This sounds like something I would say.If everything has to be based on proof, the end result is inevitably that we do nothing all the time.
This sounds like something I would say.If everything has to be based on proof, the end result is inevitably that we do nothing all the time.
The difference is you often use "lack of proof" as some gotcha to claim any regressive/authoritarian approach you agree with is valid while refusing to acknowledge the balance of evidence (both quantity and quality) that disagrees...This sounds like something I would say.
There is a key difference between something being supported by evidence and something being proven. The latter, of course, representing something for which the supporting evidence is uncontestable (or sufficiently close to).This sounds like something I would say.
Come on, the Yes campaign were very light on details about how it would all work if the Yes vote won, with the answer to a lot of queries being 'we'll decide that after'. Suffice to say that more than a few people found that to be a bit 'odd', if not straight out suspect.I wouldn't have called them dumb. But I would say that the answers from a lot of no voters was 'I just don't know what it was about'..... so they're just not willing to put any thought into it
Not really, most people aren't mad keen on agreeing to things they don't understand.And I still do not understand why 'I don't know' means you vote no. That's nonsense
Oh the sweet, beautiful, and majestic irony!Something light
I think you may have read the comment backwards. The idea here is that proof is a silly standard, and we often shouldn't hold ourselves to it.The difference is you often use "lack of proof" as some gotcha to claim any regressive/authoritarian approach you agree with is valid while refusing to acknowledge the balance of evidence (both quantity and quality) that disagrees...
FalseCome on, the Yes campaign were very light on details about how it would all work if the Yes vote won, with the answer to a lot of queries being 'we'll decide that after'. Suffice to say that more than a few people found that to be a bit 'odd', if not straight out suspect.
Not really, most people aren't mad keen on agreeing to things they don't understand.
I voted No because I couldn't see anything to indicate it wasn't going to end up with another ratfuck of corruption, nepotism and abuse like ATSIC was.The No voters thought that voting yes would do damage to society, or them personally, somehow
Jesus Christ. "Redpilltiktok", "sigmamale". What a pathetic joke.White liberals are weird/self-hating I do agree.
I asking for basic proof of something you say works actually fucking works. I don't give 2 shits about the economics. I partly do in US because people losing their jobs in the US means losing healthcare, which is probably worse overall than being unnecessarily exposed to covid due to people not getting care for everything else (as covid is not nearly the only public health concern). I'm aware just about everywhere else (developed nations at least) have public healthcare that you don't lose because you got fired or laid off so that US issue doesn't apply elsewhere. Thus, I'm not asking for that US issue to even be in the discussion. Where is the proof that lockdowns actually saved any life (lowering covid deaths =/= saving overall deaths btw)? Nobody has yet to produce this evidence because it actually doesn't exist.Dude, you're not appealing to science over lockdowns, you're appealing to economics.
OMFG, not every cost-benefit analysis is economics. For example, basically all medical interventions are basically cost-benefit analyses over whether any one of them actually fucking works. Any drug study is literally just a cost-benefit analysis that doesn't care about cost, it just cares about if something is beneficial. After you find that, then you can have the money discussion.No, I think you'll find they're economics. That's why the people who write nearly all of them are economists.
For instance, many of them are very explicitly assigning financial measures of value to make their determination, including numerous ones you have cited. Some are using "QALY", but the concept of QALY also comes out of the work of, and is still largely used by, economists. Just in case you don't believe this, head over to the Wikipedia page on QALY and check out the citations, looking at the author affiliations. Masses, and masses, of economists. Because it's a branch of economics.
IIRC, all of Australia at least for the first year or so did really well in keeping covid cases and deaths low. Even with that great result of keeping covid at bay, Sweden did better than Australia in overall deaths. You know that covid is not the only public health issue and by only concerning yourself about covid and ignoring everything else, that is also not good and beneficial to public health either.I said Western Australia, not Australia. We had about 5 weeks of lockdown, and virtually no community spread. On a local scale, covid didn't happen here.
So you don't make things worse...Why do we need proof to pursue a course of action? If everything has to be based on proof, the end result is inevitably that we do nothing all the time.
Really small tie knot too, someone got skinnied!Jesus Christ. "Redpilltiktok", "sigmamale". What a pathetic joke.
It really does look like he's just wearing a child's tieReally small tie knot too, someone got skinnied!
Did anyone else have skinnies at school? It's where to yank someone's tie really hard so the knot closes up and is hard to undo.
I mean, probably. But then, there is a high possibility of any government policy. (Actually, I shouldn't just blame the government here. Any private institution would do the same as well.)I voted No because I couldn't see anything to indicate it wasn't going to end up with another ratfuck of corruption, nepotism and abuse like ATSIC was.
After having to wear ties to school, I deliberately picked a job so I would never have to wear a tie... but this is good to know. Does the coin just beat on your chest all the time?Btw, anyone worried about skinnies: you can put a large coin in the knot to stop it pulling too tight.
Ah, the old cities have more gun violence than rural areas trick....White liberals are weird/self-hating I do agree.
The coin sits within the knot so you're not really aware of it, though skinnying is generally less common in the workplace than it was at school.After having to wear ties to school, I deliberately picked a job so I would never have to wear a tie... but this is good to know. Does the coin just beat on your chest all the time?