|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
That's one of the areas that needs serious reform: where fines and taxes go to. This is a good example, why on earth would the money from traffic tickets go to the police to hand out the citations? Shouldn't it go to the state DOT? Same with criminal forfeiture. It just creates perverse incentives for police.
Another example is in education. In most states (if not all?) that I know of, public schools are financed by property taxes at a local level, meaning regions with higher property values get better schools/better equipment/higher teacher:student ratios, etc. Which is, of course, the reverse of what it should be where the poorer children need more individual attention. Even if you don't think that progressive policy is right, I can't even fathom the argument that justifies anything other than a flat $/student across an entire state.
I apologize if that derails it, but I see similarities in those policies.
I had to reread this several times because my brain kept parsing it as "labor alligators". Which I think is way cooler.
Because it is relevant, and because it is local (to me anyway) I figured I'd post this piecethat has been circulating my social media.
Granted, this story is one man's side and doesn't cite sources a whole lot (he's a layperson father of a murdered son) but I think it highlights the realities of the situation.
I tend to think that, now that Fergusen is getting national attention and scrutiny, that things might actually get done. The problem is that this sort of stuff happens every day and not every incident gets the light shone on it that it deserves.
But you don't just have to believe, you have to believe and also rigorously follow a 2000+ year old moral code or you will be tortured for eternity.
No, you were pitching a fit because you continued to willingly misinterpret what I said. Something no one else seems to have had a problem understanding.
I never said Arab Israelis were disenfranchised, I said half the population of Israel, of which I am counting the population of Palestine. Or at least the territory of palestine entirely surrounded by Israel.
Feel free to continue to represent my rather clear statement though if it makes you feel superior. Seems to be your only motivation for being on these boards anyway.
Well, voting is a legal matter. If you aren't legally part of a country, why should you vote in it?
Well, when you live in an area under military control by a power that won't recognize your state's sovereignty, and you commute to Israel every day for work for your entire life, yes you should be able to vote.
By your logic, all the US would have to do is declare minority neighborhoods in the US to be part of a different country to disenfranchise entire swaths of our country. No dice.
There's NO WAY you would tolerate a policy that granted citizenship to US residents based solely on their heritage.
I find it telling how willing you are to take the imperialist side of this argument.
Arab citizens are allowed to vote, though they do face other restriction. I suspect, especially given the "more than half" bit, that he was referring to the adult population of the whole territory Israel controls. Both Israel itself and the Occupied territories.
That's correct. Israel doesn't recognize the state of Palestine, and thus the population of Palestine is de facto part of Israel. They are not citizens of Israel, of course, because that would be democracy and the racist war-mongers in the Knesset would be voted out in a week.
Can you imagine if the US decided that all Native Americans (probably the closest analogy, but you'll forgive since there isn't a perfect one) were not US citizens and were denied the franchise? Being able to pick and choose who among your population are considered "citizens" and thus allowed the privilege of participating in democracy is fascism at its most pure.
The 5 steps to running a low-magic campaign
1) Don't give your players any useful (magical) treasure.
You don't have to eat, so why should insurance cover lipitor.
And by the way THEY ARE PAYING!!!!!!!!!!111eleven
Quark Blast wrote:
Similarly, in an autocracy/monarchy 100% of citizens are represented by their king!
But seriously, representation is determined by ability to vote. Women, poor and nonwhites couldn't vote and thus were not represented. If representation meant as you define, colonists were represented in parliament.
Because your medical care should be between you and your doctor, not your employer, and this sets precedent for far worse intrusions.
You don't control the food you eat Corporations do. And you don't control your world view, the media does.
Scott Betts wrote:
Except that it IS bullcrap. 1-1+1-1... is a non-converging series, which means it does not sum to 1/2. Without that bit of mathematical misdirection the whole calculation falls apart.
Let me guess, you're volunteering to be the first to go in the suggested program of euthanasia then?
You only prove my point. People don't have the intestinal fortitude for what has to actually be done.
But since you're asking, sure. If, at some point in my future, I become a financial liability because of the resources I'm consuming for medical procedures to keep me alive outweigh my utility, put me down like a sick dog. I won't pretend I'm not afraid of death, but I fear being too frail to take care of myself even more.
We have a culture that is obsessed with the sanctity of "human life" even when that human life is basically just a sack of flesh hooked up to life support, or, on the other end of the deal, a smattering of cells. Furthermore we pretend that human life is the only life that matters, all the while causing the extinction of untold numbers of species of plant, animal, fungal, and microbial life.
