U.S. Politics - the end of summer edition

[Gertrude]

It would be nice to think so, but I am not holding my breath.

[Inigima]

Well this is encouraging

Is it possible that heads will finally roll for almost causing the world's economy to collapse?

Fool me once...

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Speaking of the financial crisis VICE claims to have a secret memo from Fed heir apparent Larry Summers showing a conspiracy to set up the financial crisis, with him at the heart of it

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/larry-summers-and-the-secret-end-game-memo

The Memo confirmed every conspiracy freak’s fantasy: that in the late 1990s, the top US Treasury officials secretly conspired with a small cabal of banker big-shots to rip apart financial regulation across the planet. When you see 26.3 percent unemployment in Spain, desperation and hunger inGreece, riots in Indonesia and Detroit in bankruptcy, go back to this End Game memo, the genesis of the blood and tears.

The Treasury official playing the bankers’ secret End Game was Larry Summers. Today, Summers is Barack Obama’s leading choice for Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, the world’s central bank. If the confidential memo is authentic, then Summers shouldn’t be serving on the Fed, he should be serving hard time in some dungeon reserved for the criminally insane of the finance world.

The memo is authentic.

[Ser Greguh]

Speaking of the financial crisis VICE claims to have a secret memo from Fed heir apparent Larry Summers showing a conspiracy to set up the financial crisis, with him at the heart of it

http://www.vice.com/...t-end-game-memo

Um, I'm all for selective heads on spikes, but the sensationalist tone of that article doesn't really match the content. It's not exactly a secret, and doesn't exactly require a conspiracy, to show that there were a lot of forces, particularly in the bullish 90's, that were working to deregulate the financial industry, and that were willing to apply political pressure to that end. They were doing so not because they intended to crash it, but because like any gambling addict that's been on a winning streak, they were frustrated with the rules that prevented them from continuing to up the stakes.

In retrospect it was insanely irresponsible and certainly paved the way for the crash, but trying to say this was part of some conspiracy to crash the economy is a bit like saying that an attempt to overturn - oh, say, a specific piece of gun control legislation - can be equated with conspiring to cause a school shooting that involved those guns.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

While I agree that it's sensational, it's pretty important info when this is the guy who they are moving to be the next Fed chair.

[TerraPrime]

Re: Stag Country

What does this have to do with Bradley Manning asking for tax payer dollars to subsidize his unnecessary surgery?

Your argument so far hinges on your assertion that hormone treatments and/or gender re-assignment are not necessary medical procedures, that they are elective surgeries comparable to face lifts and breast enlargement.

Then, quite simply, they are wrong. It is, by every conceivable definition, elective. You don't get to apply special definitions to words just because you are transgender.

It's an elective treatment not a medical necessity. Following this logic, you would be ok for tax payers footing the bill for a female prisoner that decides she wants brest implants or a male prisoner deciding he would want his junk enlarged?

And no, I don't oppose dispensing drugs for arthritis or IBS (no idea why you are adding the criteria that an illness be life threatening here) those are actually illnesses and the treatments are medically necessary. Gender Reassignment surgery and hormone therapy are elective procedures that are not necessary to keep an individual healthy.

Therefore, I am bringing your attention to the fact that you probably do not feel that having your penis intact and functional is an elective procedure, nor that you can, at will, forego having a set of genital that matches your identity.

The only thing puzzling is how people seem to manufacture new meanings for words. This case being "necessity". True or false: has Manning gone his whole life without this surgery? Yup. So why the hell would it be necessary all of the sudden now that he is in PRISON on the tax payer's dime? Because he "found himself"? Get real.

He has already sorted a lot of his gender issues prior to his arrest and imprisonment. Seeking hormone replacement treatment is a natural progression of the process, not a new development.

Manning was born a man and entered prison as a man. The fact that he has psychological issues that result in him not agreeing with this reality doesn't change the fact that he is biologically a male.

I think you got it backwards. The fact that he is a biologically male person is what is causing him the problems of gender dysmorphia.

Are you actually trying to debate that gender reassignment surgery is not an elective procedure?

Not really debating, because I don't think there's another possible conclusion. I am, however, trying to convince you that your understanding of transgender issue is severely retrograde, inappropriate, and generally disrespectful to transgender people.

To the extent that prisons are responsible for the inmates health, and to the extent that psychological problems* are considered part of an inmate's overall health status, it seems peculiar that you'd argue hormone replacement treatment is not necessary for people like Manning.

