3·
6 days ago
- 0 Posts
- 26 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 9th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha,
In the medical industry they refer to motorcycles as “donorcycles”, since, in the event of a fatality you can usually still salvage at least one or two organs from the corpse.
That said, I own a motorcycle myself. :)
I think people (not me, I agree with glitchdx, overall) are probably down voting because it’s a classic example of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, with a healthy dose of smug mixed in. Smugness is a great dialectical tactic if you hope to entrench people deeper into their views, rather than convince them to consider alternatives through reasoned discussion.
Do I agree that ideally we’d have robust public transit and increased usage of smaller, greener personal transport solutions? Of course I do.
But, incrementalism is progress. Valuable progress. We could argue whether it’s more likely to get us to the aforementioned vision of robust public transit or not, but history has proven time and time again that progress takes time and is resisted tooth and nail by monied interests. I don’t like it either. I want to wave a wand and have everything change. OP is right. Electric cars are not the solution. But treating symptoms while you work on curing the disease is best practice.
Downvotes don’t make me wrong, chuds.
Oh look, a child is on Lemmy!
Say what you will, but this person absolutely knows what they’re about.
1·2 months agoI’m not sure about that, as I’ve seen conflicting information. Medicare has existed for around 60 years, and not only have patients been more satisfied with their care on average than people with private insurance, the costs have also been lower than private insurance overall. Couple those factors with metrics from the most recent study I was able to find on the cost of single payer, and the picture seems a bit muddier than you’re presenting it.
We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent (tCO2e) emission reductions per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year). These actions have much greater potential to reduce emissions than commonly promoted strategies like comprehensive recycling (four times less effective than a plant-based diet) or changing household lightbulbs (eight times less).
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541/pdf
Okay, thank you. I wasn’t sure. Why couldn’t they just pay them 50k and lobby for single payer to save money? It seems like you’re suggesting that they’d have to raise wages if single payer was implemented? Maybe I’m still confused, because it still seems like they’d save money in the long run?
Please forgive my ignorance on the topic. You seem to know a lot about it. Are you saying that they save more money than the insurance costs them?
Wow! Companies could sure save a lot of money if they lobbied for single-payer! I wonder why they don’t! 🤔
People who twist words around to intentionally misrepresent their conversational partners are neither arguing in good faith, nor are they good people, generally. Your parents should have taught you this. Do better.
Bad Faith Arguments:
It means that you’re not arguing to come to a mutual understanding. In a true debate/argument, both sides must be willing to acknowledge if the other side has good points and be open to changing their minds. If you tell someone you want a “debate” but you really just want to antagonize them or preach to them, you are lying when you say you want to “argue”.
Bad faith generally is an intent to deceive.
Here are some resources:
- Identifying fallacies.
- List and description of various fallacies. (You may want to pay particular attention to the Straw Man section)
- How to have better arguments
You can do better if you decide to. The first step to being better is learning how to converse and debate like a mature adult. You will continue to be labeled a troll if you decide you’d rather just keep acting like an uneducated, petulant child.
Well, at least you acknowledge it. That’s a start. You’re more self-aware than the bulk of the ‘righteous crusaders of truth™’ that I’ve encountered.
Just for fun, because I’m bored, what facts have I ignored so far in our conversation? Remember, I’m @LengAwaits. Don’t get me confused with the other people you’ve been talking to. I’m a different person who hasn’t weighed in on any of your supposed “facts” so far. I’m not here to argue about popular political figures. I’m only here to call out glaring biases and bad faith arguments. Surely you’ll engage with me on a more intellectual level than what you’ve so far managed to muster?
No thank you. I don’t like to engage too much with people who can’t be bothered to proof-read their own posts.
Nor do I enjoy discussions with people who are so assured of their own self-righteousness that they ignore documented facts in lieu of their own personal opinions.
It just so happens that I also don’t much enjoy arguing with people who have a documented public history of arguing in bad faith.
It’s easier to represent as 0.000001 km, imo.
14·6 months agoImagine thinking a natural biological expression of sadness and grief is an insult. Masculinity so fragile you can almost taste it right through the internet!
No. There’s a big difference between asking questions and asking pointed, leading questions. One is Socratic dialogue, the other is JAQing off.