The Cellar - The proper role and scope of government

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - The proper role and scope of government (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=26074)

First of all, these are opinion pieces - one published in a newspaper and the other in the business magazine, Forbes.

I do not trust medical (or scientific) information from such sources. Is the Winona Daily News a peer reviewed journal? And who is Dr. Frank Bures? A renowned cancer researcher? The senior oncologist at the Mayo clinic? The local chiropractor who picks up spare change writing for the Winona Daily News? Or maybe the local GP who picks up quite a bit of loose change pandering to the fear of cancer.

Who knows?

I don't and the last thing I'd do is make major health decisions based on what I read in the News, earnest journalists though they may be.

Then we have Forbes, dedicated to business and those who run businesses - NOT a medical journal. As a matter of fact, Forbes has a vested interest in attacking government regulation of ANY sort, even including health guidelines. Steve Forbes gives us his anecdotal experience without mentioning his age - which is a major factor for prostrate cancer - and makes the assumption that every man in the world will share the same experience as he did.

Whatever

This is the research done at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) published in the highly regarded, peer-reviewed Journal of New England Medicine:

~snip~

Quote:

At seven years, 50 deaths were attributable to prostate cancer in the screening group and 44 deaths were attributable in the usual-care group. Through year 10, there were 92 prostate cancer deaths in the screening group and 82 in the usual-care group. The difference between the numbers of deaths in the two groups was not statistically significant. Thus there was no detectable mortality benefit for screening vs. usual-care.

Given the uncertainties about the mortality benefits of PSA testing, NCI has been pursuing many avenues to find new ways of screening for prostate cancer, including several sets of biomarkers that are being validated in its Early Detection Research Network (EDRN), some using specimens from PLCO’s biorepository of tissue and blood. Some examples of the marker tests include using microstrands of RNA to detect disease, examining changes in genes such as GSTP1, and imaging of proteins in prostate cancer tissue.

This testing was part of a 17 year on-going study and included a subject pool of 76,693 men. Compared with the Steve Forbes study of one man - himself.

The NIH is working on developing a better test in order to save lives. The old test is just not all that helpful. Sorry, Frank

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 771019)

Who cares....

About what?

A man's chances of getting prostrate cancer and what tests are appropriate?

or

How much weight should be given to the medical opinions of a gov't backed out fit which has a mandate to cut health costs?

I would think that all men would care about the former. The latter has important implications for government sponsored health care.

Merc, you just skim stuff that other people post if you read it at all. Honestly! :rolleyes:

Liberal Programs Deserve Blame for Income Inequality

The Congressional Budget Office documents income gains for everyone, not just the wealthy.

http://reason.com/archives/2011/11/0...lame-for-incom

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamIam (Post 770674)

I'm with you, Lamplighter. Private contractors are raking in money hand over fist. They're making a killing in more ways than one. During the Iraq War, there was one private contractor employee for every one American soldier.

Most of us understand and appreciate nearly every single one of them. I was always glad to see the contractors on every deployment. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by henry quirk (Post 762653)

In my view: to not exist.

I just spent a bit of time living in a country where the government really does not exist. Pakistan. What a lovely place! That's right no government getting in the way with those pesky regulations and enforcement of basic law and order. Visiting countries like Pakistan in the course of my job has really impacted my view on the role of government in our country. I have experienced first hand the idea of no government, and it is not a nice place. I am sure that I will experience the reality of no government the next time our Great Nation decides to send me to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, the Horn of Africa or some other place where no there is a lot of no government going on.

Oh, and most of the places with not a lot of government going on have lots and lots of Religion in government going on. Hmmm....I wonder if there is a relationship there.

/rant off.

Joe!

Joe's back!

*big smile*

Thanks Dana. :) good to see you too!

"I have experienced first hand the idea of no government, and it is not a nice place."

So what? Who said anything about 'nice' or 'fair' or 'equal' or any of that crap?

While not always the case: 'peace' (or 'nice' or 'fair' or 'equal' or 'just', etc.) is just another word for 'controlled'.

#

"...most of the places with not a lot of government going on have lots and lots of Religion in government going on."

Not surprising as 'politics' and 'religion' are essentially the same thing: Idealism (the worship of 'god', whether it be divine arbiter or ideology, is the same across the board).

