The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
"Pablo Gomez Jr. Is Suspected of Homicide, But They Deserve to be Known by the Gender Pronoun They Prefer"
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Governor Jerry Brown, billionaire Tom Steyer, and them

From Berkeleyside:

Op-ed: Pablo Gomez Jr. is suspected of homicide, but they deserve to be known by the gender pronoun they prefer

Jan. 12, 2017, 9:00 a.m.
By Julia Schwartz

Julia Schwartz is a gender non-conforming 23-year-old chess teacher living in New York City.

There has been a lot of discussion in the past year over people using gender-neutral pronouns, specifically the use of “they/them” instead of “he” and “she.”

This may be because the use of they/them is becoming more common and widespread, or because people like to find new, relatively mundane things to make controversial. Reactionaries everywhere have griped that “they” and “them” are plural pronouns, and it’s breaking traditional rules of grammar to use them to refer to a singular person.

Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people. This pedantic interest in words is masking something much more sinister: a basic discomfort with people who are different, and a fear of the undermining of the traditional gender roles that have long structured certain people’s sense of the world and of themselves.

So, surprising to no one, there has been considerable right-wing media outrage over Berkeleyside’s decision to use the preferred gender pronouns of Pablo Gomez Jr., 22, the main suspect in the killing of Emilie Inman, 27, on Jan. 6 in a home in the 2400 block of Ashby Avenue and the stabbing of another woman. Berkeleyside, based on police reports, first referred to Gomez as “he.” But after learning that Gomez prefers “they/them” pronouns, Berkeleyside corrected its initial identification and started to refer to Gomez as “they.” Berkeleyside then continued on with the normal reporting of the homicide, which was totally unrelated to Gomez’s gender identity.

At that moment when that correction was made, the homicidal fugitive was on the run from the law. Perhaps properly identifying the stabby suspect so that law enforcement could apprehend him and civilians could avoid him would seem to be a higher priority than gender sensitivity?

So what’s really being expressed by this sentiment is that gender queer or gender non-conforming individuals deserve less respect than cis (gender-conforming) people. Not to mention the fact that Gomez being an alleged killer is just a convenience to Ann Coulter’s bigoted agenda, which probably wouldn’t allow Mother Teresa the right to gender-neutral pronouns.

The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

Just as Race Does Not Exist, also Family Trees Don’t Exist.

By the way, here’s they’s victim:

Who cares about her, the gender-conformist?

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
    []
  1. Eff “they” and eff “them.”

    Read More
    • Agree: Frau Katze
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/pablo-gomez-jr-is-suspected-of-homicide-but-they-deserve-to-be-known-by-the-gender-pronoun-they-prefer/#comment-1725872
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. I believe it is “They deserves” since “They” is a singular subject. However, it’s unclear whether They agrees his proper name is to be capitalized.

    Read More
  3. “Gender nonconforming chess-teacher” is not a real job, and New York is expensive. I think her description should read either “waitress” or “trust-fund brat.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Or maybe escort girl or "masseuse "

    The proper pronoun should be it. It is singular and gender neutral. I hate the term gender. It is a grammatical term in some languages.
    , @27 year old
    I disagree, I bet you can make early 20s livable money teaching chess in NYC if you know the right people. I question how good she actually is at chess, but that's a different argument.
    , @Flinders Petrie
    On the bright side, the first line serves as a warning that the rest of the article will probably be a steaming pile of horseshit.
  4. The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

    Just as Race Does Not Exist,

    Dunno about that,Steve. SJWs are noticably less friendly to Rachel Dolezal’s Transracialism. Here’s EBONY magazine:

    Like some sort of cultural fungus, former NAACP Spokane, Wash. President-turned-outed-White-woman Rachel Dolezal just won’t go away. We just heard from the new mom when she hit the publicity trail to (again) talk about pretending to be a Black woman while hawking a book about race. She talked to outlets, including the Today Show and the BBC, making it clear she was still clinging to the notion that she was Black solely because she identifies as such.
    This, despite the fact that she isn’t Black at all. And by “not at all” I mean not even one drop rule Black.

    http://www.ebony.com/news-views/rachel-dolezal-rasta#axzz4VbwOUrja

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    A drop here, a drop there, and it is a regular haplogroup water torture.
    , @markflag
    It is total bull s. Scrape his mouth, put cells on slide, stain for chromosomes, look. My or my he be an XY. How does a "they" manage in a language in which and adjectives are gendered (humans have a sex not a gender)? It is hilarious. A non-US born and raised friend called recently laughing. At 6'3", 210, broad shouldered and a voice suggesting Tennessee Ernie Ford, he was asked while registering at an academic conference what gender he preferred. His response was to spread his arms and say. "LOOK AT ME" The absurdity of this pathetic pajama boy and leather chaps girl academically driven nonsense is both pathetic and highly amusing. It ain't gonna wash in a lot of the world.
    , @Jefferson
    "Dunno about that,Steve. SJWs are noticably less friendly to Rachel Dolezal’s Transracialism. Here’s EBONY magazine:"

    What about Elizabeth Warren and Shaun King. The Left's view on Transracialism are like cafeteria Catholics view on Catholicism. They pick and choose what they like and don't like about it.
  5. @syonredux

    The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

     


    Just as Race Does Not Exist,
     
    Dunno about that,Steve. SJWs are noticably less friendly to Rachel Dolezal's Transracialism. Here's EBONY magazine:

    Like some sort of cultural fungus, former NAACP Spokane, Wash. President-turned-outed-White-woman Rachel Dolezal just won’t go away. We just heard from the new mom when she hit the publicity trail to (again) talk about pretending to be a Black woman while hawking a book about race. She talked to outlets, including the Today Show and the BBC, making it clear she was still clinging to the notion that she was Black solely because she identifies as such.
    This, despite the fact that she isn’t Black at all. And by “not at all” I mean not even one drop rule Black.

     

    http://www.ebony.com/news-views/rachel-dolezal-rasta#axzz4VbwOUrja

    A drop here, a drop there, and it is a regular haplogroup water torture.

    Read More
  6. “Not to mention the fact that Gomez being an alleged killer is just a convenience to Ann Coulter’s bigoted agenda, which probably wouldn’t allow Mother Teresa the right to gender-neutral pronouns.”

    What does this even mean? I’m pretty sure Mother Theresa wouldn’t want to be known by a gender neutral pronoun and Julia Schwartz probably hates a lot of what she stood for. There is a reason this was published in Berkeleyside and not a real newspaper.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Had Mother Theresa demanded people refer to her with neutral pronouns, we would have had to say "they is a bride of Christ." People might have thought Jesus was gay married to a dude!
    , @Frau Katze

    There is a reason this was published in Berkeleyside and not a real newspaper.
     
    'Real' newspapers aren't much better. Examples: NYT, WaPo.
    , @Jack D
    I'm sure it's purely a coincidence that Stabby McGomez wanted to be know as "they" and Mother Teresa didn't - it could have just as likely been the other way, right? Just like it's a coincidence that all the black guys that the police shoot are "aspiring rappers" and none of them are brain surgeons like the black guys on TV. I'm sure Julia would say that the cops would shoot these guys EVEN IF they were brain surgeons, but by some odd coincidence, they never are. As soon as Julia finds the genderqueer Mother Teresa, let us know.
  7. Tom Steyer looks like Pablo Gomez’s Gay sugar daddy in that picture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The preferred nomenclature is...
    He's not?
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    Steyer has a wife and four kids, and I don't like the modern tendency to read every sign of male or paternal affection in a lewd sense.

    Anyway, how did this mentally-unbalanced nobody manage to insinuate himself so highly? I'm quite sure I'd be turned away at the first ring of Brown's or Steyer's gatekeepers, much less getting an affectionate arm around my shoulders.

    People really seem to be losing their social antennae. There were probably all sorts of red flags going up around this young psychopath but dopey, doe-eyed whites just lap this Noble Savage crap up.

    Is anybody reporting on this besides the Berkely college paper?
  8. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I supposed if someone demands that they be addressed in their own preferred non-traditional term then everyone is obligated to obey their demand. Also, one must cast their eyes downward when doing so, or else. Any limits to this? I suppose I’ll start demanding that everyone henceforth address me as ‘Your Highness’ and expect compliance. It will please me greatly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CCZ
    I now respond to personal introductions with: “I do not respect ‘my pronouns are’ requests. I do not accommodate delusions, personal or social.”
  9. Trying to figure out where the singular use of they came from I found this:

    “His or Her” vs. Singular “They”

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number. Without coining words, this can only be done in the third person singular by use of compound terms like “his or her”. Grammarians in 1879, 1922, 1931, 1957, and the 1970s have accepted “they” as a singular term that could be used in place of “he” or “he or she”, though sometimes limiting it to informal constructions. Others in 1795, 1825, 1863, 1898, 1926, and 1982 argued against it for various reasons. And whatever the grammarians might argue, people have been using the singular “they” for about the last 600 years, though (as mentioned earlier) it can only be applied in certain cases. If new gender-neutral pronouns are not adopted, i’m sure that singular “they” will still be a point of contention for centuries to come. For further information on the use of singular “their” throughout the centuries, see the large body of information that Henry Churchyard has compiled on the subject.

    https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    This is interesting, and the Berkeleyside comments included a quote from an 18th Century grammarian complaining how the plural second person ("you") was being used for second person singular ("thou"). And of course we no longer make that distinction, either.

    As we discussed the other day, use of "they" as a pronoun referring to an antecedent is common ("A writer should always try to write clearly, but (a) he should also try .... (traditional) (b) he or she should also try .... (seventies) (c) they should also try ...... (current status) not to sound like an idiot."

    So what's happening here is that they are attempting to hijack that convention for all pronoun usage. However, unlike other changes (you/thou; Miss/Mrs/Ms) this one creates legitimate confusion because of the plural status of "they."

    Incidentally, it also carries with it a whiff of entitlement, in many languages (not just IE ones) the proper mode of address involves third person, and even in the service one sometimes encountered it: "The Lieutenant orders the Marine to do xyz" when he's standing right there, it also comes up with sports celebrities, thus, "Kirby, I notice you said you were feeling good in centerfield although you are playing left field now: was that a Freudian slip?" "Kirby Puckett don't know nothing about no Floridian slip."

    My objection in this particular case was that: (1) this is an accused murderer. Get over it. (2) the perp was still at large, and use of plural pronoun was actually confusing.
    , @Yak-15
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we

    So long as they don't use "we" instead of "I" we can continue without a peep from Prince Albert II of Monaco
    , @slumber_j

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number.
     
    Although I'm insistently told that it no longer does, I take this as confirmation that Asperger's Syndrome most certainly did exist in the 18th c.

    They should have solved the problem of irregular verbs while they were at it: so annoying!!
  10. @syonredux

    The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

     


    Just as Race Does Not Exist,
     
    Dunno about that,Steve. SJWs are noticably less friendly to Rachel Dolezal's Transracialism. Here's EBONY magazine:

    Like some sort of cultural fungus, former NAACP Spokane, Wash. President-turned-outed-White-woman Rachel Dolezal just won’t go away. We just heard from the new mom when she hit the publicity trail to (again) talk about pretending to be a Black woman while hawking a book about race. She talked to outlets, including the Today Show and the BBC, making it clear she was still clinging to the notion that she was Black solely because she identifies as such.
    This, despite the fact that she isn’t Black at all. And by “not at all” I mean not even one drop rule Black.

     

    http://www.ebony.com/news-views/rachel-dolezal-rasta#axzz4VbwOUrja

    It is total bull s. Scrape his mouth, put cells on slide, stain for chromosomes, look. My or my he be an XY. How does a “they” manage in a language in which and adjectives are gendered (humans have a sex not a gender)? It is hilarious. A non-US born and raised friend called recently laughing. At 6’3″, 210, broad shouldered and a voice suggesting Tennessee Ernie Ford, he was asked while registering at an academic conference what gender he preferred. His response was to spread his arms and say. “LOOK AT ME” The absurdity of this pathetic pajama boy and leather chaps girl academically driven nonsense is both pathetic and highly amusing. It ain’t gonna wash in a lot of the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    They often use the 'neuter' pronouns in those languages--German Spezielleschneeflocken will use the formal, gender-neutral 'Sie' or neuter-gender 'es'.
  11. So what’s really being expressed by this sentiment is that gender queer or gender non-conforming individuals deserve less respect than cis (gender-conforming) people.

    Is it possible to have LESS respect than the amount of respect that is due to a man who stabbed to death an innocent woman who answered her doorbell and almost killed another? Can you have less than zero respect?

    What is REALLY being expressed here is that when a dangerous fugitive is on the lam, what is really important is scoring political points and forcing everyone to kowtow to an ever-changing party line of PC naming conventions as a show of loyalty to the Inner Party. If next week genderqueers decide that you are to call them Your Royal Highness, you proles had better respect that , or else you are Literally Hitler.

    Read More
    • Agree: TWS, Laugh Track
    • Replies: @SFG
    That's exactly the point. They don't want traditional views on gender holding a beachhead.
  12. The last few topics have been yawners.

    So how about this one.

    Portland, of all places, this winter, has experienced a multiplicity of winter storms and snowfalls that are Biblical.

    I say of all places because Portland is a locus of support for the notion that AGW is long settled science and the anthropos are taking it on the chin. So much so that the Portland Board of Ed earlier in 2016 banned expression of any other view on AGW than the prevailing orthodoxy in the local streets.

    Sick of winning yet? BTW, prior to the election, I predicted that the Trump victory would be an inflection point to a great turning globally, just as 1989 was.

    Anyhow, the tectonic plates are moving, it is a new era.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    Very simple. A close family member left the Northeast and moved to Portland a few months ago, and took the NE winter with him. You're welcome.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    Meanwhile,
    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/819753629464797186
    , @Perspective
    It's been colder than usual in many places across the world. Many of the Greek Islands are experiencing significant snow falls and the accompanying cold temperatures. Those of us in eastern North America endured one of the coldest springs in 2016. To my knowledge, there hasn't been a warm spring in north eastern America since 2012.
    , @Jack D
    Where have you been? The left figured that one out a long time ago - it's not "Global Warming" anymore, it's "Climate Change". Climate Change is non-refutable. If it gets warmer, that's due to Climate Change. If it get's colder in some place, that's Climate Change too, or the warming is not evenly spread. More snow/rain is Climate Change and so is less. Whatever happens is due to Climate Change, or else is just weather, which is not the same as climate.
  13. As a “right-winger,” I’m actually more concerned about Pablo/they’s political radicalism, which likely had something to do with these brutal stabbings. Julia Schwartz is basically a narcissist who wants to make this all about her/his/its/their gender issues.

    Read More
  14. OT:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/01/04/the-u-s-might-be-better-off-without-congress-and-a-president/

    You also talk about a collective presidency. What does that mean?

    This is another example that I’ve seen it in practice in other countries, especially Switzerland. I firmly believe that there’s no reason in a complex world for one individual to coordinate everything in a government. How can one man actually juggle all the domestic and foreign challenges at the same time and come to a coherent, comprehensive decision about it? He can’t.

    I always thought the original idea behind the P/VP election system modeled the Roman consuls–basically those garnering the 2 highest number of votes received executive leadership.

    Singapore and Switzerland. I hear that Singapore is quite unpleasant to live in–boring and stifling. Switzerland is supposed to be lovely however.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Discordiax
    The VP was a complete afterthought in the Constitutional Convention. He was elected (originally) along with the President on a combined ballot, but that was mostly part of the Rube Goldberg mechanism of making it hard to seize the Presidency as a platform to overthrow the republic. The dual-ballot was put in to ensure that you didn't only vote for your home-state hero--you have to vote for TWO guys.

    It's not clear at all what the Convention was thinking about the role of the Vice President, but the short answer is "not much." It certainly wasn't intended as a co-presidency, or what we now know as a Vice-Premiership or Deputy Prime Minister-ship in a coalition government.
  15. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Read More
  16. Wouldn’t Mother Theresa with gender neutral pronouns be Parent Theresa?

    Read More
    • LOL: TomSchmidt
    • Replies: @Cletus Rothschild
    "Wouldn’t Mother Theresa with gender neutral pronouns be Parent Theresa?"

    That might be offensive to people who choose not to be breeders.
  17. Berkeleyside then continued on with the normal reporting of the homicide, which was totally unrelated to Gomez’s gender identity.

    I think she (whatever) begs the question right here. Sane people assume that the perp’s deranged knifey behaviour may well be connected with his deranged pronoun behaviour.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    It's hard to believe otherwise. Claiming that the two different types of craziness didn't have anything to do with each other is not just a claim to be proven, it's an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.
  18. continued on

    Continued on what? The bus, the train, the aeroplane…?

    “Continue on” belongs in the same file with “free gift”, “true fact”, “tiny little”, and “is located [at]“.

    Forgive the pedantry, but I wish I could find “from whence” all this redundancy comes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Redundancy hurts no one, but the more redundancy you have, the smaller the chance of misunderstanding is. It's also useful to emphasize something, like "tiny little" is, you guessed it, very very small. (Another redundancy, using "very" twice.)

    There are apparently anti-redundancy purists in many (probably all) languages, and they are wrong everywhere.
  19. Much more sinister: the undermining of the traditional gender roles that have long structured the majority of people’s sense of the world, by a tiny minority of psychopathic degenerates. Them need to leave our pronouns alone. Reading that story the other day gave me a headache. The Swiss degenerate community pioneered gender neutered pronouns, but they invented a new one…Henn rather than appropriating normal people pronouns. The Berkeley degenerate community should respect that and INVENT their own pronouns! I propose ¿Hunh?.

    Read More
  20. @syonredux

    The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

     


    Just as Race Does Not Exist,
     
    Dunno about that,Steve. SJWs are noticably less friendly to Rachel Dolezal's Transracialism. Here's EBONY magazine:

    Like some sort of cultural fungus, former NAACP Spokane, Wash. President-turned-outed-White-woman Rachel Dolezal just won’t go away. We just heard from the new mom when she hit the publicity trail to (again) talk about pretending to be a Black woman while hawking a book about race. She talked to outlets, including the Today Show and the BBC, making it clear she was still clinging to the notion that she was Black solely because she identifies as such.
    This, despite the fact that she isn’t Black at all. And by “not at all” I mean not even one drop rule Black.

     

    http://www.ebony.com/news-views/rachel-dolezal-rasta#axzz4VbwOUrja

    “Dunno about that,Steve. SJWs are noticably less friendly to Rachel Dolezal’s Transracialism. Here’s EBONY magazine:”

    What about Elizabeth Warren and Shaun King. The Left’s view on Transracialism are like cafeteria Catholics view on Catholicism. They pick and choose what they like and don’t like about it.

    Read More
  21. “…Pablo Gomez Jr., 22, the main suspect in the killing of Emilie Inman…”

    Shouldn’t that be “suspects”?

    “But after learning that Gomez prefers ‘they/them’ pronouns, Berkeleyside corrected its initial identification and started to refer to Gomez as ‘they’.”

    Shouldn’t that be “the Gomezes prefer”?

    What if the Gomezes are found guilty of murder in a court of law but they prefer to be known as “not guilty”? Or since guilty/not guilty is/are binary, what if the Gomezes prefer to be referred to as “found to be on some continuum ranging from guilt to innocence”?

