as well, with little sympathy for those who can't. and even more interesting are those who are still dysfunctional within the standardized definition of the word who disdain others who are either dysfunctional or have achieved some level of functionality.

as to the types of experiences, they run the gamut, from poverty, to illness, to sexual abuse, to substance abuse in the family, to psychological belittling by family members which can occur in many dynamics.

ar - agree completely.

Matt - our level of knowledge and capability borders on the bizarre, and we're just pushing forward on so many frontiers. it's fabulous and frightening all at the same time.

i forgot one simple thing. and maybe this was 10023's point. i think that with some non-alarmist but reasonable discussion and examples we can help our children become more sympathetic, if not empathetic. to gain true perspective you'd have to live that life, and hopefully none of us want stark and nasty and harsh realities for our children at a young age. but some awareness is probably a great thing.

Matt - i really do find it sad that so many people insist on having their own biological children at such an expense (or decide to not have any when they can't conceive) when there are so many that need to be adopted. people have such an aversion to it. personally, i don't get it, but everyone is different.

I think empathy is largely hard-wired.

i think you are correct. and i think it is so sad that people feel so strongly about their "legacy" that they can't adopt. not that having a child is a bad goal. but this thought that your biological spawn will be "superior."

we are in this battle right now, on a different level, telling our daughter weekly that it really doesn't mean shit if she goes to an ivy league school. really. we are drowning our children in stupid expectations, which now seem rather meaningless to those kids who have worked their asses off for just about nothing.

10023, for the gened option, i'd think through 9th or 10th grade. too many kids who are capable would opt out during those hormonal teen years just because they could. although i do like your re-entry model.

i think we've frightened everyone else away ;)

funny, very. no, it's getting late. somebody may or may not pick it up tomorrow. or later tonight.

it did seem to be a vibrant conversation until i entered. sorry if i was a psych killjoy.

Try working summers picking up garbage at Orchard Beach in the Bronx when Lindsay was Mayor. Gives you a hell of an incentive to educate yourself and get the f$%# out of that life.

And I also was in charge of writing up reports when we got "floaters". If you don't know what they are, you don't want to know. The images still are vivid many years later.

And Pelham Bay Park was right off the Bronx River, so we got a lot of dumpings. Thankfully I never unrolled that rug when I saw a hand sticking out if it.

i know what floaters are.

and i worked picking berries during the summers to pay for my clothes. at one point in time i was told by the parents that i would need to be the primary income earner during a prolonged strike. i gave piano lessons. at 14.

Some of the smartest and motivated people I met (both scientist, diff. fields) have taken a few years off between high school & college to 1) be in a band and 2)competitive cycling. Both were in more forgiving "re-entry" friendly systems (Can/Aus) and while "old" by the time they finished college, they definitely had a much keener sense of why they were there.

AR: trouble is they generally haven't learned much by 8th grade these days.

so...you don't want to cut off their nuts?

10023, i agree, entirely. which is why you can't change the system, at least now, to cut them off.

Nope, not at all. I enjoy the company of guys. I grew up with brothers, was always a science/math dork, went into male-dominated fields. Puberty can hit teen males hard - there are a significant fraction (if not majority) of them who just don't do well in a desk-bound academic setting that has no real-life relevance to them (while a teen). Get them into trades, running small businesses, whatever. Provide numerous re-entry points into college/high school. I think sometimes that our society is afraid of dealing with teenage males and like to pretend to deal with them by caging them in schools.

"I think sometimes that our society is afraid of dealing with teenage males and like to pretend to deal with them by caging them in schools."
I totally agree with this.Castration and sterilization are notions that horrify me. And national service should be optional. There are gifted kids that are better off creating and producing by that age.

10023, long-term, interesting idea. but you do realize the short-term problems? and your real naivete is in terms of the parents. those who should be demoted have the funds to keep them afloat.

Like I said, people don't want to deal. Just shove 'em off to school.

trades are terribly underemphasized. quite simply, not everyone is academically inclined. It boggles my mind to see NYC parents raising 3 y.o.'s w/ an ivy education in mind (and working backwards from that goal). The poor kids.
i can remember in high school walking by the "drafting" class (i think that's what it was) and being so jealous of the "guys" who got to take it. these guys weren't in any of my classes ;).

some people don't want to deal. many don't want to deal. some claim they want to deal.

some do deal.

I did poorly in drafting (college) - would love to take it again. I have great spatial skills, just not neat when it comes to drawing things.

actually, cc, i'm horrified to reread this thread. my cut them off had nothing to do with male appendages.

i don't believe in the death penalty, and that quite frankly has to do not only with inclination but also having a spouse who has proven many cases to be totally ungrounded in any sort of fact.

and i don't espouse castration.

I assume that to be logically consistent you define "welfare" (ie , those to be sterilized) as anyone receiving government subsidies....such as anyone receiving subsidized health insurance (or medicaid)?...how about farm subsidies ?...

i'm not one for having arguments about abortion, but isn't it inconsistent to believe abortion is murder and also support it? isn't the issue whether or not you believe it's murder? or are you only pro-choice under certain circumstances that may qualify as murder in self defense?

I believe that it's too hard to define when life starts. So that's why I think it's "murder" - unfortunately, the fetus can't survive outside the mother's body and she has rights to do as she wishes to her body.

If one can remove an fetus at whatever stage of development from the womb and keep it in suspended animation (cheaply) for an indefinite period of time, then the whole abortion question would be moot.

Jim: that's not how I would define welfare (nice try).

thedeuce - for many, the issue is about the choice, regardless of how/when you define life/murder.

so, the interesting question for this thread, 10023, is how do you see yourself politically? have you always considered yourself a liberal? moderate? anarchist?

the choice to "murder" is not legalized in any kind of moral society. that's why i don't think you can define it as murder but also legalize it.

thedeuce - legal vs philosophical positions. many would argue that murder is warranted/morally permissible/ok depending on the circumstance, regardless of legality. not everyone buys into Kant's categorical imperative.

"My husband, born overseas, always says that it is only in the US that it is considered a "right" that every kid can go to college."

Which is what completely screwed up much of the college system. The CUNYs used to be absolute gems, but open admissions let everybody in, but made it nearly worthless. HALF of income CUNY freshman need remedial math or english.

The US, and particularly places like NYC, are so focused on "access" (mainly because moron politicians want the credit for 'levelling") that they miss that all they're doing is making it so NOONE has it.

ACORN made a whole big stink about Stuyvesant HS and that it discriminated... so they wanted to get rid of the test.

So, you'd be left with another regular failing NYC high school!