Dude, why wait for the United States to change? You should move tomorrow! I'll help pay your fair to Islamabad. It sounds to me like you would love it there. Don't stay in Islamabad though, way to much control there. Bolochistan or North West Frontier sound like about your speed.

Peace, nice, fair, equal and just are other words for controlled?? What dictionary do you use? It's hard to take you serious when you discuss things in such a manner. Is this radar with a different handle?

"You should move tomorrow!"

As an 'occupant' might say: make me.

#

"It's hard to take you serious when you discuss things in such a manner."

In post #53 of this http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=26210&page=4 Dana declares 'All threads in the Cellar are 'opinion' threads, essentially." So: pffftt! If you don't like the way I define or express or opine, that, 'dude', is your concern, not mine.

And: since I haven't a clue who you are, can't see how your (not) taking 'me' serious is sumthin' I need to worry about.

And: no, I'm not 'radar'...I don't use multiple handles and I don't change what works.

I don't want to make you move to another country. That's not what I am about. There is a line of logic, flawed though it may be, to my thinking though. Having been to many other countries, the U.S. is a very, very peaceful, nice, fair, equitable, and just place. By comparison. We aren't perfect, but we have it really good. So, since there are so many other places where government enforcement of regulations and laws is lax to say the least, it would be easier to move to one of these places then try to create this atmosphere in the US. It's also a selfish idea, I prefer the United States as it is today. Although it's not a perfect union, it is a bit more perfect then just about any place I've been. A damn sight more perfect then places I've been where there is no government. We have more then our fair share of the blessings of liberty, justice and domestic tranquility. We have a pretty damn good common defense, I help see to that.

I'm really not willing to give that up. Again, not trying to make anyone move where they do not want to go. It just sounds to me like you would like to live there rather then here.

"I'm really not willing to give that up."

Me neither, which is why it irks me you fixated on "In my view: to not exist." as the answer to the question of 'what is the proper role and scope of government?' when the bulk of my post (#8) was given over to the notion of proxyhood (or, extremely limited government) as preferable to 'governance' (in the current form).

I may be anarchistic, but I'm not advocating an anarchy. Any lazy shit reading your post (and not bothering to go up-thread to read my post) is sure to take me as some of rabid libertarian-type.

Next thing I'll know: said lazy shit will bring up Somalia as my idea of heaven... :mad: ...which it's not.

I'm quite capable of painting myself into a corner without others lending a hand by way of out-of-context quotes...just sayin'... ;)

#

"the U.S. is a very, very peaceful, nice, fair, equitable, and just place"

Trundle over to the 'wall street occupied' thread for opposing views...me: I'm content here despite the fact I don't think America is all that peaceful, nice, fair, etc.

U.S. boosts estimate of auto bailout losses to $23.6B

Quote:

David Shepardson/ Detroit News Washington Bureau
The Treasury Department dramatically boosted its estimate of losses from its $85 billion auto industry bailout by more than $9 billion in the face of General Motors Co.'s steep stock decline.
In its monthly report to Congress, the Treasury Department now says it expects to lose $23.6 billion, up from its previous estimate of $14.33 billion.
The Treasury now pegs the cost of the bailout of GM, Chrysler Group LLC and the auto finance companies at $79.6 billion. It no longer includes $5 billion it set aside to guarantee payments to auto suppliers in 2009.
The big increase is a reflection of the sharp decline in the value of GM's share price.
The current estimate of losses is based on GM's Sept. 30 closing price of $20.18, down one-third over the previous quarterly price.
GM's stock closed Monday at $22.99, up 2 percent. The government won't reassess the estimate of the costs until Dec. 30.
The government has recovered $23.2 billion of its $49.5 billion GM bailout, and cut its stake in the company from 61 percent to 26.5 percent. But it has been forced to put on hold the sale of its remaining 500 million shares of stock.
The new estimate also hikes the overall cost of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program costs to taxpayers. TARP is the emergency program approved by Congress in late 2008 at the height of the financial crisis.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434/U.S.-boosts-estimate-of-auto-bailout-losses-to-$23.6B#ixzz1dxXuR19T

"...I don't think America is all that peaceful, nice, fair, etc." IN MY OPINION

Nor is there one good reason (but many bad ones) why it should be.