    Read More
    • LOL: Autochthon
    • Replies: @guest
    I'm verdict queer, judge.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Kylie, this is ripe for Abbott and Costello. "Excuse me, who are you?" "I am they." "They who?" "No, who's on first."
  22. @George
    Trying to figure out where the singular use of they came from I found this:

    “His or Her” vs. Singular “They”

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number. Without coining words, this can only be done in the third person singular by use of compound terms like “his or her”. Grammarians in 1879, 1922, 1931, 1957, and the 1970s have accepted “they” as a singular term that could be used in place of “he” or “he or she”, though sometimes limiting it to informal constructions. Others in 1795, 1825, 1863, 1898, 1926, and 1982 argued against it for various reasons. And whatever the grammarians might argue, people have been using the singular “they” for about the last 600 years, though (as mentioned earlier) it can only be applied in certain cases. If new gender-neutral pronouns are not adopted, i’m sure that singular “they” will still be a point of contention for centuries to come. For further information on the use of singular “their” throughout the centuries, see the large body of information that Henry Churchyard has compiled on the subject.

    https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/

    This is interesting, and the Berkeleyside comments included a quote from an 18th Century grammarian complaining how the plural second person (“you”) was being used for second person singular (“thou”). And of course we no longer make that distinction, either.

    As we discussed the other day, use of “they” as a pronoun referring to an antecedent is common (“A writer should always try to write clearly, but (a) he should also try …. (traditional) (b) he or she should also try …. (seventies) (c) they should also try …… (current status) not to sound like an idiot.”

    So what’s happening here is that they are attempting to hijack that convention for all pronoun usage. However, unlike other changes (you/thou; Miss/Mrs/Ms) this one creates legitimate confusion because of the plural status of “they.”

    Incidentally, it also carries with it a whiff of entitlement, in many languages (not just IE ones) the proper mode of address involves third person, and even in the service one sometimes encountered it: “The Lieutenant orders the Marine to do xyz” when he’s standing right there, it also comes up with sports celebrities, thus, “Kirby, I notice you said you were feeling good in centerfield although you are playing left field now: was that a Freudian slip?” “Kirby Puckett don’t know nothing about no Floridian slip.”

    My objection in this particular case was that: (1) this is an accused murderer. Get over it. (2) the perp was still at large, and use of plural pronoun was actually confusing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Your option a above ("...he should also try...") is correct. The masculine embraces the feminine in these situations.

    The phrase "in the case of the pronouns 'he,' 'him,' and 'his,' the masculine shall embrace the feminine" (or other words to that effect) was often made part of the boilerplate terms of contracts, wills, statutes, and similar legal documents before all of the recent baloney about being feminist, politically correct, and sensitive to idiots prevailed.

    It's no more incorrect to write or say "he" in sich circumstances than it was for Mr. Armstrong to have said "man" and "mankind" when he did.

    If anything, I advise continued use of "he" with the explicit, legalistic admonition that the masculine shall embrace the feminine – that ought to really irk readers who hate healthy, normal, heterosexual relations between men and women.
  23. @anonguy
    The last few topics have been yawners.

    So how about this one.

    Portland, of all places, this winter, has experienced a multiplicity of winter storms and snowfalls that are Biblical.

    I say of all places because Portland is a locus of support for the notion that AGW is long settled science and the anthropos are taking it on the chin. So much so that the Portland Board of Ed earlier in 2016 banned expression of any other view on AGW than the prevailing orthodoxy in the local streets.

    Sick of winning yet? BTW, prior to the election, I predicted that the Trump victory would be an inflection point to a great turning globally, just as 1989 was.

    Anyhow, the tectonic plates are moving, it is a new era.

    Very simple. A close family member left the Northeast and moved to Portland a few months ago, and took the NE winter with him. You’re welcome.

    Read More
  24. @Anonymous
    https://twitter.com/20committee/status/819749996300038144

    John Schindler is a fucking lunatic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    He's legit. The Flynns may go down as the next Rosenbergs.
  25. @Reg Cæsar

    continued on
     
    Continued on what? The bus, the train, the aeroplane…?

    "Continue on" belongs in the same file with "free gift", "true fact", "tiny little", and "is located [at]".

    Forgive the pedantry, but I wish I could find "from whence" all this redundancy comes.

    Redundancy hurts no one, but the more redundancy you have, the smaller the chance of misunderstanding is. It’s also useful to emphasize something, like “tiny little” is, you guessed it, very very small. (Another redundancy, using “very” twice.)

    There are apparently anti-redundancy purists in many (probably all) languages, and they are wrong everywhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    They're not wrong. It depends on the context, but for me it comes down to aesthetics. Usually, trying to leave as little chance of misunderstanding as possible is ugly English.

    If you want to get across how small something is, you can use an adverb, like your "very," instead of two synonymous adjectives.

    "Very, very" is fine rhetoric, so far as I'm concerned. Just not all the time.

  26. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people.”

    What if they is declared ‘guilty’ but insists it be ‘innocent’?

    Gotta meet the needs of people.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as ‘ten’, she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.

    After all, 5 tomatoes can be cut in half, in which case there are 10 pieces of tomatoes.

    Just saying.

    ——

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I bet she wins at Chess by calling her King a Queen. And I bet she never announces it until she's facing mate.
    , @reiner Tor

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.
     
    Yes, I hope they are getting nuttier and nuttier.
    , @guest
    Their lunacy is a double-edged sword. It weakens them, but in the meantime they're still in charge. They can take Western Civilization with them when they eventually fall.
    , @Olorin
    These people graduated past farce into industrial strength batguano nutzaroonie at least 30 years ago.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as ‘ten’, she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.
     
    Sounds like what central bankers and banksters do, dunnit?

    Youse all might enjoy reading the comments on the piece at the Berkeleysighed link above. A good number of the commenters there apparently think that they are going to Change Language so that in the future everyone will look back at them and go all, like, "SHAA, wow--they SO checked their privilege so the rest of us could have this Utopia of utter confusion on the difference between one and more than one!"

    They're not even bothering with 2 + 2 = 5.

    Plus (or do I mean minus!?) they're counting worse than birds, who can count to 6 or 7.

    http://www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/emmerton/

    Quoth the mod:


    please refrain from linking this page to the right wing trolls. They took over on the pussy hat article, and just spammed. Breitbart already has an article on this murder case, and I'm sure their readers would like nothing more than to blast this comments section.

    Thank you.
     
    For years now Chez Olorin we have discussed a table starting up a fortune cookie manufactory whose mottoes are drawn from apparently unintentionally koanic eructations such as

    They took over on the pussy hat article, and just spammed.
     
  27. @G Pinfold

    Berkeleyside then continued on with the normal reporting of the homicide, which was totally unrelated to Gomez’s gender identity.
     
    I think she (whatever) begs the question right here. Sane people assume that the perp's deranged knifey behaviour may well be connected with his deranged pronoun behaviour.

    It’s hard to believe otherwise. Claiming that the two different types of craziness didn’t have anything to do with each other is not just a claim to be proven, it’s an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.

    Read More
  28. @Anon
    "Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people."

    What if they is declared 'guilty' but insists it be 'innocent'?

    Gotta meet the needs of people.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as 'ten', she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.

    After all, 5 tomatoes can be cut in half, in which case there are 10 pieces of tomatoes.

    Just saying.

    ------

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.

    I bet she wins at Chess by calling her King a Queen. And I bet she never announces it until she’s facing mate.

    Read More
    • LOL: wren
    • Replies: @Cletus Rothschild
    "I bet she wins at Chess by calling her King a Queen. And I bet she never announces it until she’s facing mate."

    That would actually be a fantastic conundrum for an opponent to place her in: she either falls in line with the established rules of the gender binary of chess and wins the game, or she respects her opponent's delusion and loses. In the former case, is she forced to admit that whether or not one insists on identifying as a different gender, the type of crown (genitalia) is the true gender identifier.
  29. @Anon
    "Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people."

    What if they is declared 'guilty' but insists it be 'innocent'?

    Gotta meet the needs of people.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as 'ten', she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.

    After all, 5 tomatoes can be cut in half, in which case there are 10 pieces of tomatoes.

    Just saying.

    ------

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.

    Yes, I hope they are getting nuttier and nuttier.

    Read More
  30. Congress is back in session.

    Priority #1 is not Trump’s agenda of immigration enforcement and restriction, not giving him fast track to renegotiate sellout trade deals, but instead the Paul Ryan agenda of replacing the ACA with gimmicks about buying insurance across state lines.

    This BS might already be aborting Trump’s post election honeymoon. His net approval kept going up from the election until New Year’s, then Ryan and McConnell and their varying plans to repeal the ACA got into the news, and Trump has started sliding.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    Lot are you enrolled in Obamacare?
    , @Anonymous
    I think the Russia stuff has been more of a factor. The healthcare stuff has been going on largely behind the scenes.
    , @reiner Tor
    What I don't understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this. Based on my limited knowledge of the US healthcare system I seriously don't think it's easy to replace Obamacare. Though it's probably a mess, what was before was a mess, too, and you can't just replace the system mid-year. It would've been prudent to at least spend a few months just thinking about the issue instead of pushing for an immediate repeal and replace.
    , @Opinionator
    Seems just insane.

    It is already generating all kinds of fears in people and dredging up all the old associations of Republican coldheartedness and partisanship. "Yanking people's health care away." It could eventually lead to some tragic human interest stories that the media will pounce on.

    If the idea is repeal and replace, why the hell don't they wait until they have something to replace it with? What is the rush?

    I suppose Trump could veto. Or trade his his signature for repeal of Hart-Celler.

    We must all be missing something. What is it?
  31. @Lot
    Congress is back in session.

    Priority #1 is not Trump's agenda of immigration enforcement and restriction, not giving him fast track to renegotiate sellout trade deals, but instead the Paul Ryan agenda of replacing the ACA with gimmicks about buying insurance across state lines.

    This BS might already be aborting Trump's post election honeymoon. His net approval kept going up from the election until New Year's, then Ryan and McConnell and their varying plans to repeal the ACA got into the news, and Trump has started sliding.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

    Lot are you enrolled in Obamacare?

    Read More
  32. Anyone paying attention to new Trump appointee Rex Tillerson’s blockade of the artificial islands in the South China Sea? Anyone have any opinion? It’s very interesting. I wonder where the Doomsday Clock is right now.

    “May you live in interesting times”. – yeah, I know it’s apocryphal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    I don't know anything about the guy, and I provisionally hate him. But I assume you can't be Secretary of State without rattling sabres of reassurance for the War Party, so maybe it's all talk.
  33. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Polynices
    John Schindler is a fucking lunatic.

    He’s legit. The Flynns may go down as the next Rosenbergs.

    Read More
  34. “The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.”

    The libertarian-leaning gynephilic transsexuals seem to be making the opposite argument. Humans are born with a certain brain sex (male, female or androgynous) and a minority of people end up with a brain sex that is different to their physical sex. This is probably where the LGBT rainbow alliance will start to fall apart. You can’t have one half of the movement claiming gender and sexual orientation are a social construct and the other half claiming they are due to biology.

    Read More
  35. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Lot
    Congress is back in session.

    Priority #1 is not Trump's agenda of immigration enforcement and restriction, not giving him fast track to renegotiate sellout trade deals, but instead the Paul Ryan agenda of replacing the ACA with gimmicks about buying insurance across state lines.

    This BS might already be aborting Trump's post election honeymoon. His net approval kept going up from the election until New Year's, then Ryan and McConnell and their varying plans to repeal the ACA got into the news, and Trump has started sliding.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

    I think the Russia stuff has been more of a factor. The healthcare stuff has been going on largely behind the scenes.

    Read More
  36. @Lot
    Congress is back in session.

    Priority #1 is not Trump's agenda of immigration enforcement and restriction, not giving him fast track to renegotiate sellout trade deals, but instead the Paul Ryan agenda of replacing the ACA with gimmicks about buying insurance across state lines.

    This BS might already be aborting Trump's post election honeymoon. His net approval kept going up from the election until New Year's, then Ryan and McConnell and their varying plans to repeal the ACA got into the news, and Trump has started sliding.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

    What I don’t understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this. Based on my limited knowledge of the US healthcare system I seriously don’t think it’s easy to replace Obamacare. Though it’s probably a mess, what was before was a mess, too, and you can’t just replace the system mid-year. It would’ve been prudent to at least spend a few months just thinking about the issue instead of pushing for an immediate repeal and replace.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Alden
    Trump should first remove the requirement to enroll and then re name it Federal Health Subsidy, FHS and let it be.
    , @Old fogey
    I am all for repealing but not for replacing Obamacare. Ever since the government got into the health care business costs have skyrocketed. It makes much more sense for people to pay medical bills exactly the same way they buy everything else, and use insurance for catastrophic events - just as we paint our houses ourselves but buy fire insurance in case they burn down. There has been a ridiculous emphasis on paying health-related bills instead of keeping the costs within reason. Look up Karl Denninger for the numbers - he can really count!
    , @IHTG

    What I don’t understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this.

     

    Like he promised countless times in his rallies?
  37. @anonguy
    The last few topics have been yawners.

    So how about this one.

    Portland, of all places, this winter, has experienced a multiplicity of winter storms and snowfalls that are Biblical.

    I say of all places because Portland is a locus of support for the notion that AGW is long settled science and the anthropos are taking it on the chin. So much so that the Portland Board of Ed earlier in 2016 banned expression of any other view on AGW than the prevailing orthodoxy in the local streets.

    Sick of winning yet? BTW, prior to the election, I predicted that the Trump victory would be an inflection point to a great turning globally, just as 1989 was.

    Anyhow, the tectonic plates are moving, it is a new era.

    Meanwhile,

    Read More
    • LOL: anonguy
    • Replies: @anonguy
    These climate changes have been repeating all winter, getting worse each time, and it isn't even Jan 20th yet:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/weather/frigid-temps-lock-in-ice-after-historic-portland-storm-commuter-train-derails/

    And for gravy, yet another example of why light rail is unserious stuff.

  38. @Lot
    Congress is back in session.

    Priority #1 is not Trump's agenda of immigration enforcement and restriction, not giving him fast track to renegotiate sellout trade deals, but instead the Paul Ryan agenda of replacing the ACA with gimmicks about buying insurance across state lines.

    This BS might already be aborting Trump's post election honeymoon. His net approval kept going up from the election until New Year's, then Ryan and McConnell and their varying plans to repeal the ACA got into the news, and Trump has started sliding.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/trump_favorableunfavorable-5493.html

    Seems just insane.

    It is already generating all kinds of fears in people and dredging up all the old associations of Republican coldheartedness and partisanship. “Yanking people’s health care away.” It could eventually lead to some tragic human interest stories that the media will pounce on.

    If the idea is repeal and replace, why the hell don’t they wait until they have something to replace it with? What is the rush?

    I suppose Trump could veto. Or trade his his signature for repeal of Hart-Celler.

    We must all be missing something. What is it?

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor, snorlax
    • LOL: IHTG
    • Replies: @snorlax
    The first rule of Trump — and I love the guy all the same — is that he's a narcissist. So the idea of replacing "Obamacare" with "Trumpcare" appeals to his ego. He also thinks everyone loves him and he has infinite amounts of political capital to do everything he wants all at once, everyone will see that Trumpcare is far better than Obamacare because it's Trumpcare, etc.

    I agree that this as the day one priority is very worrisome.
    , @Jack D
    Trump made it very clear at the news conference that the "replace" would happen on the same day as the "repeal".

    So first they have to figure out what the "replace" will be before they "repeal". So far the thinking seems to be "keep the parts that everyone likes and get rid of the parts that they don't." The problem is that everyone likes free benefits (having your pre-existing conditions covered, having your "kids" covered into adulthood) but no one likes paying. At bottom, what everyone really LIKES is unlimited quantity, high quality healthcare on demand paid for by someone else. So unless they do something that will displease a lot of voters, the economics of Trumpcare will be even less viable than those of Obamacare.
    , @Opinionator
    And here we go...

    US Patients Await Obamacare's Fate

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38590922
  39. “but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people”

    No. That’s what publik edjakashun would have you believe, because if each student has to recreate English in his own head, he’ll likely stay ignorant and be more easily manageable. But it isn’t true.

    We’re not talking about the needs of people, here. We’re talking about what’s politically useful . Language does evolve that way, but I’d bet this writer wouldn’t like that kind of recreation were she the whom instead of the who.

    Read More
  40. @RSF
    "Not to mention the fact that Gomez being an alleged killer is just a convenience to Ann Coulter’s bigoted agenda, which probably wouldn’t allow Mother Teresa the right to gender-neutral pronouns."

    What does this even mean? I'm pretty sure Mother Theresa wouldn't want to be known by a gender neutral pronoun and Julia Schwartz probably hates a lot of what she stood for. There is a reason this was published in Berkeleyside and not a real newspaper.

    Had Mother Theresa demanded people refer to her with neutral pronouns, we would have had to say “they is a bride of Christ.” People might have thought Jesus was gay married to a dude!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Wouldn't it have to be "spouse" rather than "bride?"
  41. @anonymous
    I supposed if someone demands that they be addressed in their own preferred non-traditional term then everyone is obligated to obey their demand. Also, one must cast their eyes downward when doing so, or else. Any limits to this? I suppose I'll start demanding that everyone henceforth address me as 'Your Highness' and expect compliance. It will please me greatly.

    I now respond to personal introductions with: “I do not respect ‘my pronouns are’ requests. I do not accommodate delusions, personal or social.”

    Read More
  42. OK, this “they” thing is weird. But, there’s no pattern here, is there? Do people who want to be referred to as “they” commit more murders? Is any other news outlet using “they” to refer to this guy?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Since the number of people who prefer the pronoun "they" is so small, even with n=1 they seem to be overrepresented.
  43. @reiner Tor
    Redundancy hurts no one, but the more redundancy you have, the smaller the chance of misunderstanding is. It's also useful to emphasize something, like "tiny little" is, you guessed it, very very small. (Another redundancy, using "very" twice.)

    There are apparently anti-redundancy purists in many (probably all) languages, and they are wrong everywhere.

    They’re not wrong. It depends on the context, but for me it comes down to aesthetics. Usually, trying to leave as little chance of misunderstanding as possible is ugly English.

    If you want to get across how small something is, you can use an adverb, like your “very,” instead of two synonymous adjectives.

    “Very, very” is fine rhetoric, so far as I’m concerned. Just not all the time.

    Read More
  44. @Kylie
    "...Pablo Gomez Jr., 22, the main suspect in the killing of Emilie Inman..."

    Shouldn't that be "suspects"?

    "But after learning that Gomez prefers 'they/them' pronouns, Berkeleyside corrected its initial identification and started to refer to Gomez as 'they'."

    Shouldn't that be "the Gomezes prefer"?

    What if the Gomezes are found guilty of murder in a court of law but they prefer to be known as "not guilty"? Or since guilty/not guilty is/are binary, what if the Gomezes prefer to be referred to as "found to be on some continuum ranging from guilt to innocence"?

    I’m verdict queer, judge.

    Read More
  45. @Anon
    "Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people."

    What if they is declared 'guilty' but insists it be 'innocent'?

    Gotta meet the needs of people.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as 'ten', she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.

    After all, 5 tomatoes can be cut in half, in which case there are 10 pieces of tomatoes.

    Just saying.

    ------

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.

    Their lunacy is a double-edged sword. It weakens them, but in the meantime they’re still in charge. They can take Western Civilization with them when they eventually fall.

    Read More
  46. Jesse Jackson is looking for a huge pay day by financially shaking down Uber.

    http://www.blackpressusa.com/jesse-jackson-tells-uber-to-release-diversity-data-invest-in-oakland/

    The fact that so many wealthy people who run private sector Fortune 500 companies fold like a pizza slice and cut Jesse Jackson a huge paycheck means the 1 percent is mostly made up of Cucks. Most of them are his bitches because they fear him.

