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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (19056)	8/30/2010 11:10:57 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

I think she just proved you wrong. That's what it looks like to me.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (19056)	8/31/2010 8:02:27 AM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

You want to discuss some of those that don't have healthcare....maybe a small list? No, not particularly. Even assuming we could find the information given that there's not much written about that which doesn't exist, what would be the utility? My response was a reaction to yet another example of your oddball challenges. Just the other day you challenged me to identify one statement you made that was not based on scientific data. Given that virtually every one of them filled the bill, as I pointed out, what was the point of the challenge? Having apparently learned nothing from that experience, yesterday you issued a challenge to inode to find a country that doesn't have national health care, when in fact, the vast majority of countries do not have national health care. What's that about? I'm quite sure I've never seen anyone reverse the structure of a challenge. The idea behind such a challenge is to focus the other party on the rarity of a set. The difficulty of identifying members of the specified set is an object lesson intended to trigger recognition that the set in question is small or non-existent. You issue a challenge like that expecting the challenged party to fail, not to award a gimme. You don't challenge someone, for example, to identify a tall NBA player. It makes no sense because they're virtually all very tall. A challenge only makes sense when it's to find the anomaly, in this case an NBA player under six feet tall. It's purpose is to force recognition of the reality that NBA players are tall by a dimwit who has been arguing that they aren't. When you reverse the challenge form, you set yourself up as the dimwit. Why would anyone do that? Like I said, I'm fascinated by the way people's minds work (or not).