Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

It's a 1T/2T dream in any case. Stick around. You're still young enough to make it to Mars and die there. That seesm to be the plan for Mars Manned Mission 1 ... and the following two or three, I'll wager.

Politics/economics are not the only barriers, dude. It's probably not happening in my lifetime, if ever.

There's not really a lot of "there" there, if you know what i mean. Leaving alone things like peak oil.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Politics/economics are not the only barriers, dude. It's probably not happening in my lifetime, if ever.

There's not really a lot of "there" there, if you know what i mean. Leaving alone things like peak oil.

I think Peak Metals (particularly rare-Earth stuff) may compel some venture capitalists to seek an asteroid--maybe towing a relatively small one into near-Earth orbit--before we have men on Mars.

Robert Zubrin has proposed a seemingly feasible plan for bootstrapping eventual permanent settlement on Mars. Maybe not in our lifetimes, though. I still have the dream--disappointed as I am that what was once in my childhood considered an inevitability by the turn of this century didn't happen--that it still could, and if we're smart, should, happen. I firmly believe that we should strive to put some of our eggs in another basket. We of course won't have truly arrived until we settle a terrestrial planet (that can actually support masses of people) around another star. I'm reading the Coyote trilogy by Allen Steele and have rekindled that dream once more. I think either something like that has to happen eventually, or else we'll stagnate on this planet and probably destroy ourselves. Maybe the various religious concepts of "heaven" are a metaphor for this too... those who "pass" go to the stars ("the heavens"). (Could end up being a 2T theme at some point.) Whatever your spiritual beliefs are though, we Earthlings know (and will continue to know more) what's around us--I know eventually we'll find a way to get there (unless we fuck up and destroy ourselves first).

(Yes, I'm one of those space-bullish people. And I understand what all the obstacles are... but still, I believe we will, and must, do it .)

As long as you understand that that is a belief, part of the cult of progress, and not a realistic evaluation of scientific or technological trends.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

As long as you understand that that is a belief, part of the cult of progress, and not a realistic evaluation of scientific or technological trends.

Continued manned spaceflight is largely unproductive. I think the trend is going to be, more and more, bringing space to us through robotics. Not as romantic, but way more profitable, less dangerous, and healthier.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

As long as you understand that that is a belief, part of the cult of progress, and not a realistic evaluation of scientific or technological trends.

Sure. But who a century ago would predict (or extrapolate based on technological trends of the day) what we've come up with today?

I do think that, barring events that would terminate (or vastly diminish) our existence on Earth, as time goes on our chances of finding a way to get to those places we continue to discover and know are there will approach 1:1. Unless the way we are hardwired radically changes and we lose that explorative curiosity and drive that has always been with us. Probably will take more than one century, maybe a few. I guess I hope progress wins the race over destruction--but that's what hope is. I know it may not.

It may very well be "post-humans" that actually do it though. All the biological barriers would be lifted in that case--but uploaded human consciousness would still get to experience it.

That, or genetically modified but still fleshly humans.

I'm still hoping for it to be fleshly (genetically-modified or not) humans though... a chance to reproduce and proliferate and create new, unique (or distinct--mindful of the whole "are individuals unique" controversy in another thread), and unpredicted life in new places.

Yes, space is the one place I still allow my dreams to run wild .

A fair number of people, actually, it was the social stuff they missed completely.

When I am at the computer I can send you some links, but in the meantime what you are basically reciting right now is a catechism, which is cool, as long as you know that.

The obvious answer to Fermi's paradox, based on our understanding of physics, is that interstellar travel isn't really possible on any meaningful scale or timeframe.

Originally Posted by The Rani

We'll be like the alien species in Independence Day, moving from planet to planet and sucking up all the natural resources.
For the sake of The Universe, I hope we stay put.
For the sake of our own planet, I hope we learn to take care of it!

That sounds like our economic elites.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

You've not only failed to improve your accuracy on the third point...

Slippery worm caught -

Originally Posted by Justin '77

... To be correct, you would state the third point as something along the lines of: "Person only exists in a social context".

It's your own words, dude! It's a minor point, but it does demonstrate how slippery you are. You are likely not even conscious of your own inconsistencies. It's a little scary actually, but at the same time, pretty damn entertaining!

However, we did at least get some clarity here on your belief system -

Originally Posted by Justin '77

• a monopoly on the rightful initiation of force is neither necessary nor desirable (arguably, there's no such thing as a rightful initiation of force, but that's a bit of a tangential issue)
• The concept of "property" is meaningless without some context for exclusion
• "Person" can only exist in a social context, and does not exist absent one.