    Jesse Jackson’s Black privilege exists because of White Cuckness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Jeff, as to Uber's diversity...don't you need to own a real car? Who wants to ride to the airport bouncing around in the back of a low-rider with 20 inch rims?
    , @SFG
    It's not so easy as all that. A lot of these guys' fortunes depend on the upper middle class buying their products, and if Uber winds up known as 'racist' they could have problems given their business model works best in cities, which are much more liberal. Also liberals are much more fond of boycotts--I have my doubts Breitbart is going to be able to recover from all the advertisers leaving, for example.

    Gamergate was the only incident I know of where successful resistance to the SJW agenda occurred.

  47. @berkeleyguy
    OK, this "they" thing is weird. But, there's no pattern here, is there? Do people who want to be referred to as "they" commit more murders? Is any other news outlet using "they" to refer to this guy?

    Since the number of people who prefer the pronoun “they” is so small, even with n=1 they seem to be overrepresented.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TWS
    I can say for a fact that perverts are way overrepresented in prison as you might expect. If you're willing to break society's norms for your own gratification or if you are unable to resist the urge to do so you are more likely to commit a crime.
  48. @Autochthon
    "Gender nonconforming chess-teacher" is not a real job, and New York is expensive. I think her description should read either "waitress" or "trust-fund brat."

    Or maybe escort girl or “masseuse ”

    The proper pronoun should be it. It is singular and gender neutral. I hate the term gender. It is a grammatical term in some languages.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Frau Katze
    Thank goodness that in English only the singular, third person pronouns carry gender.

    This oddity (for an Indo-European language) is sparing us much trouble.
  49. @reiner Tor
    What I don't understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this. Based on my limited knowledge of the US healthcare system I seriously don't think it's easy to replace Obamacare. Though it's probably a mess, what was before was a mess, too, and you can't just replace the system mid-year. It would've been prudent to at least spend a few months just thinking about the issue instead of pushing for an immediate repeal and replace.

    Trump should first remove the requirement to enroll and then re name it Federal Health Subsidy, FHS and let it be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    But would it not further increase costs? If you don't have to enroll, healthy young people might opt out, leaving a pool of mostly sick people, which would raise costs and thus further incentivize the healthy or even those with less severe conditions to leave. It's also known as a death spiral.

    Any changes to a complex system need to be well thought out and not done in haste. It's a very important issue, and if it's a failure it could easily destroy Trump's presidency from the outset.
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    The requirement to enroll was the lynchpin, because otherwise the young healthy people who tend not to buy, and actually rarely need, health insurance wouldn't be there to finance the scheme.

    Supposedly we are talking about an 11 million person gap. I would think via an expansion of Medicaid and Medicare, and removing the atrocious employer linkage we could get everybody covered. Oh, and scrap the tort system. You can afford a casualty compensation system or you can afford a casualty tort system but you can't afford both. Of course, that's the last vestige of States as sovereign entities but that's been in the works for 150 years.

    "Health" is inherently uninsurable, but we'll kick that can down the road like all the others.
  50. @Anon
    "Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people."

    What if they is declared 'guilty' but insists it be 'innocent'?

    Gotta meet the needs of people.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as 'ten', she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.

    After all, 5 tomatoes can be cut in half, in which case there are 10 pieces of tomatoes.

    Just saying.

    ------

    This sort of proggy thing is heaven-sent. It is turning their side into a total farce.

    Keep it up by all means,I or we say.

    These people graduated past farce into industrial strength batguano nutzaroonie at least 30 years ago.

    By the way, if Julia Schwartz asks for 10 tomatoes, but I give her 5 and insist it be counted as ‘ten’, she better accept it because numbers are static truth but must meet the need of people such as I who now goes as we.

    Sounds like what central bankers and banksters do, dunnit?

    Youse all might enjoy reading the comments on the piece at the Berkeleysighed link above. A good number of the commenters there apparently think that they are going to Change Language so that in the future everyone will look back at them and go all, like, “SHAA, wow–they SO checked their privilege so the rest of us could have this Utopia of utter confusion on the difference between one and more than one!”

    They’re not even bothering with 2 + 2 = 5.

    Plus (or do I mean minus!?) they’re counting worse than birds, who can count to 6 or 7.

    http://www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/emmerton/

    Quoth the mod:

    please refrain from linking this page to the right wing trolls. They took over on the pussy hat article, and just spammed. Breitbart already has an article on this murder case, and I’m sure their readers would like nothing more than to blast this comments section.

    Thank you.

    For years now Chez Olorin we have discussed a table starting up a fortune cookie manufactory whose mottoes are drawn from apparently unintentionally koanic eructations such as

    They took over on the pussy hat article, and just spammed.

    Read More
  51. @Anonym
    Anyone paying attention to new Trump appointee Rex Tillerson's blockade of the artificial islands in the South China Sea? Anyone have any opinion? It's very interesting. I wonder where the Doomsday Clock is right now.

    "May you live in interesting times". - yeah, I know it's apocryphal.

    I don’t know anything about the guy, and I provisionally hate him. But I assume you can’t be Secretary of State without rattling sabres of reassurance for the War Party, so maybe it’s all talk.

    Read More
  52. Keep showing the victim. No doubt, she embraced political views at odds with many endorsed here, but she seems to be an objectively lovely young woman.

    Read More
  53. @Alden
    Trump should first remove the requirement to enroll and then re name it Federal Health Subsidy, FHS and let it be.

    But would it not further increase costs? If you don’t have to enroll, healthy young people might opt out, leaving a pool of mostly sick people, which would raise costs and thus further incentivize the healthy or even those with less severe conditions to leave. It’s also known as a death spiral.

    Any changes to a complex system need to be well thought out and not done in haste. It’s a very important issue, and if it’s a failure it could easily destroy Trump’s presidency from the outset.

    Read More
  54. @reiner Tor
    What I don't understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this. Based on my limited knowledge of the US healthcare system I seriously don't think it's easy to replace Obamacare. Though it's probably a mess, what was before was a mess, too, and you can't just replace the system mid-year. It would've been prudent to at least spend a few months just thinking about the issue instead of pushing for an immediate repeal and replace.

    I am all for repealing but not for replacing Obamacare. Ever since the government got into the health care business costs have skyrocketed. It makes much more sense for people to pay medical bills exactly the same way they buy everything else, and use insurance for catastrophic events – just as we paint our houses ourselves but buy fire insurance in case they burn down. There has been a ridiculous emphasis on paying health-related bills instead of keeping the costs within reason. Look up Karl Denninger for the numbers – he can really count!

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Except that some 90+% of healthcare costs fall under the "catastrophic" umbrella. You get cancer, and in a few months you'll spend many times more on it than your total aggregate healthcare spending up to that point. Basically you don't need to worry much about healthcare costs other than the few big illnesses.

    The other issue is the few people who are born with or - through no fault of their own - acquire some expensive chronic condition. Do you want them to suffer throughout their lives? It's ultimately a question which you Americans have to answer for your own society. I'm happy that in Europe it's covered by society. Just one of my colleagues has a daughter who was born with a non-genetic heart condition, which may or may not stay with her throughout her life. Besides being compassionate, it could still happen to me.
  55. @Old fogey
    I am all for repealing but not for replacing Obamacare. Ever since the government got into the health care business costs have skyrocketed. It makes much more sense for people to pay medical bills exactly the same way they buy everything else, and use insurance for catastrophic events - just as we paint our houses ourselves but buy fire insurance in case they burn down. There has been a ridiculous emphasis on paying health-related bills instead of keeping the costs within reason. Look up Karl Denninger for the numbers - he can really count!

    Except that some 90+% of healthcare costs fall under the “catastrophic” umbrella. You get cancer, and in a few months you’ll spend many times more on it than your total aggregate healthcare spending up to that point. Basically you don’t need to worry much about healthcare costs other than the few big illnesses.

    The other issue is the few people who are born with or – through no fault of their own – acquire some expensive chronic condition. Do you want them to suffer throughout their lives? It’s ultimately a question which you Americans have to answer for your own society. I’m happy that in Europe it’s covered by society. Just one of my colleagues has a daughter who was born with a non-genetic heart condition, which may or may not stay with her throughout her life. Besides being compassionate, it could still happen to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    A very good blog post by Greg Cochran. Just published. Worth to read. Medicine and healthcare are very unlike the rest of the economy. The market's invisible hand won't weed out bad service or bad medicine.
    , @SFG
    Yeah, liberals are right on healthcare. Just give every legal citizen Medicare and raise taxes to pay for it. The single payer will drive down costs and eliminate the private insurance companies that basically make money as middlemen so it won't cost quite as much as you think.

    Yes, it'll help the diversity. It'll also help unemployed downsized middle-aged white guys.

    , @jtgw
    I think it's quite true that, with a free insurance market, those with any kind of pre-existing condition would be shut out of the market, or at least face much higher premiums. The only way it could work is with some kind of group insurance, through a job or some kind of charitable society (the way it worked way back at the start of the 20th century). It was interesting for me to read about some of those lodges and friendly society of the pre-WWI, though; a worker through his society could buy a year's worth of care with a day's wage.

    As I'm sure you know, European healthcare systems are not without costs or deficiencies. I think when it comes to healthcare, psychological security plays a big part, and Europeans are no doubt reassured by the idea of being financially covered. Actually getting care, on the other hand, is not guaranteed, going by what I've read of timeliness of care in most European countries, waiting lists and so on. This survey did a good job summarizing the pros and cons of 12 different countries:

    https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa-613.pdf
    , @Old fogey
    Thank you for reading my comment and replying. What you have written sounds exactly like the opinion of most of my friends and acquaintances. As long as the bills are paid they really don't care how much anything costs, as long as the co-pay (which comes out of their own pocket at the time the service is performed) is small. If you ask them what some procedure costs they will tell you what the co-pay was, not what the hospital or physician has billed.

    I have seen over the years that since our system of "insurance" covers a whole range of things that do not fall under the catastrophic umbrella, such as running to the doctor every two months to have blood glucose levels taken if you are considered "pre-diabetic"(can be done at basically no cost by yourself at home) and taking children to the doctor if they have a cold (all my colleagues at work did this repeatedly) that a great deal of what we term "health care" does not really improve people's health. A doctor's office is a seat of infection that should be avoided at all costs, as are hospitals. Look up how many people lose their lives annually due to mistakes made by the medical profession - it is horrendous.

    And please do have a gander at Karl Denninger's pleas that the laws already in the books pertaining to fraudulent business practices be applied to the medical industry. That would be a wonderful place to start.
  56. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Nice piece, though the last bit does devolve into Taleb bragging a bit. (I go drinking with Russians! I lift!)

    Fun little right-wing reading list there at the end, I may consider. I always wanted to read Ammianus Marcellinus--I'm getting the feeling we may be there soon. (He was one of the last writers of the Roman Empire near the fall of the western half, depending on how you count Procopius.)

    , @El Dato
    Interesting.
  57. @reiner Tor
    Except that some 90+% of healthcare costs fall under the "catastrophic" umbrella. You get cancer, and in a few months you'll spend many times more on it than your total aggregate healthcare spending up to that point. Basically you don't need to worry much about healthcare costs other than the few big illnesses.

    The other issue is the few people who are born with or - through no fault of their own - acquire some expensive chronic condition. Do you want them to suffer throughout their lives? It's ultimately a question which you Americans have to answer for your own society. I'm happy that in Europe it's covered by society. Just one of my colleagues has a daughter who was born with a non-genetic heart condition, which may or may not stay with her throughout her life. Besides being compassionate, it could still happen to me.

    A very good blog post by Greg Cochran. Just published. Worth to read. Medicine and healthcare are very unlike the rest of the economy. The market’s invisible hand won’t weed out bad service or bad medicine.

    Read More
    • Agree: Lot
    • Replies: @jtgw
    Thanks for the article. I don't think he really shows that the market does not weed out bad service or bad medicine, though. He does essentially repeat the argument commonly made, also by some economists, that demand for medicine is too inelastic, i.e. it's one thing when the alternative of downloading some app is accomplishing a small task more slowly, but it's another thing when the alternative to getting surgery is certain, painful death. So people will be willing to pay more to get medical service, reducing their bargaining power. But presumably the countervailing dynamics of competition still apply: it's clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.

    He wonders why centuries of free market in medicine didn't achieve much, but can't we ask the same of just about every other scientific and technological achievement? They all took centuries to develop, and they all or mostly saw the biggest leaps in the early modern period. Economics doesn't say that the market is magic or achieves modern prosperity overnight. The idea is that no lasting progress can be made without accumulation of capital, which is understood in the broad sense of any goods, including knowledge, that can be used to produce what we want. That is, you need economic growth before you can talk about redistributing wealth.

    Greg also notes that the last 50 years haven't seen as much progress as the earlier 20th century, which kind of undermines his thesis, since those are the years that saw significant increases in regulation and government oversight of medicine. Getting a new drug approved by the FDA is a long and expensive process and you have to ask whether lives potentially saved by keeping unsafe drugs off the market outweigh lives lost because perfectly effective drugs have been kept off for too long. At least we should talk about legalizing the sale of non-approved drugs, as long as patients and doctors understand that the drugs are not yet approved.

    , @Lot
    Is there anyone in the Steveosphere who has given serious thought to these issues and agreed with the Paul Ryan/Libertarian party line?

    Not Derb, who was the son of a nurse and grew up with the UK's NHS, not Mickey Kaus, not Greg Cochran.

    After years and years of "Obamacare sux" the GOP does need a cosmetic repeal. I could live with one idea of replacing the individual mandate with a "continuous coverage" rule.

    So instead of a tax penalty to keep healthy people in the insurance pool, they would be told if they don't join now, they can't join later when they actually need it.

    There are a lot of ways to make federal health care policy be less of a give-away to the underclass plus big private companies. But the ACA's "subsidy and exchange" system overwhelmingly went to people who are self-employed, work at very small businesses, or who retired with pensions before Medicare age.

    The illegals and non-working lumpenproles already had free health care from Medicaid/emergency rooms. The ACA's beneficiaries are heavily WWC plus self-employed people age 50-64 with preexisting conditions, another white-heavy group.

  58. Once in jail, “they” won’t get to decide which way “they” is addressed by other inmates. I bet the convicts will just call him “bitch”. Who knows, “they” might even grow to like it.

    Read More
  59. @reiner Tor
    What I don't understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this. Based on my limited knowledge of the US healthcare system I seriously don't think it's easy to replace Obamacare. Though it's probably a mess, what was before was a mess, too, and you can't just replace the system mid-year. It would've been prudent to at least spend a few months just thinking about the issue instead of pushing for an immediate repeal and replace.

    What I don’t understand is that Trump also seems to be pushing this.

    Like he promised countless times in his rallies?

    Read More
  60. @415 reasons
    Wouldn't Mother Theresa with gender neutral pronouns be Parent Theresa?

    “Wouldn’t Mother Theresa with gender neutral pronouns be Parent Theresa?”

    That might be offensive to people who choose not to be breeders.

    Read More
  61. @markflag
    It is total bull s. Scrape his mouth, put cells on slide, stain for chromosomes, look. My or my he be an XY. How does a "they" manage in a language in which and adjectives are gendered (humans have a sex not a gender)? It is hilarious. A non-US born and raised friend called recently laughing. At 6'3", 210, broad shouldered and a voice suggesting Tennessee Ernie Ford, he was asked while registering at an academic conference what gender he preferred. His response was to spread his arms and say. "LOOK AT ME" The absurdity of this pathetic pajama boy and leather chaps girl academically driven nonsense is both pathetic and highly amusing. It ain't gonna wash in a lot of the world.

    They often use the ‘neuter’ pronouns in those languages–German Spezielleschneeflocken will use the formal, gender-neutral ‘Sie’ or neuter-gender ‘es’.

    Read More
  62. @Jack D

    So what’s really being expressed by this sentiment is that gender queer or gender non-conforming individuals deserve less respect than cis (gender-conforming) people.
     
    Is it possible to have LESS respect than the amount of respect that is due to a man who stabbed to death an innocent woman who answered her doorbell and almost killed another? Can you have less than zero respect?

    What is REALLY being expressed here is that when a dangerous fugitive is on the lam, what is really important is scoring political points and forcing everyone to kowtow to an ever-changing party line of PC naming conventions as a show of loyalty to the Inner Party. If next week genderqueers decide that you are to call them Your Royal Highness, you proles had better respect that , or else you are Literally Hitler.

    That’s exactly the point. They don’t want traditional views on gender holding a beachhead.

    Read More
  63. If you want a gender-neutral, grammatically correct, singular pronoun, what’s wrong with “it”?

    Read More
  64. @reiner Tor
    Except that some 90+% of healthcare costs fall under the "catastrophic" umbrella. You get cancer, and in a few months you'll spend many times more on it than your total aggregate healthcare spending up to that point. Basically you don't need to worry much about healthcare costs other than the few big illnesses.

    The other issue is the few people who are born with or - through no fault of their own - acquire some expensive chronic condition. Do you want them to suffer throughout their lives? It's ultimately a question which you Americans have to answer for your own society. I'm happy that in Europe it's covered by society. Just one of my colleagues has a daughter who was born with a non-genetic heart condition, which may or may not stay with her throughout her life. Besides being compassionate, it could still happen to me.

    Yeah, liberals are right on healthcare. Just give every legal citizen Medicare and raise taxes to pay for it. The single payer will drive down costs and eliminate the private insurance companies that basically make money as middlemen so it won’t cost quite as much as you think.

    Yes, it’ll help the diversity. It’ll also help unemployed downsized middle-aged white guys.

    Read More
    • Agree: slumber_j
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The more I think about healthcare, the less sure I am. I'm not sure there's a good system, only that there are always hard tradeoffs, and that there's no system which is better than the other in all respects.

    It's difficult even to tell if a particular system is doing worse or better than the previous one. The US for example tends to pay more for its drugs than other countries, but in part that's because it pays for research and development costs which other countries with centralized bargaining power avoid. However, it's obvious that the US couldn't simply replicate those better bargains, because in the absence of higher US prices there would be no R&D.

    All I can tell is that the Swiss system is based on private insurers, is truly universal, very expensive, and at the highest level still not providing US quality technology (and for economy of scale problems often German or French clinics are better), and it's difficult to tell if it could be scaled up to the size of the US. I'm not sure a Medicare for all system would work better than for example Obamacare, but it's also a question of "for whom?" Maybe it'd work better for Latinos and even poor whites, but worse for the white middle class, or only worse for the upper middle class, or there would be more cheating as the upper middle class would just try to opt out of the system, or it'd slow down progress...

    I don't know much about it, and my feeling is the people in charge don't know any more.

    It definitely wouldn't be the thing to start a presidency with, because the chances of failure are just that much higher.
    , @The preferred nomenclature is...
    Except almost nothing run by our current government bureaucracy works.

    Also, it be one thing if our demographics were the same as they were in 1964 but they ain't.
    , @Frau Katze
    A single payer health care system isn't as bad as you think, plus it costs a lot less than what you're spending (I'm in Canada). But one thing must be remembered: goodies like this are incompatible with open borders.

    Otherwise you might as well hang up a sign at the border saying "Free stuff ahead."

    Canada doesn't border a country like Mexico and up till now (the idiot Trudeau might change things) there was no unvetted immigration.

    Sure, house prices are through the roof in Vancouver thanks to wealthy Chinese (some of whom don't even live here) but the Chinese are not forming an underclass. So no thinks that single payer health care is ripping them off to support an underclass.

