Dead Peasants Insurance: a clarification

Originally posted by Darth Jello
I see this whole thing as one again going back to that FDR speech at Madison Square Garden (which at this time, every network should re-air, even if it is audio only, during prime time) where he likened organized money to organized mob (because that's exactly what it is). It think abuses like this should be legislated away but I also think that we do need trust busting instead of bailouts and a temporary law enforcement agency with extraordinary rights, a new Elliot Ness, to deal with this and other issues.

That seems to be unrelated.

We could discuss the merits of that though, but what does that have to do with the topic at hand?

Originally posted by inimalist
you run your own calculations, which you trust more than std deviations?

No, that's not what I said at all.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, that's not what I said at all.

it better not be...

😠

It did go a bit off topic but what I was saying was that the entire concept was a symptom of the rule by organized money Roosevelt both observed and warned us about. It was the same speech wherein he rightfully equated what we today use the code word "small government" with lazy, careless "do nothing" government. Basically what we have right now.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
It did go a bit off topic but what I was saying was that the entire concept was a symptom of the rule by organized money Roosevelt both observed and warned us about. It was the same speech wherein he rightfully equated what we today use the code word "small government" with lazy, careless "do nothing" government. Basically what we have right now.

That's a misinterpretation of the term small government though. The government you have in the US, is, in fact, huge. And with that hugeness it is somewhat corrupt and corporate friendly.

Small as in not having a social safety net and not doing shit for a majority of its constituents. Btw, are you aware that in Russian, the word "Bahrrdahk" means disorganized mess?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Small as in not having a social safety net and not doing shit for a majority of its constituents. Btw, are you aware that in Russian, the word "Bahrrdahk" means disorganized mess?

I wasn't aware of that, that's pretty funny though. And I find out after only using this username for like 6 years.

On topic though, I agree that the money that is spent (and that's a rather huge amount) is mostly going to the wrong channels.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Don't you generally have to rely on some data though to "run your own numbers"? I mean they could be flawed just as well.

The real issue I have with statistics is when it goes from onjective facts (i.e. numbers, which admittedly may be wrong, but at least are based on something evident) to something subjective. i.e. the statistic on health care King Kandy posted a while ago where one of the foundations was the "fairness" of the system, which is, imo, is subjective and might change the outcome drastically if redefined.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
It did go a bit off topic but what I was saying was that the entire concept was a symptom of the rule by organized money Roosevelt both observed and warned us about. It was the same speech wherein he rightfully equated what we today use the code word "small government" with lazy, careless "do nothing" government. Basically what we have right now.

Originally posted by King Kandy
You definition may not agree with theirs, but the WHO actually used a quantifiable definition of fairness that could be statistically calculated.

That's not contrary to what I was saying though.