Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (90883)	10/20/2008 4:46:52 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541634

Instead of insisting that "reassertion isn't a persuasive argument," why not answer the question I asked I have challenged your specific assertions several times and you have not addressed any of them. That's why I said what I did. I challenged the toddler, your point about healthy societies, the cookie..., and you have not defended your claim that they are, indeed, about fairness nor given me any argument about why I am mistaken in my assessment of them as non-fairness questions. You've simply proceeded as though I hadn't challenged anything you offered. I don't find that conducive to analysis of the question. why not answer the question I asked so we can stop generalizing and see if my thesis holds up that public policy decisions virtually always merit some degree of a "fairness analysis?" I answered it the best way I knew how. I answered in the affirmative, arenas where I think fairness applies rather than the myriad arenas where it doesn't. The implication is that "doesn't" covers everything else, leaving you to pick your examples of non-commons issues where you think it applies. You must have something in mind. OTOH, it's harder to think of negative examples. If you wanted to test your thesis, you could have provided some justification near the top of this discussion about why the person who is not on a diet eating the last cookie is about fairness rather than utility. But since I've put this much effort into it already, I'll accede to your demand to do it your way. Some contemporary non-fairness public policy issues: How about raising the tax on cigarettes? Or building a new aircraft carrier? Or something about which I posted my annoyance recently, Medicare not paying for blood glucose tests for pre-diabetics? I can't think off-hand how the fairness factor might determine any of those decisions.