    Unfortunately the US already has an underclass. That no doubt is why the US is alone in the West without some type of single payer health system.

    But mass unvetted immigration may bring in another underclass. I'm referring to Jason Richwine's research that the Mexican immigrants are not assimilating even after several generations. If Trump doesn't deal with this, he will make a very serious mistake and lose support.
  65. @SPMoore8
    I bet she wins at Chess by calling her King a Queen. And I bet she never announces it until she's facing mate.

    “I bet she wins at Chess by calling her King a Queen. And I bet she never announces it until she’s facing mate.”

    That would actually be a fantastic conundrum for an opponent to place her in: she either falls in line with the established rules of the gender binary of chess and wins the game, or she respects her opponent’s delusion and loses. In the former case, is she forced to admit that whether or not one insists on identifying as a different gender, the type of crown (genitalia) is the true gender identifier.

    Read More
    • Agree: SPMoore8
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Cletus, I would be inclined to believe that in her game of chess all the pieces have the same value and can be placed where ever she pleases and then you're playing checkers.
  66. @Anon
    https://medium.com/incerto/the-intellectual-yet-idiot-13211e2d0577#.w9zl928er

    Nice piece, though the last bit does devolve into Taleb bragging a bit. (I go drinking with Russians! I lift!)

    Fun little right-wing reading list there at the end, I may consider. I always wanted to read Ammianus Marcellinus–I’m getting the feeling we may be there soon. (He was one of the last writers of the Roman Empire near the fall of the western half, depending on how you count Procopius.)

    Read More
  67. @George
    Trying to figure out where the singular use of they came from I found this:

    “His or Her” vs. Singular “They”

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number. Without coining words, this can only be done in the third person singular by use of compound terms like “his or her”. Grammarians in 1879, 1922, 1931, 1957, and the 1970s have accepted “they” as a singular term that could be used in place of “he” or “he or she”, though sometimes limiting it to informal constructions. Others in 1795, 1825, 1863, 1898, 1926, and 1982 argued against it for various reasons. And whatever the grammarians might argue, people have been using the singular “they” for about the last 600 years, though (as mentioned earlier) it can only be applied in certain cases. If new gender-neutral pronouns are not adopted, i’m sure that singular “they” will still be a point of contention for centuries to come. For further information on the use of singular “their” throughout the centuries, see the large body of information that Henry Churchyard has compiled on the subject.

    https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we

    So long as they don’t use “we” instead of “I” we can continue without a peep from Prince Albert II of Monaco

    Read More
  68. @Opinionator
    Seems just insane.

    It is already generating all kinds of fears in people and dredging up all the old associations of Republican coldheartedness and partisanship. "Yanking people's health care away." It could eventually lead to some tragic human interest stories that the media will pounce on.

    If the idea is repeal and replace, why the hell don't they wait until they have something to replace it with? What is the rush?

    I suppose Trump could veto. Or trade his his signature for repeal of Hart-Celler.

    We must all be missing something. What is it?

    The first rule of Trump — and I love the guy all the same — is that he’s a narcissist. So the idea of replacing “Obamacare” with “Trumpcare” appeals to his ego. He also thinks everyone loves him and he has infinite amounts of political capital to do everything he wants all at once, everyone will see that Trumpcare is far better than Obamacare because it’s Trumpcare, etc.

    I agree that this as the day one priority is very worrisome.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    I'll elaborate on "Trump thinks everyone loves him." He of course knows he has critics, but he thinks they're just jealous. He's very similar to most rappers in that respect, as Sailer often mentioned during the early days of the campaign.

    This is why whenever Obama, or Hillary, or the New York Times demonstrates even the barest minimum expected level of cordiality or fairness,[1] he goes out of his way to lavish them with praise and announces all has been forgiven and they'll be working together from now on. And then he seems genuinely surprised and hurt when they immediately go right back to attacking him.

    It's also why in the early campaign he was constantly insisting that he'd win all 50 states and the black, Hispanic and Muslim vote, the NYT would endorse him, most Muslims supported his Muslim ban, etc. That he thinks everyone's on his side explains his occasional odd uses of the royal we, and even odder uses of the third person.[2]

    Again, this is not to attack the guy, but to the extent that we in the alt-centrist-sphere have influence (I bet Bannon and/or Miller are at least occasional Sailer readers), it helps to understand what makes the PEOTUS tick.

    [1] Such as: Hillary calls to concede, Obama invites him to the White House, NYT says the Buzzfeed dossier is uncorroborated.
    [2] "The Muslim ban is something that in some form has morphed into the 'extreme vetting.'"

    , @Harry Baldwin
    I share your concern about repealing Obamacare. Priority from Day One must be immigration. To get into a quagmire trying to repeal Obamcare might cost us any chance to deal with the border.
  69. @anonguy
    The last few topics have been yawners.

    So how about this one.

    Portland, of all places, this winter, has experienced a multiplicity of winter storms and snowfalls that are Biblical.

    I say of all places because Portland is a locus of support for the notion that AGW is long settled science and the anthropos are taking it on the chin. So much so that the Portland Board of Ed earlier in 2016 banned expression of any other view on AGW than the prevailing orthodoxy in the local streets.

    Sick of winning yet? BTW, prior to the election, I predicted that the Trump victory would be an inflection point to a great turning globally, just as 1989 was.

    Anyhow, the tectonic plates are moving, it is a new era.

    It’s been colder than usual in many places across the world. Many of the Greek Islands are experiencing significant snow falls and the accompanying cold temperatures. Those of us in eastern North America endured one of the coldest springs in 2016. To my knowledge, there hasn’t been a warm spring in north eastern America since 2012.

    Read More
  70. @Chrisnonymous
    OT:


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/01/04/the-u-s-might-be-better-off-without-congress-and-a-president/

    You also talk about a collective presidency. What does that mean?

    This is another example that I’ve seen it in practice in other countries, especially Switzerland. I firmly believe that there’s no reason in a complex world for one individual to coordinate everything in a government. How can one man actually juggle all the domestic and foreign challenges at the same time and come to a coherent, comprehensive decision about it? He can’t.
     
    I always thought the original idea behind the P/VP election system modeled the Roman consuls--basically those garnering the 2 highest number of votes received executive leadership.

    Singapore and Switzerland. I hear that Singapore is quite unpleasant to live in--boring and stifling. Switzerland is supposed to be lovely however.

    The VP was a complete afterthought in the Constitutional Convention. He was elected (originally) along with the President on a combined ballot, but that was mostly part of the Rube Goldberg mechanism of making it hard to seize the Presidency as a platform to overthrow the republic. The dual-ballot was put in to ensure that you didn’t only vote for your home-state hero–you have to vote for TWO guys.

    It’s not clear at all what the Convention was thinking about the role of the Vice President, but the short answer is “not much.” It certainly wasn’t intended as a co-presidency, or what we now know as a Vice-Premiership or Deputy Prime Minister-ship in a coalition government.

    Read More
  71. The prohibition of using gender specific pronouns in academia has been going on for a while now. My first year of university was 2003, and I recall a self professed feminist “professor” telling us they would deduct marks for using gender specific pronouns. This included words such as “manholes”and “manned”. One student didn’t get the message, and was knocked down a whole grade level on their paper because they used a gender specific pronoun.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Formerly CARealist
    I was in a rhetoric class in 1990 where this was discussed as a woman's issue. Using "he" for a pronoun was deemed offensive to some women, and they spoke up about it. They were lying, of course. They weren't going to read the other papers, that was the TA's job. The TA himself, a hip, liberal white guy announced that he always used "she".

    The whole episode reminded me why I was glad I was studying microbiology. Bacteria just don't give a crap about such nonsense.
    , @2Mintzin1
    Ha! I think I've got everybody beat here. When I was in junior college in 1975 my philosophy prof. promoted the idea that we should use sex-neutral pronouns...the one that sticks in my mind is "ti" instead of he/she.
    A pretty good professor, but a little looney on this subject.
    He did not react well to my comment that the proper use of language is to give us more information, not less.
  72. @SFG
    Yeah, liberals are right on healthcare. Just give every legal citizen Medicare and raise taxes to pay for it. The single payer will drive down costs and eliminate the private insurance companies that basically make money as middlemen so it won't cost quite as much as you think.

    Yes, it'll help the diversity. It'll also help unemployed downsized middle-aged white guys.

    The more I think about healthcare, the less sure I am. I’m not sure there’s a good system, only that there are always hard tradeoffs, and that there’s no system which is better than the other in all respects.

    It’s difficult even to tell if a particular system is doing worse or better than the previous one. The US for example tends to pay more for its drugs than other countries, but in part that’s because it pays for research and development costs which other countries with centralized bargaining power avoid. However, it’s obvious that the US couldn’t simply replicate those better bargains, because in the absence of higher US prices there would be no R&D.

    All I can tell is that the Swiss system is based on private insurers, is truly universal, very expensive, and at the highest level still not providing US quality technology (and for economy of scale problems often German or French clinics are better), and it’s difficult to tell if it could be scaled up to the size of the US. I’m not sure a Medicare for all system would work better than for example Obamacare, but it’s also a question of “for whom?” Maybe it’d work better for Latinos and even poor whites, but worse for the white middle class, or only worse for the upper middle class, or there would be more cheating as the upper middle class would just try to opt out of the system, or it’d slow down progress…

    I don’t know much about it, and my feeling is the people in charge don’t know any more.

    It definitely wouldn’t be the thing to start a presidency with, because the chances of failure are just that much higher.

    Read More
  73. @George
    Trying to figure out where the singular use of they came from I found this:

    “His or Her” vs. Singular “They”

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number. Without coining words, this can only be done in the third person singular by use of compound terms like “his or her”. Grammarians in 1879, 1922, 1931, 1957, and the 1970s have accepted “they” as a singular term that could be used in place of “he” or “he or she”, though sometimes limiting it to informal constructions. Others in 1795, 1825, 1863, 1898, 1926, and 1982 argued against it for various reasons. And whatever the grammarians might argue, people have been using the singular “they” for about the last 600 years, though (as mentioned earlier) it can only be applied in certain cases. If new gender-neutral pronouns are not adopted, i’m sure that singular “they” will still be a point of contention for centuries to come. For further information on the use of singular “their” throughout the centuries, see the large body of information that Henry Churchyard has compiled on the subject.

    https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number.

    Although I’m insistently told that it no longer does, I take this as confirmation that Asperger’s Syndrome most certainly did exist in the 18th c.

    They should have solved the problem of irregular verbs while they were at it: so annoying!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    If that's this Joseph Priestley, he had plenty of other intellectual diversions.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Priestley


    "an 18th-century English theologian, English Dissenters clergyman, natural philosopher, chemist, innovative grammarian, multi-subject educator, and Liberal political theorist who published over 150 works. He is usually credited with the discovery of oxygen, having isolated it in its gaseous state, although Carl Wilhelm Scheele and Antoine Lavoisier also have a claim to the discovery."
     
    , @SFG
    Except for the philosophical argument that 'Asperger's Syndrome' doesn't exist until Asperger defines it, there are plenty of historical figures displaying Asperger traits. (Newton comes to mind.) There are even ancient Greek jokes about impractical scholastikos, though I guess that's a slightly different kettle of fish.
  74. “Reactionaries everywhere have griped that “they” and “them” are plural pronouns, and it’s breaking traditional rules of grammar to use them to refer to a singular person.”

    It’s sneaky. Using “they” and “them” makes it seem like there are more of them.

    See what I mean?

    Read More
  75. “They” is plural. Its reminiscent of that guy in the Bible that Jesus cast 42 demons out of. The demons said to call them “legion, for we are many”. If memory serves the demons then entered some animals (lambs, pigs?….its been a while), and they all ran off a cliff.

    ” They” Gomez may be schizophrenic, but at least he has each other (lulz).

    Read More
  76. @reiner Tor
    Except that some 90+% of healthcare costs fall under the "catastrophic" umbrella. You get cancer, and in a few months you'll spend many times more on it than your total aggregate healthcare spending up to that point. Basically you don't need to worry much about healthcare costs other than the few big illnesses.

    The other issue is the few people who are born with or - through no fault of their own - acquire some expensive chronic condition. Do you want them to suffer throughout their lives? It's ultimately a question which you Americans have to answer for your own society. I'm happy that in Europe it's covered by society. Just one of my colleagues has a daughter who was born with a non-genetic heart condition, which may or may not stay with her throughout her life. Besides being compassionate, it could still happen to me.

    I think it’s quite true that, with a free insurance market, those with any kind of pre-existing condition would be shut out of the market, or at least face much higher premiums. The only way it could work is with some kind of group insurance, through a job or some kind of charitable society (the way it worked way back at the start of the 20th century). It was interesting for me to read about some of those lodges and friendly society of the pre-WWI, though; a worker through his society could buy a year’s worth of care with a day’s wage.

    As I’m sure you know, European healthcare systems are not without costs or deficiencies. I think when it comes to healthcare, psychological security plays a big part, and Europeans are no doubt reassured by the idea of being financially covered. Actually getting care, on the other hand, is not guaranteed, going by what I’ve read of timeliness of care in most European countries, waiting lists and so on. This survey did a good job summarizing the pros and cons of 12 different countries:

    https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa-613.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    pre-WWI
     
    Pre-WWI, if you had no access to doctors, it increased your life expectancy. Between the wars, doctors just barely broke even, saving as many lives as they killed.

    Modern medicine is totally different, in that it has very expensive but also quite effective treatments, like surgery and chemotherapy which could save your life maybe 50% of the time if you have cancer. There is also very little limit to costs. By spending double the amount they might increase your chances from 50% to 60%, is it worth it? The costs are very difficult to measure, US patients subsidizing prices in other countries has already been mentioned, obviously it's not easier to divide costs within the country.

    I will read the link later, from reading about many different systems from different people with widely different proposals and perspectives, my take is that there's always a downside to any system. So it's basically a question of choice, to a large extent. Which is not to say that it cannot be improved, just a difficult thing to do. I certainly wouldn't want Trump to risk his legacy by jumping on the issue in such haste.
  77. @snorlax
    The first rule of Trump — and I love the guy all the same — is that he's a narcissist. So the idea of replacing "Obamacare" with "Trumpcare" appeals to his ego. He also thinks everyone loves him and he has infinite amounts of political capital to do everything he wants all at once, everyone will see that Trumpcare is far better than Obamacare because it's Trumpcare, etc.

    I agree that this as the day one priority is very worrisome.

    I’ll elaborate on “Trump thinks everyone loves him.” He of course knows he has critics, but he thinks they’re just jealous. He’s very similar to most rappers in that respect, as Sailer often mentioned during the early days of the campaign.

    This is why whenever Obama, or Hillary, or the New York Times demonstrates even the barest minimum expected level of cordiality or fairness,[1] he goes out of his way to lavish them with praise and announces all has been forgiven and they’ll be working together from now on. And then he seems genuinely surprised and hurt when they immediately go right back to attacking him.

    It’s also why in the early campaign he was constantly insisting that he’d win all 50 states and the black, Hispanic and Muslim vote, the NYT would endorse him, most Muslims supported his Muslim ban, etc. That he thinks everyone’s on his side explains his occasional odd uses of the royal we, and even odder uses of the third person.[2]

    Again, this is not to attack the guy, but to the extent that we in the alt-centrist-sphere have influence (I bet Bannon and/or Miller are at least occasional Sailer readers), it helps to understand what makes the PEOTUS tick.

    [1] Such as: Hillary calls to concede, Obama invites him to the White House, NYT says the Buzzfeed dossier is uncorroborated.
    [2] “The Muslim ban is something that in some form has morphed into the ‘extreme vetting.’”

    Read More
  78. @slumber_j

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number.
     
    Although I'm insistently told that it no longer does, I take this as confirmation that Asperger's Syndrome most certainly did exist in the 18th c.

    They should have solved the problem of irregular verbs while they were at it: so annoying!!

    If that’s this Joseph Priestley, he had plenty of other intellectual diversions.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Priestley

    “an 18th-century English theologian, English Dissenters clergyman, natural philosopher, chemist, innovative grammarian, multi-subject educator, and Liberal political theorist who published over 150 works. He is usually credited with the discovery of oxygen, having isolated it in its gaseous state, although Carl Wilhelm Scheele and Antoine Lavoisier also have a claim to the discovery.”

    Read More
  79. @reiner Tor
    A very good blog post by Greg Cochran. Just published. Worth to read. Medicine and healthcare are very unlike the rest of the economy. The market's invisible hand won't weed out bad service or bad medicine.

    Thanks for the article. I don’t think he really shows that the market does not weed out bad service or bad medicine, though. He does essentially repeat the argument commonly made, also by some economists, that demand for medicine is too inelastic, i.e. it’s one thing when the alternative of downloading some app is accomplishing a small task more slowly, but it’s another thing when the alternative to getting surgery is certain, painful death. So people will be willing to pay more to get medical service, reducing their bargaining power. But presumably the countervailing dynamics of competition still apply: it’s clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.

    He wonders why centuries of free market in medicine didn’t achieve much, but can’t we ask the same of just about every other scientific and technological achievement? They all took centuries to develop, and they all or mostly saw the biggest leaps in the early modern period. Economics doesn’t say that the market is magic or achieves modern prosperity overnight. The idea is that no lasting progress can be made without accumulation of capital, which is understood in the broad sense of any goods, including knowledge, that can be used to produce what we want. That is, you need economic growth before you can talk about redistributing wealth.

    Greg also notes that the last 50 years haven’t seen as much progress as the earlier 20th century, which kind of undermines his thesis, since those are the years that saw significant increases in regulation and government oversight of medicine. Getting a new drug approved by the FDA is a long and expensive process and you have to ask whether lives potentially saved by keeping unsafe drugs off the market outweigh lives lost because perfectly effective drugs have been kept off for too long. At least we should talk about legalizing the sale of non-approved drugs, as long as patients and doctors understand that the drugs are not yet approved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    it’s clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.
     
    Did homeopathy producers go out of business, or if not, when can we expect them to do so? With drugs, it's difficult to tell if they work. People didn't notice for millennia that doctors were killing them! How is that even possible to have a free market with such blind customers?
  80. @Alden
    Trump should first remove the requirement to enroll and then re name it Federal Health Subsidy, FHS and let it be.

    The requirement to enroll was the lynchpin, because otherwise the young healthy people who tend not to buy, and actually rarely need, health insurance wouldn’t be there to finance the scheme.

    Supposedly we are talking about an 11 million person gap. I would think via an expansion of Medicaid and Medicare, and removing the atrocious employer linkage we could get everybody covered. Oh, and scrap the tort system. You can afford a casualty compensation system or you can afford a casualty tort system but you can’t afford both. Of course, that’s the last vestige of States as sovereign entities but that’s been in the works for 150 years.

    “Health” is inherently uninsurable, but we’ll kick that can down the road like all the others.

    Read More
  81. @jtgw
    I think it's quite true that, with a free insurance market, those with any kind of pre-existing condition would be shut out of the market, or at least face much higher premiums. The only way it could work is with some kind of group insurance, through a job or some kind of charitable society (the way it worked way back at the start of the 20th century). It was interesting for me to read about some of those lodges and friendly society of the pre-WWI, though; a worker through his society could buy a year's worth of care with a day's wage.