I don't hold human life as sacred the way most people do. What I want to survive is our culture and our civilization, which means finding a sustainable model for industrial civilization.
Generic Villain wrote:
Why on earth would I wash my dishes before I wash my dishes?
And you wonder why I would question the "current" scientific process or any peer reviewed (re:echo chamber) data presented on these boards?
Peer-review is the very opposite of an echo chamber. It is review of data and findings by people who are rivals in your field and may very well lose face or grand money due to the findings.
Nevertheless, it's always smart to doubt what you're told and do your own research. It's not, however, intellectually honest to dismiss something out of hand because there is a infinitesimal chance of it being a sham without doing said research.
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Funny, that's precisely how I feel as a progressive. From BOTH sides. At least the conservatives on the boards don't give each other endless crap about not being conservative enough. Not that I've seen anyway.
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Anyway, by this logic no one can ever fall into any pits ever under any circumstances as long as they're adjacent to a wall.
If grabbing onto a slope to prevent yourself from falling is a DC 10 check, then certainly grabbing a flat surface is even easier. If a pit trap opens underneath you, all you have to do is grab the ground 5 feet away from you with a DC 0 check.
Anyway, your interpretation jumps through several logical hoops (I'm not sure the "keep yourself from falling" rules were meant for when a pit OPENS UP beneath you but rather if you're already climbing) to completely obviate a spell. Yes, turning a DC X reflex save or fall into a DC X save or have to make a completely trivial check that almost all monsters will make on a 1 is very different.
Every point you bring up is addressed in the FAQ.I crazily assumed you were able to read.
It's more of an issue that the solar roads need to a) be able to store energy, or b) carry power, in order to melt snow when there isn't any real solar generation (snow generally happens when it's pretty overcast...) and it seems to me that both will be prohibitively expensive and dangerous to boot. I mean... for the insulation on those cables to be known to work, there would have to be some pretty extreme testing done. After the first people responding to an accident get electrocuted by damaged high voltage cables in the road itself, do you think opinion on the solar road might, shall we say, swing a little?
In the 1800s, when railways were being built in the United States, there were mass movements to stop their development. When trains were first invented, people thought that the very sight of seeing an object going more than 15 miles an hour would literally drive everyone mad.
People are f%!$ing stupid.
Vod Canockers wrote:
You're just being disingenuous now. First off, the missionaries being talked about are indeed catholic, not some other mysterious denomination of christianity. Catholicism accounts for about half of christians worldwide.
I guess I'd consider ANY belief in demon possession and exorcism to be akin to witchcraft, and when you use your supposed magical powers over the supernatural to keep the ignorant in line, you're a petty tyrant not a good priest.
As for the AIDS thing, I'm not sure why you're making a distinction between crazy and lunacy here. The idea that condom manufacturers are intentionally or accidentally infecting condoms with AIDS is absurd and would fail to transmit the disease at any rate. Refusing to repudiate such ludicrous claims has the effect of reducing condom usage among a population that could benefit from them to prevent the actual spread of AIDS.
You're right, it wouldn't be the first time Europeans spread disease, but the supposed agent (infected condoms) is so beyond ludicrous that I have to assume an educated bishop or cardinal knows precisely what he's doing when he spreads that misinformation: playing on the superstition and mistrust of an unsophisticated audience to advance the church's stance against prophylactics at the expense of human lives.
There are no loop holes, only the law as written. There is no fine print only the law as written. I kind of get tired of people saying a business or person is taking advantage of a loop hole like they are dishonest. Now there are unintended consequences of laws, that does happen. And sometimes the unintended law was not unintended.
...what you're describing is what the rest of us refer to as a loophole.
Andrew R wrote:
So we layer on rules and regulations to starve americans of rights, resources and jobs in the name of being green while they burn the rest of the world about us. We can suffer under the name of saving the planet for nothing then, and when we weaken ourselves enough by doing so another nation will take us and see that those resources are used. We need to be smart about this, it is a global game and we lose if we self destruct. "green tech" is a laudable goal but we cannot cripple the economy in its name before it can do what we need it to.
We toss money at it, investing in renewable energy and develop the technology to the point where it is of comparable cost. We lead the world in the production of green energy, we get Europe and other big economies on our side, and then force China and India to comply by way of trade sanctions, offering them for FREE the technology we've developed.
Seriously, a major cause of medical costs is the cost of malpractice insurance, whether you like it or not. That money has to be taken from somewhere, and if it is, it's going to be too expensive to give people socialized health care.