How is "exclusion" enforced if you have two parties disagree over who excludes whom? I believe upstream you answered this yourself that it is done by force, but given your occasional short memory loss -

Originally Posted by Justin '77

...my own contra-Rand view regarding that second point as something along the lines, "property is a function of a context for enforcing exclusion". That context need not be government, and need not be monopoly -- it goes all the way down to "this stick is mine because it's in my closed (that is, not immediately accessible to anybody else) hand".

Your basic "might makes right" notion, no? "Right" being not only the exclusive use, but the very definition, of property - whether that be land, food, water or other human beings, correct?

And given that you believe -

Originally Posted by Justin '77

...a monopoly on the rightful initiation of force is neither necessary nor desirable

- you put that question of "might" into the hands of the individual ("Annie, get my gun, our property is trying to make a break for it again!") or whatever like-minded gang or militia one could muster in support ("boys, break out the armor, those dudes have come back to try to take back their women!), yes?

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Agreed, but low taxes/cost of living and a scant social safety net have been features of much of the Sunbelt for generations, and yet people moved there from the North in droves. Like I said, I don't think ObamaCare is likely to reverse the push/pull factors. Doesn't mean that things will carry on as is ad infinitum, but I don't think the health insurance thing alone is going to change it.

We'll see

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Gah, I'm getting pulled in.

Life is full of choices. Choose wisely.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

No, but are these (highly educated and exhaustively trained) people really necessary to perform most healthcare functions? How about the extent to which these people's salaries are inflated by education requirements + the capping by Medicare of the number of residency slots offered each year?

This is the type of stuff I think of when I think about "bloat in the system", among other things. A regulation that all cars have seatbelts and airbags is one thing, a mandate that the bulk of vehicles on the road be BMWs (with a cap in the growth of vehicles per year, subsidies to help a fraction of the poor pay for BMWs, certain BMW-only roads, etc.) quite something else. If I may be permitted an analogy.

I don't have any problem with any of this - at least as a departure point for further assessment.

I'm about introducing reality into discussions, and that includes helping those with really bizarre notions of where to lay blame. A great deal of forces are constantly at work trying to sell bizarre notions of blame to the masses - I consider myself a beacon of reality for those that have even the slightest hint of a still opened mind.

I doubt that I will be around when the first astronauts (cosmonauts?) reach Mars. (Heck, maybe governments will choose an easier goal instead, like Venus) To industrialize space in a big way-to get out into the solar system beyond initial exploration-will require a much more efficient means of launching into orbit. There are a number of theoretical concepts, Once in orbit, tethers and light sails and aerobraking will take us as far out as Mars.. I have thought of a title for such an era-The Big Breakout Into Space. However, it does not seem imminent. For the 21st century my grandest hope is asteroid mining-replentishing supplies for such materials as platinum group metals and rare earth elements.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Slippery worm caught -



It's your own words, dude! It's a minor point, but it does demonstrate how slippery you are. You are likely not even conscious of your own inconsistencies.

That's a funny thing for a liar to say in a context where any reader has only to scroll upwards to expose his lies. I have to say, I'm terribly impressed by the strength and resilience of your anti-introspection/context force shield.

How is "exclusion" enforced if you have two parties disagree over who excludes whom? I believe upstream you answered this yourself that it is done by force, but given your occasional short memory loss -

...my own contra-Rand view regarding that second point as something along the lines, "property is a function of a context for enforcing exclusion". That context need not be government, and need not be monopoly -- it goes all the way down to "this stick is mine because it's in my closed (that is, not immediately accessible to anybody else) hand".

You lie in everything you say. My offhand example of a most basic form of exclusion does not represent The Other Way for exclusion to happen, nor does anything I wrote imply that. It is, rather, an other way. You lie.
That fully established, one example (for the sake of making your future lies on this point that much easier to expose, I'll comment right now that this is also not The Other Way, but rather a single example illustrative of the existence of more than one category of solution) of a non-violent means of exclusion would be when both parties who might disagree over a particular something both elect to submit to the judgement of some third party known to them and whose judgement they both respect sufficiently to commit to submitting to it voluntarily. Real-world examples of this abound, so when you try your customary dodge of 'magic pony land', know that it too is already exposed as a lie.

Your basic "might makes right" notion, no? "Right" being not only the exclusive use, but the very definition, of property - whether that be land, food, water or other human beings, correct?

Incorrect. See above, and everything else I've ever written (that is, explicitly excluding the things you make up and then claim were "what Justin's words actually mean").