    As I'm sure you know, European healthcare systems are not without costs or deficiencies. I think when it comes to healthcare, psychological security plays a big part, and Europeans are no doubt reassured by the idea of being financially covered. Actually getting care, on the other hand, is not guaranteed, going by what I've read of timeliness of care in most European countries, waiting lists and so on. This survey did a good job summarizing the pros and cons of 12 different countries:

    https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa-613.pdf

    pre-WWI

    Pre-WWI, if you had no access to doctors, it increased your life expectancy. Between the wars, doctors just barely broke even, saving as many lives as they killed.

    Modern medicine is totally different, in that it has very expensive but also quite effective treatments, like surgery and chemotherapy which could save your life maybe 50% of the time if you have cancer. There is also very little limit to costs. By spending double the amount they might increase your chances from 50% to 60%, is it worth it? The costs are very difficult to measure, US patients subsidizing prices in other countries has already been mentioned, obviously it’s not easier to divide costs within the country.

    I will read the link later, from reading about many different systems from different people with widely different proposals and perspectives, my take is that there’s always a downside to any system. So it’s basically a question of choice, to a large extent. Which is not to say that it cannot be improved, just a difficult thing to do. I certainly wouldn’t want Trump to risk his legacy by jumping on the issue in such haste.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    John Wanamaker, the department store magnate, used to say, "Half of all the money I spend on advertising is completely ineffective, but I don't know which half." Or something like that. But we don't seem to try very hard for health care, because lots of people are making a nice living off of the half that is wasted.

    The latest studies show, for example, that giving women frequent mammograms results in the discovery of many more early stage tumors (and therefore creates lots more expense for surgery and chemo, etc. as well as lots of mental anguish) but it doesn't actually change mortality rates from breast cancer. Same thing with prostate cancer. There are slow growing tumors that you will outlive and aggressive ones that will kill you no matter when you find them so the whole emphasis on "early detection" may be completely misguided at least as it is being done now (at tremendous expense).

    But there is a whole industry built around "non profit" fund raising and early detection and treatment, etc. and if you try to change anything they will accuse you of hating women and mobilize hysterical marches, etc. (when in fact they are protecting their own bank accounts and could care less about women).
  82. OT. Imagine how evil someone must be to deliberately change the demography of a place for political, military or strategic advantage! Couldn’t happen here.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/13/irans-syria-project-pushing-population-shifts-to-increase-influence

    “Iran seeks arch of control from Tehran to Israel’s border by moving Shia communities into areas where Sunnis have fled or been forced out. The population swaps are central to a plan to make demographic changes to parts of Syria, realigning the country into zones of influence that backers of Bashar al-Assad, led by Iran, can directly control and use to advance broader interests.”

    Read More
  83. @SPMoore8
    This is interesting, and the Berkeleyside comments included a quote from an 18th Century grammarian complaining how the plural second person ("you") was being used for second person singular ("thou"). And of course we no longer make that distinction, either.

    As we discussed the other day, use of "they" as a pronoun referring to an antecedent is common ("A writer should always try to write clearly, but (a) he should also try .... (traditional) (b) he or she should also try .... (seventies) (c) they should also try ...... (current status) not to sound like an idiot."

    So what's happening here is that they are attempting to hijack that convention for all pronoun usage. However, unlike other changes (you/thou; Miss/Mrs/Ms) this one creates legitimate confusion because of the plural status of "they."

    Incidentally, it also carries with it a whiff of entitlement, in many languages (not just IE ones) the proper mode of address involves third person, and even in the service one sometimes encountered it: "The Lieutenant orders the Marine to do xyz" when he's standing right there, it also comes up with sports celebrities, thus, "Kirby, I notice you said you were feeling good in centerfield although you are playing left field now: was that a Freudian slip?" "Kirby Puckett don't know nothing about no Floridian slip."

    My objection in this particular case was that: (1) this is an accused murderer. Get over it. (2) the perp was still at large, and use of plural pronoun was actually confusing.

    Your option a above (“…he should also try…”) is correct. The masculine embraces the feminine in these situations.

    The phrase “in the case of the pronouns ‘he,’ ‘him,’ and ‘his,’ the masculine shall embrace the feminine” (or other words to that effect) was often made part of the boilerplate terms of contracts, wills, statutes, and similar legal documents before all of the recent baloney about being feminist, politically correct, and sensitive to idiots prevailed.

    It’s no more incorrect to write or say “he” in sich circumstances than it was for Mr. Armstrong to have said “man” and “mankind” when he did.

    If anything, I advise continued use of “he” with the explicit, legalistic admonition that the masculine shall embrace the feminine – that ought to really irk readers who hate healthy, normal, heterosexual relations between men and women.

    Read More
  84. @snorlax
    The first rule of Trump — and I love the guy all the same — is that he's a narcissist. So the idea of replacing "Obamacare" with "Trumpcare" appeals to his ego. He also thinks everyone loves him and he has infinite amounts of political capital to do everything he wants all at once, everyone will see that Trumpcare is far better than Obamacare because it's Trumpcare, etc.

    I agree that this as the day one priority is very worrisome.

    I share your concern about repealing Obamacare. Priority from Day One must be immigration. To get into a quagmire trying to repeal Obamcare might cost us any chance to deal with the border.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Immigration in the US and supporting right-wing parties in Europe. Especially the Swedish Democrats, because stories of Swedish cucking cause the strongest, almost physical pain in my stomach. It would be nice if no wars were started anywhere. If Soros and all of his operations were exposed in a thorough investigation - is it not illegal in the US to finance a coup in a foreign country? Soros is bragging about it. Was financing BLM with its terrorist rhetoric (leading eventually to terror attacks against cops) totally legal? Bringing down globalist oligarchs would perhaps be more important than temporarily slowing down immigration. It would also be more far reaching, helping Europe.

    The healthcare system will be extremely shitty with a non-white majority anyway, so why bother until cultural Marxism is not fixed?
    , @densa
    Agree with the discussion here on healthcare. Trump must be very careful here, and the traditional GOP cure amounts to applying leeches and leaves them vulnerable in 2018. But there are alternatives. Trump mentioned yesterday that the drug companies were "getting away with murder." This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It's a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.

    The mandate needs to go. But if it can't go, then instead of mandating private insurance premiums, and subsidizing their inflationary cost, the mandate could be shifted to Medicare. Think about it. Young people can buy into Medicare for less than ACA costs, and it shores up Medicare by bringing in new payers. They could adjust a premium for them to reflect that they're still paying into the system with payroll deductions. I think it should be a option.

    The Left that got excluded from Obama's famous Table with its Conversations on ACA wanted a Medicare alternative to enforced purchase of private insurance. Given the relatively small number of workers, mostly self-employed, being 'served' by ACA, they could be moved to Medicare (or Medicaid) and shut down the ACA disaster.

    BTW, I am on it. I am a beneficiary of it, and I support its repeal. As an example of the waste of money it represents, I cannot use the federal website. All of my business with them is done over the phone, which is expensive for the government and painful for me. Why? Who knows. Somehow, somewhere, someone entered some information into my account and now it is permanently unavailable to me to use. No one can fix that little glitch for me. Oh, and thanks for the subsidy. I'd tell you how much but it would ruin your day.
    , @okie
    the problem is that probably 60+ in the senate and PROBABLY Pushing 300 in the house are pro immigration for one reason or other( fear of their constituents, the media, or their donors). the republican speaker just last nite promised that the DACA people "will not be deported" I'm sorry, just cuz they are "yutes" doesn't give them exemption from laws.

    This is all about the fact that the upper middles that actually vote the most are not yet threatened enough by migrants like the LMC an the poors being displaced are. As long as dems and rinos can hang on to 30-40% of nice white people, that plus their coalition of fringes will get them over the top to stop any real action. Just like even with every misstep GWB made post 2004, the Rep core vote halted all but obamacare.

    As a citizen i like this minority protection, ( i don't want 51% pissing into the cornflakes of the 49%) but it scares me that the plans to "elect a new population" will continue until it is too late to stop, just because nice white ladies aren't as scared yet as roofers are about their livelihood and future.
  85. @guest
    Had Mother Theresa demanded people refer to her with neutral pronouns, we would have had to say "they is a bride of Christ." People might have thought Jesus was gay married to a dude!

    Wouldn’t it have to be “spouse” rather than “bride?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    I don't know how they refer to the participants of gay weddings. One of them could be a bride for all I know.
  86. @jtgw
    Thanks for the article. I don't think he really shows that the market does not weed out bad service or bad medicine, though. He does essentially repeat the argument commonly made, also by some economists, that demand for medicine is too inelastic, i.e. it's one thing when the alternative of downloading some app is accomplishing a small task more slowly, but it's another thing when the alternative to getting surgery is certain, painful death. So people will be willing to pay more to get medical service, reducing their bargaining power. But presumably the countervailing dynamics of competition still apply: it's clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.

    He wonders why centuries of free market in medicine didn't achieve much, but can't we ask the same of just about every other scientific and technological achievement? They all took centuries to develop, and they all or mostly saw the biggest leaps in the early modern period. Economics doesn't say that the market is magic or achieves modern prosperity overnight. The idea is that no lasting progress can be made without accumulation of capital, which is understood in the broad sense of any goods, including knowledge, that can be used to produce what we want. That is, you need economic growth before you can talk about redistributing wealth.

    Greg also notes that the last 50 years haven't seen as much progress as the earlier 20th century, which kind of undermines his thesis, since those are the years that saw significant increases in regulation and government oversight of medicine. Getting a new drug approved by the FDA is a long and expensive process and you have to ask whether lives potentially saved by keeping unsafe drugs off the market outweigh lives lost because perfectly effective drugs have been kept off for too long. At least we should talk about legalizing the sale of non-approved drugs, as long as patients and doctors understand that the drugs are not yet approved.

    it’s clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.

    Did homeopathy producers go out of business, or if not, when can we expect them to do so? With drugs, it’s difficult to tell if they work. People didn’t notice for millennia that doctors were killing them! How is that even possible to have a free market with such blind customers?

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    That's like asking how it's possible to have a free market when people buy crap like McDonald's instead of a good, homecooked meal. The two don't really have anything to do with eachother. If we had a free market in medicine people would be killing themselves with heroin. (More than they are already.) Because most of us are ignorant, stupid, and don't know what we're doing.
    , @jtgw
    One response, of course, is that, as long as customers are satisfied, what business is it of anyone else's? lol
  87. @reiner Tor
    Except that some 90+% of healthcare costs fall under the "catastrophic" umbrella. You get cancer, and in a few months you'll spend many times more on it than your total aggregate healthcare spending up to that point. Basically you don't need to worry much about healthcare costs other than the few big illnesses.

    The other issue is the few people who are born with or - through no fault of their own - acquire some expensive chronic condition. Do you want them to suffer throughout their lives? It's ultimately a question which you Americans have to answer for your own society. I'm happy that in Europe it's covered by society. Just one of my colleagues has a daughter who was born with a non-genetic heart condition, which may or may not stay with her throughout her life. Besides being compassionate, it could still happen to me.

    Thank you for reading my comment and replying. What you have written sounds exactly like the opinion of most of my friends and acquaintances. As long as the bills are paid they really don’t care how much anything costs, as long as the co-pay (which comes out of their own pocket at the time the service is performed) is small. If you ask them what some procedure costs they will tell you what the co-pay was, not what the hospital or physician has billed.

    I have seen over the years that since our system of “insurance” covers a whole range of things that do not fall under the catastrophic umbrella, such as running to the doctor every two months to have blood glucose levels taken if you are considered “pre-diabetic”(can be done at basically no cost by yourself at home) and taking children to the doctor if they have a cold (all my colleagues at work did this repeatedly) that a great deal of what we term “health care” does not really improve people’s health. A doctor’s office is a seat of infection that should be avoided at all costs, as are hospitals. Look up how many people lose their lives annually due to mistakes made by the medical profession – it is horrendous.

    And please do have a gander at Karl Denninger’s pleas that the laws already in the books pertaining to fraudulent business practices be applied to the medical industry. That would be a wonderful place to start.

    Read More
  88. Anybody who uses fake terms to refer to people or things are untrustworthy and frankly dangerous. Changing the language is just one way these dirty, lying, dangerous friends of perverts and criminals are destroying our society.

    Time to end all of this. Nobody should emulate them except to mock them. The sooner they are chased from the field with their tails between their legs the better.

    Read More
  89. One, can you make a living as a chess teacher? Two, leave Mother Teresa, now St. Teresa of Calcutta, out of your left fringe screed. I remember when the left found fault with this saint.

    Read More
  90. @Kylie
    "...Pablo Gomez Jr., 22, the main suspect in the killing of Emilie Inman..."

    Shouldn't that be "suspects"?

    "But after learning that Gomez prefers 'they/them' pronouns, Berkeleyside corrected its initial identification and started to refer to Gomez as 'they'."

    Shouldn't that be "the Gomezes prefer"?

    What if the Gomezes are found guilty of murder in a court of law but they prefer to be known as "not guilty"? Or since guilty/not guilty is/are binary, what if the Gomezes prefer to be referred to as "found to be on some continuum ranging from guilt to innocence"?

    Kylie, this is ripe for Abbott and Costello. “Excuse me, who are you?” “I am they.” “They who?” “No, who’s on first.”

    Read More
  91. @Jefferson
    Jesse Jackson is looking for a huge pay day by financially shaking down Uber.

    http://www.blackpressusa.com/jesse-jackson-tells-uber-to-release-diversity-data-invest-in-oakland/

    The fact that so many wealthy people who run private sector Fortune 500 companies fold like a pizza slice and cut Jesse Jackson a huge paycheck means the 1 percent is mostly made up of Cucks. Most of them are his bitches because they fear him.

    Jesse Jackson's Black privilege exists because of White Cuckness.

    Jeff, as to Uber’s diversity…don’t you need to own a real car? Who wants to ride to the airport bouncing around in the back of a low-rider with 20 inch rims?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Jeff, as to Uber’s diversity…don’t you need to own a real car? Who wants to ride to the airport bouncing around in the back of a low-rider with 20 inch rims?"

    The demographics of Uber drivers is already quite vibrantly diverse. Where I live a high percentage of Uber drivers are Allahu Akbars (Arabs, South Asians, and Somalis).

    Unless Jesse Jackson only means African Americans when he is talking about needing more diversity.

  92. @Harry Baldwin
    I share your concern about repealing Obamacare. Priority from Day One must be immigration. To get into a quagmire trying to repeal Obamcare might cost us any chance to deal with the border.

    Immigration in the US and supporting right-wing parties in Europe. Especially the Swedish Democrats, because stories of Swedish cucking cause the strongest, almost physical pain in my stomach. It would be nice if no wars were started anywhere. If Soros and all of his operations were exposed in a thorough investigation – is it not illegal in the US to finance a coup in a foreign country? Soros is bragging about it. Was financing BLM with its terrorist rhetoric (leading eventually to terror attacks against cops) totally legal? Bringing down globalist oligarchs would perhaps be more important than temporarily slowing down immigration. It would also be more far reaching, helping Europe.

    The healthcare system will be extremely shitty with a non-white majority anyway, so why bother until cultural Marxism is not fixed?

    Read More
  93. @reiner Tor
    Since the number of people who prefer the pronoun "they" is so small, even with n=1 they seem to be overrepresented.

    I can say for a fact that perverts are way overrepresented in prison as you might expect. If you’re willing to break society’s norms for your own gratification or if you are unable to resist the urge to do so you are more likely to commit a crime.

    Read More
  94. @Autochthon
    "Gender nonconforming chess-teacher" is not a real job, and New York is expensive. I think her description should read either "waitress" or "trust-fund brat."

    I disagree, I bet you can make early 20s livable money teaching chess in NYC if you know the right people. I question how good she actually is at chess, but that’s a different argument.

    Read More
  95. the right to gender-neutral pronouns.

    That right doesn’t include forcing or coercing other people to conform to your stupid Newspeak.

    Read More
  96. @slumber_j

    Around 1795, the language authorities Lindley Murray, Joseph Priestly, and Hugh Blair, amongst others, campaigned against pronoun irregularities in pronoun use, such as lack of agreement in gender and number.
     
    Although I'm insistently told that it no longer does, I take this as confirmation that Asperger's Syndrome most certainly did exist in the 18th c.

    They should have solved the problem of irregular verbs while they were at it: so annoying!!

    Except for the philosophical argument that ‘Asperger’s Syndrome’ doesn’t exist until Asperger defines it, there are plenty of historical figures displaying Asperger traits. (Newton comes to mind.) There are even ancient Greek jokes about impractical scholastikos, though I guess that’s a slightly different kettle of fish.

    Read More
    • Replies: @slumber_j
    Well, things exist before people identify them. That's necessarily the case. You can posit things that aren't yet the case of course... But anyway, I was joking.
  97. @Jefferson
    Jesse Jackson is looking for a huge pay day by financially shaking down Uber.

    http://www.blackpressusa.com/jesse-jackson-tells-uber-to-release-diversity-data-invest-in-oakland/

    The fact that so many wealthy people who run private sector Fortune 500 companies fold like a pizza slice and cut Jesse Jackson a huge paycheck means the 1 percent is mostly made up of Cucks. Most of them are his bitches because they fear him.

    Jesse Jackson's Black privilege exists because of White Cuckness.

    It’s not so easy as all that. A lot of these guys’ fortunes depend on the upper middle class buying their products, and if Uber winds up known as ‘racist’ they could have problems given their business model works best in cities, which are much more liberal. Also liberals are much more fond of boycotts–I have my doubts Breitbart is going to be able to recover from all the advertisers leaving, for example.

    Gamergate was the only incident I know of where successful resistance to the SJW agenda occurred.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "It’s not so easy as all that. A lot of these guys’ fortunes depend on the upper middle class buying their products, and if Uber winds up known as ‘racist’ they could have problems given their business model works best in cities, which are much more liberal."

    Silicon Valley is only 1 percent Black so there for making them racists, but that hasn't stopped upper middle class Left Wingers from purchasing their electronic products and apps in mass.
    , @Jack D
    Air BnB is also having a real problem. People don't want their "guests" robbing or raping them or messing up their homes, etc. and as we know, race is a very good indicator for criminality -certain races offend at rates many times higher than other races. So left to their own devices, Uber drivers, Air BNB hosts, etc. will avoid certain minorities if they can figure out who they are in advance. Taxi drivers passing by black males is a long running phenomenon (and well justified - many cab drivers over the years have lost their lives). AirBNB is now taking measures to "avoid racism" by giving AirBNB hosts less information about their guests. The problem is that the execs (who just want to get Jesse & co. off their asses) are not the ones who have to bear the consequences when vibrant customers mug the uber driver or trash the rental. How many AirBNB hosts are willing to literally "take a bullet" so that the folks at AirBNB corporate HQ won't "look racist"?
  98. @Jefferson
    Ashley Judd has 1st World problems.
    http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/12/ashley-judd-hollywood-activist-wants-standard-issu/

    I remember the six months a couple decades ago when Ashley Judd was hot.

    Read More
  99. Trump is tackling the ACA because its held together with farts and chewing gum in the form of dictats from HHS Secretary and executive orders announcing how the government will view certain statutes, no matter what the original wording is.

    Trump is smart enough to know that the minute he starts adding to the garbage fire that is the ACA, the Democrats and their media wing will go “Aha! You OWN it now!” Fixing it now and getting it out of the way requires a legislative fight.

    Those of you who wore the zipper mask through the election can’t wait to break them out at every opportunity, I know. However, 95% of what Trump will do with immigration can be reversed by HIM, Day 1. Live by the pen, die by the pen. The ACA is going to be the fight in Congress, and he has to focus the firepower there first because he wants nothing to do with it down the road.

