![[Valid RSS]](/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
Comments
| << Who's really uninsured? | Who cares who's insured? >> |
10 months ago
Warning, this is a 46 minute video. There isn't anything important visual happening though, so you can just listen to it podcast style. It's a convincingly presented argument _against_ trying to reform the government from within the government. Probably the best presentation of these arguments that I've ever heard.
Add Comment (1 comments)
| << Who's really uninsured? | Who cares who's insured? >> |
"Remember, brick walls let us show our dedication. They are there to separate us from the people who don't really want to achieve their dreams. Don't bail. The best of the gold's at the bottom of barrels of crap." --Randy Pausch
9 months, 2 weeks ago
I just had a check not reach its destination sent through the usps. I issued a stop payment and sent it again. If it weren't some stupid mistake and it was the usps striking, I would have sent it FedEx, or UPS, or The Spooner Post.
28:00 - As I keep listening, it seems like he totally missed the very important point of competition. I don't like the school's excess bureaucracy, I move my kid. It'll cost me less, or I'll get better education for the same money. The bureaucrats can "hurt" the kids all they want, they won't have any kids left soon.
He does make a valid point that you can't fight the government through politics, because if you're a member of governmental society you depend on the government's services and are subject to its force. The retaliation will sap your army before it gets off the ground.
34:00 - It occurs to me that the bureaucrats as well can only tolerate all these horrible things for so long. The postal workers or teachers or farmers don't want to see starving old people either. As they see people using alternatives and not caring about their strike, they'll go back to work and be done demanding their handounts.
This can't be the best argument. It's not bad, but he didn't even address the competition issue. If he addressed it and I still disagreed, that would be acceptable. He didn't even mention it though, so I don't believe that he's telling me anything else too groundbreaking.
Reply -- Tim