The rest of your post, relying and building as it does on a now-explicitly-exposed lie from you, becomes clearly irrelevant. Feel free to try again to make your point, without starting out lying this time. I wish you the best of luck on that journey of self-improvement.

Fermi's Paradox is still unanswered. As for instellar travel, even "slowboats" seem to require technology and resources far beyond the present. Launch of the first expeditions will likely be centuries in the future. If slowboats prove workable there may be a scenario similar to the Polynesians-over a long time they settled islands across the Pacific. However, these settlements were isolated from each other in the vastness of the Pacific. As for FTL, we don't even know if that is possible. If it is, it seems to require the super technology of a super civilization.

I am grateful that exoplanets can now be detected. It had been my understanding that such was nearly impossible.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

That's a funny thing for a liar to say in a context where any reader has only to scroll upwards to expose his lies. I have to say, I'm terribly impressed by the strength and resilience of your anti-introspection/context force shield.

Let me try to say this as gentle as possible - Dude, those were your own words.

Does Gollum tells you that Master lied and is trickse? Poor Smeagol, poor Spiegel.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

You lie in everything you say. My offhand example of a most basic form of exclusion does not represent The Other Way for exclusion to happen, nor does anything I wrote imply that. It is, rather, an other way. You lie.
That fully established, one example (for the sake of making your future lies on this point that much easier to expose, I'll comment right now that this is also not The Other Way, but rather a single example illustrative of the existence of more than one category of solution)

I have no idea what you are trying to communicate there. What you said is not what you wanted to say, but you said it anyway because that would show me to be a liar by repeating what you said as being what you said? Odd.

Also, "The Other Way" - is that from Scientology or some cult or something? Have you considered the possibility that you may be going into full meltdown?

Originally Posted by Justin '77

of a non-violent means of exclusion would be when both parties who might disagree over a particular something both elect to submit to the judgement of some third party known to them and whose judgement they both respect sufficiently to commit to submitting to it voluntarily. Real-world examples of this abound, so when you try your customary dodge of 'magic pony land', know that it too is already exposed as a lie.

I think you asked the obvious question and trying very very hard not to let the only answer enter into your full consciousness. Still, doesn't it bother you just a tad that you can't pinpoint your magical land on anyone else's map?

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Incorrect. See above, and everything else I've ever written (that is, explicitly excluding the things you make up and then claim were "what Justin's words actually mean").

The rest of your post, relying and building as it does on a now-explicitly-exposed lie from you, becomes clearly irrelevant. Feel free to try again to make your point, without starting out lying this time. I wish you the best of luck on that journey of self-improvement.

Yes, Spiegel, Master's been tricksee, using your own words to confuse you - very bad Master.
Master will leave you alone now. Now go find some nice Sushi to beat and sing to.
And Smeagol, try to calm down.

Tim et al,

The Polynesians are not a good metaphor of interstellar travel. The distances involved are not even vaguely a like, even allowing for travel at some non-trivial fraction of the speed of light. In-system, with fusion or something? Maybe, but you still haven't solved the issue of there being no "there" there, as it were.

And the whole asteroid mining thing, too, is more than a bit unrealistic barring the invention of... magic. Here are a good couple of articles explaining some of the issues confronting the idea.

Life is full of choices. Choose wisely.

Right? I totally have better things to be doing right now, and yet here I am.

I don't have any problem with any of this - at least as a departure point for further assessment.

I'm about introducing reality into discussions, and that includes helping those with really bizarre notions of where to lay blame. A great deal of forces are constantly at work trying to sell bizarre notions of blame to the masses - I consider myself a beacon of reality for those that have even the slightest hint of a still opened mind.

Whatever gets you through the day, man. I just couldn't help pointing out that relying on Doctors making six figure salaries for the bulk of our medical care is a choice, not a natural law. Not necessarily a very good one, either.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed;

...Whatever gets you through the day, man. I just couldn't help pointing out that relying on Doctors making six figure salaries for the bulk of our medical care is a choice, not a natural law. Not necessarily a very good one, either.

That is a common viewpoint....until one gets a brain tumor of course.

Originally Posted by playwrite

That is a common viewpoint....until one gets a brain tumor of course.

Don't be obtuse. Brain tumors do not constitute "the bulk of our medical care".

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Don't be obtuse. Brain tumors do not constitute "the bulk of our medical care".