    Read More
  100. @SFG
    Yeah, liberals are right on healthcare. Just give every legal citizen Medicare and raise taxes to pay for it. The single payer will drive down costs and eliminate the private insurance companies that basically make money as middlemen so it won't cost quite as much as you think.

    Yes, it'll help the diversity. It'll also help unemployed downsized middle-aged white guys.

    Except almost nothing run by our current government bureaucracy works.

    Also, it be one thing if our demographics were the same as they were in 1964 but they ain’t.

    Read More
  101. @Dave Pinsen
    Meanwhile,
    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/819753629464797186

    These climate changes have been repeating all winter, getting worse each time, and it isn’t even Jan 20th yet:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/weather/frigid-temps-lock-in-ice-after-historic-portland-storm-commuter-train-derails/

    And for gravy, yet another example of why light rail is unserious stuff.

    Read More
  102. @Alden
    Or maybe escort girl or "masseuse "

    The proper pronoun should be it. It is singular and gender neutral. I hate the term gender. It is a grammatical term in some languages.

    Thank goodness that in English only the singular, third person pronouns carry gender.

    This oddity (for an Indo-European language) is sparing us much trouble.

    Read More
  103. The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

    Really??? Where the hell are all the professional biologists and geneticists out there? How can they possibly allow this stuff to go unchallenged? The meme that the Right is somehow anti-scientific and the Left is motivated by purely objective science is utterly absurd.

    (BTW… speaking of genetics, one wonders if Julia Schwartz is a (((Julia Schwartz))) from New York City?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Where the hell are all the professional biologists and geneticists out there? How can they possibly allow this stuff to go unchallenged?

    They want to keep their jobs--universities are controlled by the left, and the few in the private sector don't want to make waves. Of course, they know better, or pretend not to.

    As for Ms. Schwartz--probably, not that many German-Americans in NYC. Who knows?
  104. @RSF
    "Not to mention the fact that Gomez being an alleged killer is just a convenience to Ann Coulter’s bigoted agenda, which probably wouldn’t allow Mother Teresa the right to gender-neutral pronouns."

    What does this even mean? I'm pretty sure Mother Theresa wouldn't want to be known by a gender neutral pronoun and Julia Schwartz probably hates a lot of what she stood for. There is a reason this was published in Berkeleyside and not a real newspaper.

    There is a reason this was published in Berkeleyside and not a real newspaper.

    ‘Real’ newspapers aren’t much better. Examples: NYT, WaPo.

    Read More
  105. @Harry Baldwin
    I share your concern about repealing Obamacare. Priority from Day One must be immigration. To get into a quagmire trying to repeal Obamcare might cost us any chance to deal with the border.

    Agree with the discussion here on healthcare. Trump must be very careful here, and the traditional GOP cure amounts to applying leeches and leaves them vulnerable in 2018. But there are alternatives. Trump mentioned yesterday that the drug companies were “getting away with murder.” This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It’s a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.

    The mandate needs to go. But if it can’t go, then instead of mandating private insurance premiums, and subsidizing their inflationary cost, the mandate could be shifted to Medicare. Think about it. Young people can buy into Medicare for less than ACA costs, and it shores up Medicare by bringing in new payers. They could adjust a premium for them to reflect that they’re still paying into the system with payroll deductions. I think it should be a option.

    The Left that got excluded from Obama’s famous Table with its Conversations on ACA wanted a Medicare alternative to enforced purchase of private insurance. Given the relatively small number of workers, mostly self-employed, being ‘served’ by ACA, they could be moved to Medicare (or Medicaid) and shut down the ACA disaster.

    BTW, I am on it. I am a beneficiary of it, and I support its repeal. As an example of the waste of money it represents, I cannot use the federal website. All of my business with them is done over the phone, which is expensive for the government and painful for me. Why? Who knows. Somehow, somewhere, someone entered some information into my account and now it is permanently unavailable to me to use. No one can fix that little glitch for me. Oh, and thanks for the subsidy. I’d tell you how much but it would ruin your day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    BTW, I am on it.

    I too am on it. As a self-employed person, it has worked out well for me. I've heard people complaining about their deductible going up to $6500, but my last deductible under private insurance had been $10,000.

    Like you, I have not been able to use the website to get anything done. It's too buggy. There are problems with it that I've experienced that I've never heard anyone else bring up. When we have to renew or change plans, we go to the nearest office and deal with someone who knows how to make it work.
    , @SFG
    Ah, so you agree with me? Every American on Medicare?
    , @Sparkling Wiggle

    This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It’s a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.
     
    You'd see even more doctors refusing Medicare/Medicaid patients in that case, which would move us closer to a fully bifurcated public/private system: private (good, fast) care for those who can afford it, and public (good enough, slow) for those who couldn't.

    We're already a long way down this road. It might be a good idea to just admit this is where we're headed and try to figure out how to make each of those 2 systems work for the people they serve.

    Demographics are fundamental, of course. Many of the ideas for health care reform will more or less work in an America that is 90% white.
  106. Recently had the misfortune of having to speak to a psychologist regarding some cardiac health issues. They wouldn’t discharge me from hospital without an assesment of my emotional status. In the course of the interview he asked me with what gender did I self identify. The look on my face must have prompted him to add, “I have to ask that question.” Scary to think that he’s a mental health professional. I would prefer being crazy. How can someone buy into that nonsense without laughing at the absurdity of it? Confirms the wisdom of bailing on statist education when I was 15. Am so glad I never attended university

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Recently had the misfortune of having to speak to a psychologist regarding some cardiac health issues. They wouldn’t discharge me from hospital without an assesment of my emotional status. In the course of the interview he asked me with what gender did I self identify. The look on my face must have prompted him to add, “I have to ask that question.”
     
    Next time something like that happens, tell him, "People under the Communists and Nazis had to explain things that way too".
    , @Harry Baldwin
    I recently had to fill out a form from the state government. It had a question, "With which gender do you identify?" followed by, "Which gender were you assigned at birth?"

    I was with a group of other middle-aged people and there was a lot of guffaws over this. The Hispanic bureaucrat running the meeting laughed and told us, sorry, but that's the way it is these days. It occurred to me that he better not reveal that he finds it amusing if he wants to keep his job, because that's the way it is these days too.
  107. @RSF
    "Not to mention the fact that Gomez being an alleged killer is just a convenience to Ann Coulter’s bigoted agenda, which probably wouldn’t allow Mother Teresa the right to gender-neutral pronouns."

    What does this even mean? I'm pretty sure Mother Theresa wouldn't want to be known by a gender neutral pronoun and Julia Schwartz probably hates a lot of what she stood for. There is a reason this was published in Berkeleyside and not a real newspaper.

    I’m sure it’s purely a coincidence that Stabby McGomez wanted to be know as “they” and Mother Teresa didn’t – it could have just as likely been the other way, right? Just like it’s a coincidence that all the black guys that the police shoot are “aspiring rappers” and none of them are brain surgeons like the black guys on TV. I’m sure Julia would say that the cops would shoot these guys EVEN IF they were brain surgeons, but by some odd coincidence, they never are. As soon as Julia finds the genderqueer Mother Teresa, let us know.

    Read More
  108. @Jefferson
    Lot are you enrolled in Obamacare?

    No.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "No"

    Than why do you care if Obamacare is abolished?
  109. @Harry Baldwin
    I share your concern about repealing Obamacare. Priority from Day One must be immigration. To get into a quagmire trying to repeal Obamcare might cost us any chance to deal with the border.

    the problem is that probably 60+ in the senate and PROBABLY Pushing 300 in the house are pro immigration for one reason or other( fear of their constituents, the media, or their donors). the republican speaker just last nite promised that the DACA people “will not be deported” I’m sorry, just cuz they are “yutes” doesn’t give them exemption from laws.

    This is all about the fact that the upper middles that actually vote the most are not yet threatened enough by migrants like the LMC an the poors being displaced are. As long as dems and rinos can hang on to 30-40% of nice white people, that plus their coalition of fringes will get them over the top to stop any real action. Just like even with every misstep GWB made post 2004, the Rep core vote halted all but obamacare.

    As a citizen i like this minority protection, ( i don’t want 51% pissing into the cornflakes of the 49%) but it scares me that the plans to “elect a new population” will continue until it is too late to stop, just because nice white ladies aren’t as scared yet as roofers are about their livelihood and future.

    Read More
  110. @anonguy
    The last few topics have been yawners.

    So how about this one.

    Portland, of all places, this winter, has experienced a multiplicity of winter storms and snowfalls that are Biblical.

    I say of all places because Portland is a locus of support for the notion that AGW is long settled science and the anthropos are taking it on the chin. So much so that the Portland Board of Ed earlier in 2016 banned expression of any other view on AGW than the prevailing orthodoxy in the local streets.

    Sick of winning yet? BTW, prior to the election, I predicted that the Trump victory would be an inflection point to a great turning globally, just as 1989 was.

    Anyhow, the tectonic plates are moving, it is a new era.

    Where have you been? The left figured that one out a long time ago – it’s not “Global Warming” anymore, it’s “Climate Change”. Climate Change is non-refutable. If it gets warmer, that’s due to Climate Change. If it get’s colder in some place, that’s Climate Change too, or the warming is not evenly spread. More snow/rain is Climate Change and so is less. Whatever happens is due to Climate Change, or else is just weather, which is not the same as climate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E Newman
    Hey Jack, you think you're keeping up with this crap? Listen, peakstupidity has been writing about Global Climate DisruptionTM for some time now, see here We have it trademarked; did you see that big superscripted "TM" back there?
  111. @enemy of earth
    Recently had the misfortune of having to speak to a psychologist regarding some cardiac health issues. They wouldn't discharge me from hospital without an assesment of my emotional status. In the course of the interview he asked me with what gender did I self identify. The look on my face must have prompted him to add, "I have to ask that question." Scary to think that he's a mental health professional. I would prefer being crazy. How can someone buy into that nonsense without laughing at the absurdity of it? Confirms the wisdom of bailing on statist education when I was 15. Am so glad I never attended university

    Recently had the misfortune of having to speak to a psychologist regarding some cardiac health issues. They wouldn’t discharge me from hospital without an assesment of my emotional status. In the course of the interview he asked me with what gender did I self identify. The look on my face must have prompted him to add, “I have to ask that question.”

    Next time something like that happens, tell him, “People under the Communists and Nazis had to explain things that way too”.

    Read More
  112. @Autochthon
    Wouldn't it have to be "spouse" rather than "bride?"

    I don’t know how they refer to the participants of gay weddings. One of them could be a bride for all I know.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Hilarious: Key & Peele - Gay Wedding Advice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtgY1q0J_TQ)
  113. @reiner Tor

    it’s clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.
     
    Did homeopathy producers go out of business, or if not, when can we expect them to do so? With drugs, it's difficult to tell if they work. People didn't notice for millennia that doctors were killing them! How is that even possible to have a free market with such blind customers?

    That’s like asking how it’s possible to have a free market when people buy crap like McDonald’s instead of a good, homecooked meal. The two don’t really have anything to do with eachother. If we had a free market in medicine people would be killing themselves with heroin. (More than they are already.) Because most of us are ignorant, stupid, and don’t know what we’re doing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Schmoe

    If we had a free market in medicine people would be killing themselves with heroin. (More than they are already.)
     
    I am trying to see the downside of this.

    Oh, okay. Marketing people would tell us the stuff is safe. That is the problem. The marketing people tell us that people should get to choose their gender, etc. Follow the money.
    , @Formerly CARealist
    You and the Last Real Calvinist should have some discussions.

    "Ignorant, stupid, don't know what we're doing." You could also say Totally Depraved.
  114. @Opinionator
    Seems just insane.

    It is already generating all kinds of fears in people and dredging up all the old associations of Republican coldheartedness and partisanship. "Yanking people's health care away." It could eventually lead to some tragic human interest stories that the media will pounce on.

    If the idea is repeal and replace, why the hell don't they wait until they have something to replace it with? What is the rush?

    I suppose Trump could veto. Or trade his his signature for repeal of Hart-Celler.

    We must all be missing something. What is it?

    Trump made it very clear at the news conference that the “replace” would happen on the same day as the “repeal”.

    So first they have to figure out what the “replace” will be before they “repeal”. So far the thinking seems to be “keep the parts that everyone likes and get rid of the parts that they don’t.” The problem is that everyone likes free benefits (having your pre-existing conditions covered, having your “kids” covered into adulthood) but no one likes paying. At bottom, what everyone really LIKES is unlimited quantity, high quality healthcare on demand paid for by someone else. So unless they do something that will displease a lot of voters, the economics of Trumpcare will be even less viable than those of Obamacare.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Opinionator
    Thanks. The incentives you describe do not leave me feeling optimistic.

    I am still puzzled why, if I understand the political procedures, they are starting the process of repeal before having something in hand to replace it. That would be reassuring to the public. Why needlessly alarm people?

    I also question the wisdom of leading with repeal/replace on the overall political/legislative agenda. Even more so now after considering the dynamic described in your post.

    Stripping people of health care on the one hand, while at the same time taking some difficult decisions on deportation, is not a promising formula for growing support, imo.
  115. @densa
    Agree with the discussion here on healthcare. Trump must be very careful here, and the traditional GOP cure amounts to applying leeches and leaves them vulnerable in 2018. But there are alternatives. Trump mentioned yesterday that the drug companies were "getting away with murder." This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It's a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.

    The mandate needs to go. But if it can't go, then instead of mandating private insurance premiums, and subsidizing their inflationary cost, the mandate could be shifted to Medicare. Think about it. Young people can buy into Medicare for less than ACA costs, and it shores up Medicare by bringing in new payers. They could adjust a premium for them to reflect that they're still paying into the system with payroll deductions. I think it should be a option.

    The Left that got excluded from Obama's famous Table with its Conversations on ACA wanted a Medicare alternative to enforced purchase of private insurance. Given the relatively small number of workers, mostly self-employed, being 'served' by ACA, they could be moved to Medicare (or Medicaid) and shut down the ACA disaster.

    BTW, I am on it. I am a beneficiary of it, and I support its repeal. As an example of the waste of money it represents, I cannot use the federal website. All of my business with them is done over the phone, which is expensive for the government and painful for me. Why? Who knows. Somehow, somewhere, someone entered some information into my account and now it is permanently unavailable to me to use. No one can fix that little glitch for me. Oh, and thanks for the subsidy. I'd tell you how much but it would ruin your day.

    BTW, I am on it.

    I too am on it. As a self-employed person, it has worked out well for me. I’ve heard people complaining about their deductible going up to $6500, but my last deductible under private insurance had been $10,000.

    Like you, I have not been able to use the website to get anything done. It’s too buggy. There are problems with it that I’ve experienced that I’ve never heard anyone else bring up. When we have to renew or change plans, we go to the nearest office and deal with someone who knows how to make it work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    And the $10,000 deductible plan you had before the ACA would have gotten worse and more expensive every year, which was the prior trend.
  116. @Jefferson
    Tom Steyer looks like Pablo Gomez's Gay sugar daddy in that picture.

    Steyer has a wife and four kids, and I don’t like the modern tendency to read every sign of male or paternal affection in a lewd sense.

    Anyway, how did this mentally-unbalanced nobody manage to insinuate himself so highly? I’m quite sure I’d be turned away at the first ring of Brown’s or Steyer’s gatekeepers, much less getting an affectionate arm around my shoulders.

    People really seem to be losing their social antennae. There were probably all sorts of red flags going up around this young psychopath but dopey, doe-eyed whites just lap this Noble Savage crap up.

    Is anybody reporting on this besides the Berkely college paper?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon

    Anyway, how did this mentally-unbalanced nobody manage to insinuate himself so highly?
     
    Remarkably, Jerry Brown was democratically elected to be governor – multiple times.
    , @Lot
    Gomez was a transgendered undocumented Hispanic going to Berkeley. A Fourfer. Of course left wing activists were happy to give him fellowships (a chance to employ him with no long term obligation if he is too crazy) and be photographed with him.

    It was savvy of him to focus on environmental issues since even in California, this is a 95% white group of activists full of white guilt. I know this first hand, I was a girl's plus one at a big black tie fundraiser for an environmental group a few years back. (Actually not black tie, in California a regular business suit event is the equivalent of a tux).
  117. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    1. What isteve thread are we discussing Pissgate in? (There were a few boring ones I didn’t read, but maybe they caught the timing based discussion.)

    2. I wonder how much of the Russia spying/hacking/conflict actually came FROM the JAN2016ish 4chan mailout? That it was out there, percolating? Could that have driven more of the Russia speculation?

    Read More
  118. @enemy of earth
    Recently had the misfortune of having to speak to a psychologist regarding some cardiac health issues. They wouldn't discharge me from hospital without an assesment of my emotional status. In the course of the interview he asked me with what gender did I self identify. The look on my face must have prompted him to add, "I have to ask that question." Scary to think that he's a mental health professional. I would prefer being crazy. How can someone buy into that nonsense without laughing at the absurdity of it? Confirms the wisdom of bailing on statist education when I was 15. Am so glad I never attended university

    I recently had to fill out a form from the state government. It had a question, “With which gender do you identify?” followed by, “Which gender were you assigned at birth?”

    I was with a group of other middle-aged people and there was a lot of guffaws over this. The Hispanic bureaucrat running the meeting laughed and told us, sorry, but that’s the way it is these days. It occurred to me that he better not reveal that he finds it amusing if he wants to keep his job, because that’s the way it is these days too.

    Read More
  119. Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people.

    Orwell could not have said it better. That’s exactly what the Ministry of Truth is for.

    In bourgeois societies, language serves as a medium of communication, films serve as entertainment, education serves to convey knowledge, the press conveys information, etc. but in Revolutionary societies, everything must Serve the People above all else. And wise and enlightened leaders like Julia get to tell the unenlightened (one might even call them deplorable) masses what Serves the People and what doesn’t and the press, educators, etc. must follow their guidance and convey it to the masses (or else they are Fascists too).

    Do these people even realize that they behave exactly like characters from an Orwell novel? Or a Woody Allen movie?

    Read More
  120. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Steve, why did you all steal our OC and prospective DC? Remember we are the most un-PC f’ball team. You should help us, not steal from us. Hands off of Garcon, too.

    Read More
  121. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Steyer has a wife and four kids, and I don't like the modern tendency to read every sign of male or paternal affection in a lewd sense.

    Anyway, how did this mentally-unbalanced nobody manage to insinuate himself so highly? I'm quite sure I'd be turned away at the first ring of Brown's or Steyer's gatekeepers, much less getting an affectionate arm around my shoulders.

    People really seem to be losing their social antennae. There were probably all sorts of red flags going up around this young psychopath but dopey, doe-eyed whites just lap this Noble Savage crap up.

    Is anybody reporting on this besides the Berkely college paper?

    Anyway, how did this mentally-unbalanced nobody manage to insinuate himself so highly?

    Remarkably, Jerry Brown was democratically elected to be governor – multiple times.

    Read More
  122. @reiner Tor

    pre-WWI
     
    Pre-WWI, if you had no access to doctors, it increased your life expectancy. Between the wars, doctors just barely broke even, saving as many lives as they killed.

    Modern medicine is totally different, in that it has very expensive but also quite effective treatments, like surgery and chemotherapy which could save your life maybe 50% of the time if you have cancer. There is also very little limit to costs. By spending double the amount they might increase your chances from 50% to 60%, is it worth it? The costs are very difficult to measure, US patients subsidizing prices in other countries has already been mentioned, obviously it's not easier to divide costs within the country.

