Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism (Score 1) 713

by Nithin Philips (#38268654) Attached to: USPS Ending Overnight First-Class Letter Service

Except that the example given is of people who privately own a company making a choice to allow their employees to take time off to serve a community function (firefighting). None of the things in the definition you gave apply: "cooperatve enterprises, common ownership, autonomous public ownership or state ownership". Nope, the companies are privately owned and the owner chooses to give the volunteer firefighters time off to fight fires. "relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic...affairs" Nope, the guy who owns the company is very clearly the boss and if you do not do what he says, you're fired.

Except the volunteer fire department is still a socialist enterprise, regardless whether a firm allows their employees to participate (there are indeed benefits to the employers in this arrangement) or not. Anyone (or any firm) who participates need not be coerced for it to be socialism. There is even a branch of socialism called Liberterian Socialism, which is based on free association. For purposes here a volunteer fire department and its volunteers are sufficiently socialist, even if they otherwise work for wages in a capitalist firm.

Comment: Re:Eh, that is the ULTIMATE example of socialism (Score 1) 713

by Nithin Philips (#38267394) Attached to: USPS Ending Overnight First-Class Letter Service

No, they are not an example of socialism, because everyone involved voluntarily makes whatever sacrifice they make. As far as I am aware, there are no laws requiring employers to allow firefighters to leave the job to go fight fires. This is the mistake that progressives make all the time, they think that being forced to do something is interchangeable with doing so voluntarily.

You're confusing socialism with something else. from Wikipedia:

Socialism play /solzm/ is an economic system characterized by social ownership of the means of production and cooperative management of the economy; or a political philosophy advocating such a system. "Social ownership" may refer to any one of, or a combination of, the following: cooperative enterprises, common ownership, autonomous public ownership or state ownership. As a form of social organization, socialism is based on co-operative social relations and self-management; relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic and political affairs.

Comment: Re:Kinda Risky.... (Score 2) 680

by Nithin Philips (#38170152) Attached to: In Australia, Immunize Or Lose Benefits

I'm not stupid; I understand that vaccines train the immune system. My point is that the kind of 'training' vaccines introduce is military in style: a strict vaccination schedule trains every single immune system on the same precise schedule, with identical doses of genetically identical antigens.

You're taking that analogy too far. There are a couple of things that you're getting wrong.

1. Benefits conferred by vaccination are not inherited, therefore your immune system is not made less sophisticated because of vaccination.
2. Adaptive immunity factors (i.e. receptors) are more or less randomly generated and "trained" by the body. Vaccines do not change that. (see Somatic Hypermutation.)

Vaccination gives your body a head-up on diseases. It gives your body an opportunity to develop adaptive immunity toward the disease in question. It does NOT affect how the immune system fundamentally works.

Adaptive Immune System is a fascinating part of biology. You should really spend some time understanding it.

Comment: Re:I wonder (Score 1) 433

by Nithin Philips (#38101036) Attached to: Drug-Resistant Superbugs Sweeping Across Europe

While it is true that there is no evidence for horizontal transfer of the genes inserted into GM plants for selection, the fact remains that antibiotic resistant genes do have something to do with GMO. I was responding to the assertion that antibiotic resistant genes and GMO are completely exclusive topics.

Though I have to concede that the second part of my reply, while theoretically possible, however seems to be false in practice. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21722080

Comment: Re:Haught isn't in favor of creationism (Score 1) 717

by Nithin Philips (#37940450) Attached to: Censored Religious Debate Video Released After Public Outrage

I think it is somewhat dishonest to brush off both atheists and fundamentalists, equally, claiming that you find both their arguments puerile. The atheists and fundamentalists are arguing in response to each other. Just because the atheists have to respond to repeated assertions about the validity of the genesis story, does not mean that they somehow are responsible for it, or that it makes them equally bad as the fundamentalists. If anything, you can be rest assured that the fundamentalists will, for all time, use more or less the same type of arguments. It's sad that anyone who responds will inevitably look like an idiot, but that's simply the way things are.

Comment: Re:Haught isn't in favor of creationism (Score 1) 717

by Nithin Philips (#37940330) Attached to: Censored Religious Debate Video Released After Public Outrage
Well, that's only true if you ignore the period in between when the religious groups decided to hunt down and torture anyone who disagreed with their tenets. Even in the pre-WWII America, to be a successful scientist, you had to at least pay lip service to religion. I'm not sure citing an ancient Greek philosopher would've helped them much.

Comment: Re:Ron Paul should give away his money (Score 1) 1797

by Nithin Philips (#37818656) Attached to: Ron Paul Wants To End the Federal Student Loan Program

While I agree that for-profit schools are not necessarily bad, the point you're making is moot. Much of the massive marketing in recruiting students. even by land grant institutions, is due to competition in the market, mostly from the emerging for-profit sector. Today, schools compete for students as much as students compete for schools, a trend sharply different from earlier parts of the 20th century. The whole college selection process is almost a farce.

I agree that this behavior will bring the downfall of society. The number crunching does not always account for the value of liberal arts majors or other non-STEM majors and when colleges market education, it will be to increase your income, make you more attractive, raise your popularity and not to make you a well rounded human being. It's ironic that marketing targets emotions, but the exploration of the emotions like arts, theater and literature are all but worthless to the capitalist educators.

Comment: Re:In other words, we should give up. (Score 1) 2247

by Nithin Philips (#37778314) Attached to: Ron Paul Suggests Axing 5 U.S. Federal Departments (and Budgets)
In Michigan there is (almost) no funding for the state parks system from the legislature, and they have to rely exclusively on the admission fees. While it's holding together for now, it sorta like a Dinghy in a hurricane, ready to fall apart at the first sign of trouble. Yeah, long live the state parks indeed.

Philogyny recapitulates erogeny; erogeny recapitulates philogyny.

Working...