I'm assuming we adopt the clinic model pretty much as a universal. Your point of entry into the system will be a Triage Nurse (assuming trama or other critical event) or a PA/NP. If the issue is critical, then followong triage, the ER doc starts the process, with consulting and hand-off as needed. This is similar to the ER today, so this model will not change much. For other care, the POE person will provide a preliminary diagnosis, and start the care process by providing a fast referral (i.e. within an hour). The first referral may be an Internist, if the issue is approriate for that level care, there is the potential for needing a team, or any other reason it makes sense. Otherwise, the referral will be direct (i.e. broken leg goes to orthopedics).

To work well and cheaply, almost all procedures will be out-patieint based. Major surgeries or disease treatment will be handled in facilities that do that a lot. Assume the model will be simpler in less urban areas. Transport of non-critical patients may be needed ... or not.

Assume doctors will not like this ... unless they graduate directly into the system. Private practice will be rare.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Let me try to say this as gentle as possible - Dude, those were your own words.

Liar.

My words (original post):

""Person" can only exist in a social context"

What the liar says were my words (original post)

"a person only exist within a social context"

There's a significant and meaningful difference between 'a person' and the concept of "Person" (which is what the capitalization and scare quotes in mine are the standard-usage way of indicating). The only conceivable way you could claim those are substantively the same (other than lying) is to wholly disregard the very significant difference between them. For a supposed writer, you sure seem to be haphazard and sloppy with your language, if the charitable interpretation is to be taken.

There's inconsistency, to be sure... but it appears to be largely a result of the slapdash way you have with words, their meanings, and how they are used. It's inimical to good communication, so I try to take care not to do it myself. It would be helpful if you would do the same -- choose your words deliberately, and read the words other people write thoughfully. English is a good language for deliberate communication -- we have so very many different words (to say nothing of our time-grammar!) to be able to convey the precise meaning and sense of most every thought we might want to share. Try to use it.

I have no idea what you are trying to communicate there.

Clearly. Try drinking less, or taking your medication. Then slow down and read every word. I'll wait...

...

...

Got it?
I said exactly what I intended to say -- that my example was not the only alternative to a binary choice (as you lied and claimed it was). What I said did not change between the original saying and the clarification that you refused to read. Go back and read it again. Thoughfully and deliberately. I'll wait.


...


...

...

Alright then. Onward.

I think you asked the obvious question and trying very very hard not to let the only answer enter into your full consciousness. Still, doesn't it bother you just a tad that you can't pinpoint your magical land on anyone else's map?

So you're going to use your magic pony dodge. It still manages to be slightly gratifying when I call your exact lies before you even deploy them. Experience, it seems, is a good teacher to those who will learn from it .


In intermediate-summation: you, playwrite, are a demonstrated liar. You lie explicitly, you lie implicitly, you lie by omission, you lie in attempts at clever turns-of-phrase. You continue to lie here, even when the means of exposing your lies is immediately at-hand for you and any other person reading them.

M & L,
Pretty much. I imagine it being a lot like how it is in that notoriously socialist institution, the military. There are clinics, that handle most people's needs. From there, you get referred to a hospital. Hopefully, more of them will adopt the integrated model pioneered by places like the Mayo clinic. Young doctors are already moving towards a hospital/institutional model anyways. Fewer and fewer private practices each year. The only need for a primary care physician is as a supervisor of multiple clinics, if that. Personally, the only role I see for the fed. Gov. is in regulation and the provision of baseline insurance. Most of these things are happening already. And if your local clinic happens to be in a school, a mall, or a WalMart? Who cares.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Tim et al,

The Polynesians are not a good metaphor of interstellar travel. The distances involved are not even vaguely a like, even allowing for travel at some non-trivial fraction of the speed of light. In-system, with fusion or something? Maybe, but you still haven't solved the issue of there being no "there" there, as it were.

The point of the Polynesian metaphor is that their settlements were too isolated from each other to form a unified community (given dug out canoes). Without FTL, you cannot create a unified society across interstellar distances.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

M & L,
Pretty much. I imagine it being a lot like how it is in that notoriously socialist institution, the military. There are clinics, that handle most people's needs. From there, you get referred to a hospital. Hopefully, more of them will adopt the integrated model pioneered by places like the Mayo clinic. Young doctors are already moving towards a hospital/institutional model anyways. Fewer and fewer private practices each year. The only need for a primary care physician is as a supervisor of multiple clinics, if that. Personally, the only role I see for the fed. Gov. is in regulation and the provision of baseline insurance. Most of these things are happening already. And if your local clinic happens to be in a school, a mall, or a WalMart? Who cares.

For awhile in the 80s, the Doc-In-a-Box model was popular. The Box could be almost anywhere. Malls were popular locations.