    I will read the link later, from reading about many different systems from different people with widely different proposals and perspectives, my take is that there's always a downside to any system. So it's basically a question of choice, to a large extent. Which is not to say that it cannot be improved, just a difficult thing to do. I certainly wouldn't want Trump to risk his legacy by jumping on the issue in such haste.

    John Wanamaker, the department store magnate, used to say, “Half of all the money I spend on advertising is completely ineffective, but I don’t know which half.” Or something like that. But we don’t seem to try very hard for health care, because lots of people are making a nice living off of the half that is wasted.

    The latest studies show, for example, that giving women frequent mammograms results in the discovery of many more early stage tumors (and therefore creates lots more expense for surgery and chemo, etc. as well as lots of mental anguish) but it doesn’t actually change mortality rates from breast cancer. Same thing with prostate cancer. There are slow growing tumors that you will outlive and aggressive ones that will kill you no matter when you find them so the whole emphasis on “early detection” may be completely misguided at least as it is being done now (at tremendous expense).

    But there is a whole industry built around “non profit” fund raising and early detection and treatment, etc. and if you try to change anything they will accuse you of hating women and mobilize hysterical marches, etc. (when in fact they are protecting their own bank accounts and could care less about women).

    Read More
  123. @SFG
    It's not so easy as all that. A lot of these guys' fortunes depend on the upper middle class buying their products, and if Uber winds up known as 'racist' they could have problems given their business model works best in cities, which are much more liberal. Also liberals are much more fond of boycotts--I have my doubts Breitbart is going to be able to recover from all the advertisers leaving, for example.

    Gamergate was the only incident I know of where successful resistance to the SJW agenda occurred.

    “It’s not so easy as all that. A lot of these guys’ fortunes depend on the upper middle class buying their products, and if Uber winds up known as ‘racist’ they could have problems given their business model works best in cities, which are much more liberal.”

    Silicon Valley is only 1 percent Black so there for making them racists, but that hasn’t stopped upper middle class Left Wingers from purchasing their electronic products and apps in mass.

    Read More
  124. @SFG
    It's not so easy as all that. A lot of these guys' fortunes depend on the upper middle class buying their products, and if Uber winds up known as 'racist' they could have problems given their business model works best in cities, which are much more liberal. Also liberals are much more fond of boycotts--I have my doubts Breitbart is going to be able to recover from all the advertisers leaving, for example.

    Gamergate was the only incident I know of where successful resistance to the SJW agenda occurred.

    Air BnB is also having a real problem. People don’t want their “guests” robbing or raping them or messing up their homes, etc. and as we know, race is a very good indicator for criminality -certain races offend at rates many times higher than other races. So left to their own devices, Uber drivers, Air BNB hosts, etc. will avoid certain minorities if they can figure out who they are in advance. Taxi drivers passing by black males is a long running phenomenon (and well justified – many cab drivers over the years have lost their lives). AirBNB is now taking measures to “avoid racism” by giving AirBNB hosts less information about their guests. The problem is that the execs (who just want to get Jesse & co. off their asses) are not the ones who have to bear the consequences when vibrant customers mug the uber driver or trash the rental. How many AirBNB hosts are willing to literally “take a bullet” so that the folks at AirBNB corporate HQ won’t “look racist”?

    Read More
  125. @Autochthon
    "Gender nonconforming chess-teacher" is not a real job, and New York is expensive. I think her description should read either "waitress" or "trust-fund brat."

    On the bright side, the first line serves as a warning that the rest of the article will probably be a steaming pile of horseshit.

    Read More
  126. Off topic, a lot of wealthy Black guys seem to like Donald J. Trump (Steve Harvey, Floyd Money Mayweather, Kanye West, Shaquille O’Neal, Don King, Mike Tyson, etc). They probably see him as having more swag than the average boring square stiff snobby wealthy White guy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Off topic, a lot of wealthy Black guys seem to like Donald J. Trump (Steve Harvey, Floyd Money Mayweather, Kanye West, Shaquille O’Neal, Don King, Mike Tyson, etc).


    Steve Harvey is extremely funny. I think he's one of the most entertaining individuals on television, and from what I've seen his humor on TV is family-friendly and pretty much rated G.
  127. @densa
    Agree with the discussion here on healthcare. Trump must be very careful here, and the traditional GOP cure amounts to applying leeches and leaves them vulnerable in 2018. But there are alternatives. Trump mentioned yesterday that the drug companies were "getting away with murder." This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It's a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.

    The mandate needs to go. But if it can't go, then instead of mandating private insurance premiums, and subsidizing their inflationary cost, the mandate could be shifted to Medicare. Think about it. Young people can buy into Medicare for less than ACA costs, and it shores up Medicare by bringing in new payers. They could adjust a premium for them to reflect that they're still paying into the system with payroll deductions. I think it should be a option.

    The Left that got excluded from Obama's famous Table with its Conversations on ACA wanted a Medicare alternative to enforced purchase of private insurance. Given the relatively small number of workers, mostly self-employed, being 'served' by ACA, they could be moved to Medicare (or Medicaid) and shut down the ACA disaster.

    BTW, I am on it. I am a beneficiary of it, and I support its repeal. As an example of the waste of money it represents, I cannot use the federal website. All of my business with them is done over the phone, which is expensive for the government and painful for me. Why? Who knows. Somehow, somewhere, someone entered some information into my account and now it is permanently unavailable to me to use. No one can fix that little glitch for me. Oh, and thanks for the subsidy. I'd tell you how much but it would ruin your day.

    Ah, so you agree with me? Every American on Medicare?

    Read More
    • Replies: @densa
    Agree, but have to say, "If you like your current coverage you can keep it."

    Way back when they fixed healthcare in the '80s, they said they were going to unleash the power of the free market to bring down prices. We all know how that worked out. You can't shovel tax dollars in one end and profits out the other. A free market in healthcare would require letting people die outside emergency rooms while the stock market burns down. It's not going to happen, at least not on purpose.
  128. @Lot
    No.

    “No”

    Than why do you care if Obamacare is abolished?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    I would like to see Trump get reelected and also do not want 10 million working Americans to lose health insurance.
  129. @Dr. X

    The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.
     
    Really??? Where the hell are all the professional biologists and geneticists out there? How can they possibly allow this stuff to go unchallenged? The meme that the Right is somehow anti-scientific and the Left is motivated by purely objective science is utterly absurd.

    (BTW... speaking of genetics, one wonders if Julia Schwartz is a (((Julia Schwartz))) from New York City?)

    Where the hell are all the professional biologists and geneticists out there? How can they possibly allow this stuff to go unchallenged?

    They want to keep their jobs–universities are controlled by the left, and the few in the private sector don’t want to make waves. Of course, they know better, or pretend not to.

    As for Ms. Schwartz–probably, not that many German-Americans in NYC. Who knows?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Corporations large enough to employ professional geneticists and biologists are also (almost all) controlled by the left.
  130. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Steyer has a wife and four kids, and I don't like the modern tendency to read every sign of male or paternal affection in a lewd sense.

    Anyway, how did this mentally-unbalanced nobody manage to insinuate himself so highly? I'm quite sure I'd be turned away at the first ring of Brown's or Steyer's gatekeepers, much less getting an affectionate arm around my shoulders.

    People really seem to be losing their social antennae. There were probably all sorts of red flags going up around this young psychopath but dopey, doe-eyed whites just lap this Noble Savage crap up.

    Is anybody reporting on this besides the Berkely college paper?

    Gomez was a transgendered undocumented Hispanic going to Berkeley. A Fourfer. Of course left wing activists were happy to give him fellowships (a chance to employ him with no long term obligation if he is too crazy) and be photographed with him.

    It was savvy of him to focus on environmental issues since even in California, this is a 95% white group of activists full of white guilt. I know this first hand, I was a girl’s plus one at a big black tie fundraiser for an environmental group a few years back. (Actually not black tie, in California a regular business suit event is the equivalent of a tux).

    Read More
  131. @Harry Baldwin
    BTW, I am on it.

    I too am on it. As a self-employed person, it has worked out well for me. I've heard people complaining about their deductible going up to $6500, but my last deductible under private insurance had been $10,000.

    Like you, I have not been able to use the website to get anything done. It's too buggy. There are problems with it that I've experienced that I've never heard anyone else bring up. When we have to renew or change plans, we go to the nearest office and deal with someone who knows how to make it work.

    And the $10,000 deductible plan you had before the ACA would have gotten worse and more expensive every year, which was the prior trend.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TWS
    Nothing ruined my health insurance and cost my clinic more in man hours than Obamacare. It also cost my daughter and her family substantially more. So yes, things were getting worse slowly then with Obamacare they fell off a cliff, while on fire, with nuclear powdered crocodiles at the bottom.
  132. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    What if this goes beyond conventional pronouns?

    What if someone asks to be called “All the Cool Badass People That Ever Lived”?

    Like homomania, stuff like this is cancerous. All one lie or idiocy, and it doesn’t stay contained. It becomes aggressive and grows and grows.

    Ever since the elites got rid of ‘illegal aliens’ and replaced it with ‘undocumented immigrants’, we have more moronic demands.

    On the other hand, this ‘intersectionality’ — homos + trannies + people of color + intellectuals + youth culture + celebrity attention-hogging + feminism all seem to be turning into a Prog Nightmare. After all, this is a story of POC killing a white Prog woman…. but the issue among some progs is ‘they is they’. It makes perfect sense. If Bruce Jenner is now a ‘she’, ‘they is they’.

    And I suppose the reverse is also true. If black people say that all of them constitute an ‘I’, they they is ‘I’.

    Btw, black folks have a habit of saying ‘man!!’ Will some proggy brotha or sistah complain about the male-centrism of this? Will blacks in the future be ‘inclusive’ in their utterances. So, if they get upset, they go ‘man, woman, homo, tranny, and they!!!”

    Read More
  133. One of the favorite Paul Ryan gimmicks is Health Savings Accounts to “encourage people to shop around and reduce costs.”

    Well I’ve had a HSA for about 7 years now, and I can report I have never ever done this. It has saved me about $1200 a year off my income taxes, which is why I do it.

    At least the tax benefits of HSAs are mostly for the upper middle class. Most of Ryan’s policies are aimed at making the top 0.1% richer. I really look forward to Trump closing the carried interest loophole, only enjoyed by private equity guys who get to pay 20% tax rates on their million+ incomes.

    Read More
  134. Language has never been an objective or static truth, but rather is constantly being created and recreated to meet the needs of people.

    True. And today, we’re rolling back the corrupted, PC grammar of the past, and refusing the even more corrupt, even more PC grammar of the future. In anticipation of rolling back of Schwartz & co. That’s how language is meeting the needs of the people today.

    Read More
  135. @Cletus Rothschild
    "I bet she wins at Chess by calling her King a Queen. And I bet she never announces it until she’s facing mate."

    That would actually be a fantastic conundrum for an opponent to place her in: she either falls in line with the established rules of the gender binary of chess and wins the game, or she respects her opponent's delusion and loses. In the former case, is she forced to admit that whether or not one insists on identifying as a different gender, the type of crown (genitalia) is the true gender identifier.

    Cletus, I would be inclined to believe that in her game of chess all the pieces have the same value and can be placed where ever she pleases and then you’re playing checkers.

    Read More
  136. @SFG
    Ah, so you agree with me? Every American on Medicare?

    Agree, but have to say, “If you like your current coverage you can keep it.”

    Way back when they fixed healthcare in the ’80s, they said they were going to unleash the power of the free market to bring down prices. We all know how that worked out. You can’t shovel tax dollars in one end and profits out the other. A free market in healthcare would require letting people die outside emergency rooms while the stock market burns down. It’s not going to happen, at least not on purpose.

    Read More
  137. On the whole, abolishing the belief that there exists objective reality outside and not subject to one’s own subjective feelings is bad.

    On the bright side, the idea that we all have this thing called “gender” that may or may not correspond to our chromosomes and genitals is fertile ground for comedy.

    Public health advertisements will have to be rectified to take into account the female penis.

    “Adolescent boys and girls should perform a regular testicular self-exam.”

    “Men and women over 40 should have a prostate exam during their yearly physical.”

    “Are you a man who suffered complications from a hysterectomy? You could be entitled to compensation.”

    Read More
  138. I am considering one concession: referring to all lefties with the pronoun, “it.”

    Forgive the pedantry, but I wish I could find “from whence” all this redundancy comes.

    I was wondering the other day, what happened to all of your puns and funny comments. I kind of miss them. They were a bit much, but too much was better than none.

    “The Lieutenant orders the Marine to do xyz”

    “It puts the lotion in the basket, or it gets the hose again.”

    “I’d fuck me so hard.”

    Hmmm…

    Keep showing the victim. No doubt, she embraced political views at odds with many endorsed here, but she seems to be an objectively lovely young woman.

    Just going by her photos, it’s hard to imagine her filling Schwartz’ role.

    Where have you been? The left figured that one out a long time ago – it’s not “Global Warming” anymore, it’s “Climate Change”. Climate Change is non-refutable. If it gets warmer, that’s due to Climate Change. If it get’s colder in some place, that’s Climate Change too, or the warming is not evenly spread. More snow/rain is Climate Change and so is less. Whatever happens is due to Climate Change, or else is just weather, which is not the same as climate.

    Yeah but now they’re fighting a War on the Weather, which takes Quixotic to a whole new planet.

    Read More
  139. What is the limiting principle for preferred personal pronouns? Is there any principled reason that I could not define a 100,000 page block of random text as my “preferred personal pronoun” and require it to be used in all formal communications?

    What if I want a “personal pronoun” that consists of offensive words or phrases? Are people obligated to repeat those phrases because I say so?

    Can I sell my pronoun for advertising purposes, then require that it always be used in conjunction with my name in order to maximize the exposure of my advertiser?

    How does pronoun usage affect, say, contract law? Can I insist that certain provisions be inserted into a contract on the theory that these provisions are my “preferred personal pronouns?”

    Yes, I’m trolling a bit by asking those questions, but I really would be interested in hearing thoughtful and honest answers from the folks who really believe this nonsense. I’m curious as to how far they believe the principle of mandatory language can be pushed, and how, where and upon what basis they would draw the line.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    There's the example of Prince, who came up with a non-verbal symbol he wanted people to use instead of his name, leading to him being called "The artist formerly known as Prince." Perhaps Pablo Gomez can be referred to as "the individual formerly referred to as 'he.'"
  140. @densa
    Agree with the discussion here on healthcare. Trump must be very careful here, and the traditional GOP cure amounts to applying leeches and leaves them vulnerable in 2018. But there are alternatives. Trump mentioned yesterday that the drug companies were "getting away with murder." This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It's a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.

    The mandate needs to go. But if it can't go, then instead of mandating private insurance premiums, and subsidizing their inflationary cost, the mandate could be shifted to Medicare. Think about it. Young people can buy into Medicare for less than ACA costs, and it shores up Medicare by bringing in new payers. They could adjust a premium for them to reflect that they're still paying into the system with payroll deductions. I think it should be a option.

    The Left that got excluded from Obama's famous Table with its Conversations on ACA wanted a Medicare alternative to enforced purchase of private insurance. Given the relatively small number of workers, mostly self-employed, being 'served' by ACA, they could be moved to Medicare (or Medicaid) and shut down the ACA disaster.

    BTW, I am on it. I am a beneficiary of it, and I support its repeal. As an example of the waste of money it represents, I cannot use the federal website. All of my business with them is done over the phone, which is expensive for the government and painful for me. Why? Who knows. Somehow, somewhere, someone entered some information into my account and now it is permanently unavailable to me to use. No one can fix that little glitch for me. Oh, and thanks for the subsidy. I'd tell you how much but it would ruin your day.

    This hints that he might let Medicare finally negotiate prices. It’s a start on bending that cost curve in the direction Obama had promised.

    You’d see even more doctors refusing Medicare/Medicaid patients in that case, which would move us closer to a fully bifurcated public/private system: private (good, fast) care for those who can afford it, and public (good enough, slow) for those who couldn’t.

    We’re already a long way down this road. It might be a good idea to just admit this is where we’re headed and try to figure out how to make each of those 2 systems work for the people they serve.

    Demographics are fundamental, of course. Many of the ideas for health care reform will more or less work in an America that is 90% white.

    Read More
  141. @SFG
    Where the hell are all the professional biologists and geneticists out there? How can they possibly allow this stuff to go unchallenged?

    They want to keep their jobs--universities are controlled by the left, and the few in the private sector don't want to make waves. Of course, they know better, or pretend not to.

    As for Ms. Schwartz--probably, not that many German-Americans in NYC. Who knows?

    Corporations large enough to employ professional geneticists and biologists are also (almost all) controlled by the left.

    Read More
  142. @Jack D
    Trump made it very clear at the news conference that the "replace" would happen on the same day as the "repeal".

    So first they have to figure out what the "replace" will be before they "repeal". So far the thinking seems to be "keep the parts that everyone likes and get rid of the parts that they don't." The problem is that everyone likes free benefits (having your pre-existing conditions covered, having your "kids" covered into adulthood) but no one likes paying. At bottom, what everyone really LIKES is unlimited quantity, high quality healthcare on demand paid for by someone else. So unless they do something that will displease a lot of voters, the economics of Trumpcare will be even less viable than those of Obamacare.

    Thanks. The incentives you describe do not leave me feeling optimistic.

    I am still puzzled why, if I understand the political procedures, they are starting the process of repeal before having something in hand to replace it. That would be reassuring to the public. Why needlessly alarm people?

    I also question the wisdom of leading with repeal/replace on the overall political/legislative agenda. Even more so now after considering the dynamic described in your post.

    Stripping people of health care on the one hand, while at the same time taking some difficult decisions on deportation, is not a promising formula for growing support, imo.

    Read More
  143. @Mr. Blank
    What is the limiting principle for preferred personal pronouns? Is there any principled reason that I could not define a 100,000 page block of random text as my "preferred personal pronoun" and require it to be used in all formal communications?

    What if I want a "personal pronoun" that consists of offensive words or phrases? Are people obligated to repeat those phrases because I say so?

    Can I sell my pronoun for advertising purposes, then require that it always be used in conjunction with my name in order to maximize the exposure of my advertiser?

    How does pronoun usage affect, say, contract law? Can I insist that certain provisions be inserted into a contract on the theory that these provisions are my "preferred personal pronouns?"

    Yes, I'm trolling a bit by asking those questions, but I really would be interested in hearing thoughtful and honest answers from the folks who really believe this nonsense. I'm curious as to how far they believe the principle of mandatory language can be pushed, and how, where and upon what basis they would draw the line.

    There’s the example of Prince, who came up with a non-verbal symbol he wanted people to use instead of his name, leading to him being called “The artist formerly known as Prince.” Perhaps Pablo Gomez can be referred to as “the individual formerly referred to as ‘he.’”

    Read More
    • LOL: Autochthon
    • Replies: @Mr. Blank
    If my employer ever introduces a "preferred pronoun policy," I've already got mine picked out: "Lord High Executioner, Defender of the Christian Faith, Holy Roman Emperor, Admiral of the Ocean Seas, Conqueror of Antarctica and Tsar of Jupiter, Scotland and the Aleutian Islands." Don't tell me that's a title, not a pronoun; I live my life the way I want! #LOVEWINS
    , @Achmed E Newman
    Oh, I know, instead of Pablo, or "they", how about "the inmate formerly known as no contest, your honor"?