FWIW I don't think you're lying; I think you're arguing in good faith I just think you're wrong and/or misinformed.
After a quick google searchthis studycame up that seems to indicate that, in the US at least, medical liability costs (which include malpractice insurance, legal fees, etc.) accounts for some 2.4% of the overall cost of medical care in the country.
Just like other types of insurance, you pay for the actuarial value of a third party assuming your risk. Thus, while a heart surgeon whose minor screwup costs a human life may pay malpractice insurance of 30-50k a year (well less than their average salary of $522k/yr) the average costs are actually between 7 and 15k a year.
Even this seems like a lot (still <10% of their salary), but remember that we're comparing that cost to the salary of the doctor, not the overall cost of medical care which includes all kinds of infrastructure, administration, overhead, and a sizable profit margin.
TL;DR- In actuality, medical liability costs are trivial and don't appreciably affect medical costs in the US.
Well, you can make them specific I don't see the value in a lot of them, and think our schools could do with a little less well rounding and a bit more point, as well as doing more to encourage education thats more practical.
While I can see where you're coming from, you have to at least entertain the opposite: there are PLENTY of right-wingers who wouldn't see your degree as in any way practical. You environmentalist hippie! Get a real job, like running a fortune 500 company or border patrol!
For me it's because my parents are both science professionals and I was raised to be scientifically literate. I've seen the data and, actually, participated (as an adolescent) in tangential research. Specifically, a geological/limnological study by my mother which used fossilized microbes as a litmus for lake health.
To your previous comment, yes climates always change, but never in human history has there been this rapid of a trend. Heck, not even in geological history, though I'll grant that the data on that is less conclusive.
Have you read it? Because it seems to confirm what we've been saying:
Meteorologists’ views aboutglobal warming wrote:
Basically, when weighted by number of published climate science studies, there's a pretty clear and overwhelming majority of climate scientists that think climate change is PRIMARILY of human creation.
No one doesn't think it's happening.
Here's the thing that always baffled me about the tort-reform proponents, i.e. the right wing.
The same people telling us "well, we don't need regulation because we have a legal system in which individuals can sue for damages" are also telling us "we have to stop individuals from suing for damages because it disincentivizes innovation and inflates operating costs."
If you are neither able to rely on the government to regulate businesses (or individuals) behavior in a way that prevents them from damaging your livelihood, nor able to expect the courts to force those that harmed you from compensating you, what are you meant to do other than die like a peasant?
Like my repeatedly calling philosophy (a rather liberal pursuit) completely worthless, deriding psychology, put forth a plan to cut all liberal arts majors, face palming on how women's studies has become nothing more than politically correct and rabid insistence on terminology they made up themselves ...
I don't think that term means what you think it means.
I'm not sure you want to cut the study of mathematics and physical sciences. That's a pretty broad net you're casting that is going to catch us both, as well as the next Einstein.
Before you go any further about the mcdonalds hot coffee case, you might want to educate yourself about the matter rather than making yourself look stupid.
Now to be fair, I am biased. My family makes their living by coal and oil. When people talk about banning it, they are talking about taking the livelihood away from my family. And I grew up listening to people in the 60s and 70s talking about us entering a new ice age. They also showed pictures to us in school of New York and coastal cities being underwater by the year 2000. In the 80s the ozone layer was going to kill us. And it turned out all those things were false.
This entire post is 100% lies.
Nathanael Love wrote:
If magic exists, everyone will learn to be casters so they don't have to worry about mundane stuff AAAAND it's Eberron.
You're talking about humans who are at war, as opposed to goblins not at war. Goblins who are chaotic by nature, don't form civilizations, are fundamentally opposed to writing things down, and have short, violent lives.
But by all means, have goblins be as organized and regimented as the Roman legion in your world. Heck, maybe goblins are great scholars and playwrights.
What you do in your home game isn't really germane to a conversation about the game in general, or about goblins as they're written to be.
Nathanael Love wrote:
You seem to still be having trouble understanding plain English.I wasn't talking about 1st level, or any hypothetical goblin encounter. My statement was exogenous to any such conversation.
It is in fact possible for people to talk in this topic about things other than your inane hypotheticals.
Regardless, it would take a spellcraft or Know Arcana check to know anything about those spells in order to develop those tactics. Bog standard gobbos don't have ranks, and thus can't succeed in checks over 10, which any knowledge for even a first level spell would be.
I mean if we're talking rules...