    ;-}

  144. @Perspective
    The prohibition of using gender specific pronouns in academia has been going on for a while now. My first year of university was 2003, and I recall a self professed feminist "professor" telling us they would deduct marks for using gender specific pronouns. This included words such as "manholes"and "manned". One student didn't get the message, and was knocked down a whole grade level on their paper because they used a gender specific pronoun.

    I was in a rhetoric class in 1990 where this was discussed as a woman’s issue. Using “he” for a pronoun was deemed offensive to some women, and they spoke up about it. They were lying, of course. They weren’t going to read the other papers, that was the TA’s job. The TA himself, a hip, liberal white guy announced that he always used “she”.

    The whole episode reminded me why I was glad I was studying microbiology. Bacteria just don’t give a crap about such nonsense.

    Read More
  145. @reiner Tor
    A very good blog post by Greg Cochran. Just published. Worth to read. Medicine and healthcare are very unlike the rest of the economy. The market's invisible hand won't weed out bad service or bad medicine.

    Is there anyone in the Steveosphere who has given serious thought to these issues and agreed with the Paul Ryan/Libertarian party line?

    Not Derb, who was the son of a nurse and grew up with the UK’s NHS, not Mickey Kaus, not Greg Cochran.

    After years and years of “Obamacare sux” the GOP does need a cosmetic repeal. I could live with one idea of replacing the individual mandate with a “continuous coverage” rule.

    So instead of a tax penalty to keep healthy people in the insurance pool, they would be told if they don’t join now, they can’t join later when they actually need it.

    There are a lot of ways to make federal health care policy be less of a give-away to the underclass plus big private companies. But the ACA’s “subsidy and exchange” system overwhelmingly went to people who are self-employed, work at very small businesses, or who retired with pensions before Medicare age.

    The illegals and non-working lumpenproles already had free health care from Medicaid/emergency rooms. The ACA’s beneficiaries are heavily WWC plus self-employed people age 50-64 with preexisting conditions, another white-heavy group.

    Read More
  146. I wonder if as a defense, their lawyer might argue that they have multiple personalities, and that they is a little insane.

    Read More
  147. @reiner Tor

    it’s clearly in the interests of a drug manufacturer to produce drugs with demonstrated efficacy, while a manufacturer that produces ineffective drugs risks destroying his reputation and going out of business.
     
    Did homeopathy producers go out of business, or if not, when can we expect them to do so? With drugs, it's difficult to tell if they work. People didn't notice for millennia that doctors were killing them! How is that even possible to have a free market with such blind customers?

    One response, of course, is that, as long as customers are satisfied, what business is it of anyone else’s? lol

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    That, in a sentence, is my problem with libertarianism.
  148. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Jefferson
    Off topic, a lot of wealthy Black guys seem to like Donald J. Trump (Steve Harvey, Floyd Money Mayweather, Kanye West, Shaquille O'Neal, Don King, Mike Tyson, etc). They probably see him as having more swag than the average boring square stiff snobby wealthy White guy.

    Off topic, a lot of wealthy Black guys seem to like Donald J. Trump (Steve Harvey, Floyd Money Mayweather, Kanye West, Shaquille O’Neal, Don King, Mike Tyson, etc).

    Steve Harvey is extremely funny. I think he’s one of the most entertaining individuals on television, and from what I’ve seen his humor on TV is family-friendly and pretty much rated G.

    Read More
  149. @Harry Baldwin
    There's the example of Prince, who came up with a non-verbal symbol he wanted people to use instead of his name, leading to him being called "The artist formerly known as Prince." Perhaps Pablo Gomez can be referred to as "the individual formerly referred to as 'he.'"

    If my employer ever introduces a “preferred pronoun policy,” I’ve already got mine picked out: “Lord High Executioner, Defender of the Christian Faith, Holy Roman Emperor, Admiral of the Ocean Seas, Conqueror of Antarctica and Tsar of Jupiter, Scotland and the Aleutian Islands.” Don’t tell me that’s a title, not a pronoun; I live my life the way I want! #LOVEWINS

    Read More
  150. OT, was Estéban Santiago a convert to Islam who had taken the name “Aashiq Hammad,” as reported in Judicial Watch. http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/01/airport-shooter-converted-islam-identified-aashiq-hammad-years-joining-army/

    You probably don’t want to report this until there is a little more confirmation. Snopes has a noncommital news item on this, with no truth rating yet.

    Read More
  151. Julia Schwartz is a gender non-conforming 23-year-old chess teacher living in New York City.

    Like I said in the first post about this story.

    2017, when you can’t tell if 4chan prank or real and, most importantly, journalists absolutely can’t!

    Read More
  152. @Opinionator
    Seems just insane.

    It is already generating all kinds of fears in people and dredging up all the old associations of Republican coldheartedness and partisanship. "Yanking people's health care away." It could eventually lead to some tragic human interest stories that the media will pounce on.

    If the idea is repeal and replace, why the hell don't they wait until they have something to replace it with? What is the rush?

    I suppose Trump could veto. Or trade his his signature for repeal of Hart-Celler.

    We must all be missing something. What is it?

    And here we go…

    US Patients Await Obamacare’s Fate

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38590922

    Read More
  153. @guest
    That's like asking how it's possible to have a free market when people buy crap like McDonald's instead of a good, homecooked meal. The two don't really have anything to do with eachother. If we had a free market in medicine people would be killing themselves with heroin. (More than they are already.) Because most of us are ignorant, stupid, and don't know what we're doing.

    If we had a free market in medicine people would be killing themselves with heroin. (More than they are already.)

    I am trying to see the downside of this.

    Oh, okay. Marketing people would tell us the stuff is safe. That is the problem. The marketing people tell us that people should get to choose their gender, etc. Follow the money.

    Read More
  154. @SFG
    Yeah, liberals are right on healthcare. Just give every legal citizen Medicare and raise taxes to pay for it. The single payer will drive down costs and eliminate the private insurance companies that basically make money as middlemen so it won't cost quite as much as you think.

    Yes, it'll help the diversity. It'll also help unemployed downsized middle-aged white guys.

    A single payer health care system isn’t as bad as you think, plus it costs a lot less than what you’re spending (I’m in Canada). But one thing must be remembered: goodies like this are incompatible with open borders.

    Otherwise you might as well hang up a sign at the border saying “Free stuff ahead.”

    Canada doesn’t border a country like Mexico and up till now (the idiot Trudeau might change things) there was no unvetted immigration.

    Sure, house prices are through the roof in Vancouver thanks to wealthy Chinese (some of whom don’t even live here) but the Chinese are not forming an underclass. So no thinks that single payer health care is ripping them off to support an underclass.

    Unfortunately the US already has an underclass. That no doubt is why the US is alone in the West without some type of single payer health system.

    But mass unvetted immigration may bring in another underclass. I’m referring to Jason Richwine’s research that the Mexican immigrants are not assimilating even after several generations. If Trump doesn’t deal with this, he will make a very serious mistake and lose support.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Wrong. The US has already THREE underclasses. Injuns, Blacks and Hispanics. And authorities have been busy importing riff- raff from all over the world, to add more underclasses. The more the merrier. That's why any Social Security scheme is bound to fail in America in the short term.
  155. @Perspective
    The prohibition of using gender specific pronouns in academia has been going on for a while now. My first year of university was 2003, and I recall a self professed feminist "professor" telling us they would deduct marks for using gender specific pronouns. This included words such as "manholes"and "manned". One student didn't get the message, and was knocked down a whole grade level on their paper because they used a gender specific pronoun.

    Ha! I think I’ve got everybody beat here. When I was in junior college in 1975 my philosophy prof. promoted the idea that we should use sex-neutral pronouns…the one that sticks in my mind is “ti” instead of he/she.
    A pretty good professor, but a little looney on this subject.
    He did not react well to my comment that the proper use of language is to give us more information, not less.

    Read More
  156. @Mr. Blank
    If my employer ever introduces a "preferred pronoun policy," I've already got mine picked out: "Lord High Executioner, Defender of the Christian Faith, Holy Roman Emperor, Admiral of the Ocean Seas, Conqueror of Antarctica and Tsar of Jupiter, Scotland and the Aleutian Islands." Don't tell me that's a title, not a pronoun; I live my life the way I want! #LOVEWINS

    Kim Jong-un might borrow some of these.

    Read More
  157. @Lot
    And the $10,000 deductible plan you had before the ACA would have gotten worse and more expensive every year, which was the prior trend.

    Nothing ruined my health insurance and cost my clinic more in man hours than Obamacare. It also cost my daughter and her family substantially more. So yes, things were getting worse slowly then with Obamacare they fell off a cliff, while on fire, with nuclear powdered crocodiles at the bottom.

    Read More
  158. @Jefferson
    "No"

    Than why do you care if Obamacare is abolished?

    I would like to see Trump get reelected and also do not want 10 million working Americans to lose health insurance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "I would like to see Trump get reelected and also do not want 10 million working Americans to lose health insurance."

    The vast majority of Americans enrolled in Obamacare voted for Crooked Cankles. Who cares what happens to them. And by the way most of them who never had health insurance before Barack Hussein Obama became POTUS are underclass Americans, not working class Americans. There is a huge difference between someone who is a plumber and someone who makes minimum wage working at Arby's Sandwiches.

    The vast majority of people who vote Republican in presidential elections get their health insurance from their employers, so they don't benefit from Obamacare.
  159. @guest
    That's like asking how it's possible to have a free market when people buy crap like McDonald's instead of a good, homecooked meal. The two don't really have anything to do with eachother. If we had a free market in medicine people would be killing themselves with heroin. (More than they are already.) Because most of us are ignorant, stupid, and don't know what we're doing.

    You and the Last Real Calvinist should have some discussions.

    “Ignorant, stupid, don’t know what we’re doing.” You could also say Totally Depraved.

    Read More
  160. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Adventures in ‘intersectionality’.

    This ‘leftist’ concept of ‘intersectionality’ sounds like a ‘rad’ idea, but it’s the oldest story in the book.

    It’s about seeking or finding common interests.

    One famous intersectionality of the 20th century: Nazi-Soviet pact. Both side hated Poland and saw Western Capitalist democracy as the enemy.

    And international trade is one big intersectionality in that very different nations learn to get along and trade with one another since they have common interests and mutual benefits through trade.
    So, even though Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Germany, and Egypt are very different from one another, they find common grounds through trade.

    It seems the the main ideological conflict is between realist intersectionality and idealist intersectionality.
    The realist kind accepts that different peoples and cultures will have different identities, interests, and values. But, there are some things on which all sides could agree and gain something by trading with one another. That would be realist economic intersectionality.
    Realist intersectionality favors limits, sobriety, and pragmatism.

    Concerning realist political intersectionality, we see it among Iran, Russia, and China. All three nations are constantly badgered by the US, so they see common cause in finding ways to get along and work in unison at times. Iran, Russia, and China don’t believe that they are brothers-under-the-sun. They don’t hope to create a utopia together. They understand that deep differences exist among the three nations. But they still see the necessity of working together and finding common interests since the US is so hostile to them.

    In contrast, idealist intersectionality in PC is premised on utopian dreams that Muslims, homos, trannies, black rappers, Hollywood Jewish moguls, rich capitalist feminists, academic socialist feminists, urban hipsters, Asians in Silicon Valley, and Mexican tomato pickers are all part of some noble humanity united by holy victimhood.

    It looks for the magic formula that will turn those who believe in Sharia and those who believe in ‘gay marriage’ and those who believe in calling women ‘bitchass hos’ and those who believe in freaking out about ‘rape culture’ and etc. into one big happy family under the rainbow living in happy harmony singing the Barney the Dino song in praise of Mandela, Harvey Milk, Muhammad, and Jay-Z.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Hey Ron. Once again, a great commenting system. How about a Well Said button? In your spare time of course.
  161. @SFG
    Except for the philosophical argument that 'Asperger's Syndrome' doesn't exist until Asperger defines it, there are plenty of historical figures displaying Asperger traits. (Newton comes to mind.) There are even ancient Greek jokes about impractical scholastikos, though I guess that's a slightly different kettle of fish.

    Well, things exist before people identify them. That’s necessarily the case. You can posit things that aren’t yet the case of course… But anyway, I was joking.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    There are things that people identify which don't exist, like Autism perhaps.
  162. The they/them backlash is just the latest manifestation of the general discomfort with the knowledge that gender is not a natural truth; or in other words, that our genital and chromosomal makeups don’t necessarily decide our personalities, presentations, behaviors, sexual preferences or social roles.

    Profoundly stupid. Your opponents agree that “gender” is not a natural truth. It’s a made-up bullshit social construct. Sex, however, is a different story.

    Read More
  163. @Lot
    I would like to see Trump get reelected and also do not want 10 million working Americans to lose health insurance.

    “I would like to see Trump get reelected and also do not want 10 million working Americans to lose health insurance.”

    The vast majority of Americans enrolled in Obamacare voted for Crooked Cankles. Who cares what happens to them. And by the way most of them who never had health insurance before Barack Hussein Obama became POTUS are underclass Americans, not working class Americans. There is a huge difference between someone who is a plumber and someone who makes minimum wage working at Arby’s Sandwiches.

    The vast majority of people who vote Republican in presidential elections get their health insurance from their employers, so they don’t benefit from Obamacare.

    Read More
  164. @Buffalo Joe
    Jeff, as to Uber's diversity...don't you need to own a real car? Who wants to ride to the airport bouncing around in the back of a low-rider with 20 inch rims?

    “Jeff, as to Uber’s diversity…don’t you need to own a real car? Who wants to ride to the airport bouncing around in the back of a low-rider with 20 inch rims?”

    The demographics of Uber drivers is already quite vibrantly diverse. Where I live a high percentage of Uber drivers are Allahu Akbars (Arabs, South Asians, and Somalis).

    Unless Jesse Jackson only means African Americans when he is talking about needing more diversity.

    Read More
  165. The demographics of Uber drivers is already quite vibrantly diverse. Where I live a high percentage of Uber drivers are Allahu Akbars (Arabs, South Asians, and Somalis).

    To fill the shortage of Americans willing to drive cars.

    Read More
  166. @slumber_j
    Well, things exist before people identify them. That's necessarily the case. You can posit things that aren't yet the case of course... But anyway, I was joking.

    There are things that people identify which don’t exist, like Autism perhaps.

    Read More
  167. @jtgw
    One response, of course, is that, as long as customers are satisfied, what business is it of anyone else's? lol

    That, in a sentence, is my problem with libertarianism.

    Read More
  168. @Frau Katze
    A single payer health care system isn't as bad as you think, plus it costs a lot less than what you're spending (I'm in Canada). But one thing must be remembered: goodies like this are incompatible with open borders.

    Otherwise you might as well hang up a sign at the border saying "Free stuff ahead."

    Canada doesn't border a country like Mexico and up till now (the idiot Trudeau might change things) there was no unvetted immigration.

    Sure, house prices are through the roof in Vancouver thanks to wealthy Chinese (some of whom don't even live here) but the Chinese are not forming an underclass. So no thinks that single payer health care is ripping them off to support an underclass.

    Unfortunately the US already has an underclass. That no doubt is why the US is alone in the West without some type of single payer health system.

    But mass unvetted immigration may bring in another underclass. I'm referring to Jason Richwine's research that the Mexican immigrants are not assimilating even after several generations. If Trump doesn't deal with this, he will make a very serious mistake and lose support.

    Wrong. The US has already THREE underclasses. Injuns, Blacks and Hispanics. And authorities have been busy importing riff- raff from all over the world, to add more underclasses. The more the merrier. That’s why any Social Security scheme is bound to fail in America in the short term.

    Read More
  169. @guest
    I don't know how they refer to the participants of gay weddings. One of them could be a bride for all I know.

    Hilarious: Key & Peele – Gay Wedding Advice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtgY1q0J_TQ)

    Read More
  170. @Harry Baldwin
    There's the example of Prince, who came up with a non-verbal symbol he wanted people to use instead of his name, leading to him being called "The artist formerly known as Prince." Perhaps Pablo Gomez can be referred to as "the individual formerly referred to as 'he.'"

    Oh, I know, instead of Pablo, or “they”, how about “the inmate formerly known as no contest, your honor”?

    ;-}

    Read More
  171. @Jack D
    Where have you been? The left figured that one out a long time ago - it's not "Global Warming" anymore, it's "Climate Change". Climate Change is non-refutable. If it gets warmer, that's due to Climate Change. If it get's colder in some place, that's Climate Change too, or the warming is not evenly spread. More snow/rain is Climate Change and so is less. Whatever happens is due to Climate Change, or else is just weather, which is not the same as climate.

    Hey Jack, you think you’re keeping up with this crap? Listen, peakstupidity has been writing about Global Climate DisruptionTM for some time now, see here We have it trademarked; did you see that big superscripted “TM” back there?

    Read More
  172. @Anon
    Adventures in 'intersectionality'.

    This 'leftist' concept of 'intersectionality' sounds like a 'rad' idea, but it's the oldest story in the book.

    It's about seeking or finding common interests.

    One famous intersectionality of the 20th century: Nazi-Soviet pact. Both side hated Poland and saw Western Capitalist democracy as the enemy.

    And international trade is one big intersectionality in that very different nations learn to get along and trade with one another since they have common interests and mutual benefits through trade.
    So, even though Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Germany, and Egypt are very different from one another, they find common grounds through trade.

    It seems the the main ideological conflict is between realist intersectionality and idealist intersectionality.
    The realist kind accepts that different peoples and cultures will have different identities, interests, and values. But, there are some things on which all sides could agree and gain something by trading with one another. That would be realist economic intersectionality.
    Realist intersectionality favors limits, sobriety, and pragmatism.

    Concerning realist political intersectionality, we see it among Iran, Russia, and China. All three nations are constantly badgered by the US, so they see common cause in finding ways to get along and work in unison at times. Iran, Russia, and China don't believe that they are brothers-under-the-sun. They don't hope to create a utopia together. They understand that deep differences exist among the three nations. But they still see the necessity of working together and finding common interests since the US is so hostile to them.

    In contrast, idealist intersectionality in PC is premised on utopian dreams that Muslims, homos, trannies, black rappers, Hollywood Jewish moguls, rich capitalist feminists, academic socialist feminists, urban hipsters, Asians in Silicon Valley, and Mexican tomato pickers are all part of some noble humanity united by holy victimhood.

    It looks for the magic formula that will turn those who believe in Sharia and those who believe in 'gay marriage' and those who believe in calling women 'bitchass hos' and those who believe in freaking out about 'rape culture' and etc. into one big happy family under the rainbow living in happy harmony singing the Barney the Dino song in praise of Mandela, Harvey Milk, Muhammad, and Jay-Z.

    Hey Ron. Once again, a great commenting system. How about a Well Said button? In your spare time of course.

    Read More
  173. Ann Coulter’s bigoted agenda, which probably wouldn’t allow Mother Teresa the right to gender-neutral pronouns.

    This looks like an example of someone steeped in “Who? Whom?” thinking unable to comprehend the concept of supporting a position based on general principles.

    The author clearly thinks that the reason Ann Coulter (?) doesn’t support gender neutral pronouns is because she hates the particular outgroup who uses such pronouns, and that this hatred of the outgroup is enough to deny “pronoun justice” even to the most favored members of the ingroup, even Mother Teresa!

    The author cannot believe that the reason the Ann Coulters of the world oppose overturning standard English usage is because it would be stupid and immoral, or that it doesn’t matter whom this offends.

    Read More

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
While other top brass played press agents for the administration’s war, William Odom told the truth about Iraq—though few listened.
A thousand years of meritocracy shaped the Middle Kingdom.