*Note: I do not consider gender dysmorphia as the same category of mental illness as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. However, the distress that an incongruent physical gender presentation vis a vis a person's internal identity can cause severe stress to a person's psyche and mental health. That's the context for my bringing up mental health issues.

[lokisnow]

Is it possible that heads will finally roll for almost causing the world's economy to collapse?

Hah. Everyone knows the law doesn't apply to people who work in the financial sector. They move big numbers around on spreadsheets, so obviously that means they get immunity forever for anything.

[Altherion]

*Note: I do not consider gender dysmorphia as the same category of mental illness as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. However, the distress that an incongruent physical gender presentation vis a vis a person's internal identity can cause severe stress to a person's psyche and mental health. That's the context for my bringing up mental health issues.

I'm actually curious about the general policy with regards to such things. The possible purposes of imprisonment are to protect society from the offender, to convince the offender not to repeat the offense, to deter others from doing the same thing and to inflict suffering on the offender. There's no further danger to society (Manning no longer has any security clearance) and convincing Manning not to repeat the offense is pointless (it's incredibly unlikely that anyone would trust him/her with such secrets ever again). Thus, the only remaining purposes are retribution and deterrence. Both of these do not merely allow for some measure of psychological and/or physical distress, but require it. On the other hand, we obviously don't want to take things too far. For example, if (s)he had pneumonia I'm pretty sure (s)he'd be treated (the sentence wasn't "death through neglect"). If (s)he had schizophrenia, (s)he'd also be treated (no sense in making the lives of the guards more difficult). Where is the line drawn though? If the prisoner is unhappy, does the government pay for anti-depressants?

[thecryptile]

The Commonwealth of Virginia will pay for anti-depressants and anti-psychotics for mentally ill prisoners.

[TerraPrime]

If the prisoner is unhappy, does the government pay for anti-depressants?

"Unhappy" in what sense? If someone is clinically depressed, then yes, we should treat them. But obviously, being incarcerated is going to make someone unhappy.

The 8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, so I think we will then need to make case that denying Manning hormone replacement is not "cruel and unusual."

Gender dysphoria is a recognized clinical condition, and is treated as a serious health issue by psychologists and psychiatrists. That would argue that it falls under the same category as other recognized mental health issues.

[Shryke]

While I agree that it's sensational, it's pretty important info when this is the guy who they are moving to be the next Fed chair.

Totally.

But it's more, as Ser Greguh says, a sign of the kind of stupidity and irresponsibility the financial markets breed and why those fuckers need to be kept on a tight leash.

[Altherion]

"Unhappy" in what sense? If someone is clinically depressed, then yes, we should treat them. But obviously, being incarcerated is going to make someone unhappy.

That's what I meant -- I would assume confinement is a source of unhappiness so paying for it's treatment is bizarre: first the state pays to cause a condition and then the same pays to cure it.

In any case, from that Washington Post article, it looks like the Army won't provide treatment for Manning without the inevitable lawsuit so we'll see how the courts resolve this.

[Shryke]

That's what I meant -- I would assume confinement is a source of unhappiness so paying for it's treatment is bizarre: first the state pays to cause a condition and then the same pays to cure it.

In any case, from that Washington Post article, it looks like the Army won't provide treatment for Manning without the inevitable lawsuit so we'll see how the courts resolve this.

I'm not sure you really understand what clinical depression is.

[Altherion]

While I agree that it's sensational, it's pretty important info when this is the guy who they are moving to be the next Fed chair.

Tormund, this is much of the reason why he is a strong candidate for the next Fed chair. The people who engineered the financial crisis are still running the show -- at most a few of the older ones retired and have been replaced by their apprentices. Summers is part of this club and he's not doing anything terribly important right now which makes him a good candidate. The other name being floated around (Yellen) appears to be outside the innermost circle, but only by a single step so letting her in is not a big deal. I very much doubt anyone not approved by most of the people in that memo has any chance at the chair.

[Stag Country]

Your argument so far hinges on your assertion that hormone treatments and/or gender re-assignment are not necessary medical procedures, that they are elective surgeries comparable to face lifts and breast enlargement.

Therefore, I am bringing your attention to the fact that you probably do not feel that having your penis intact and functional is an elective procedure, nor that you can, at will, forego having a set of genital that matches your identity.

You'll have to explain that because it makes absolutely no sense.

He has already sorted a lot of his gender issues prior to his arrest and imprisonment. Seeking hormone replacement treatment is a natural progression of the process, not a new development.

"Natural progression"? Poor choice of words. There is nothing natural about having an operation to completely alter the physical shape and chemical make-up of your body. And where are you getting this information that he sorted his gender issues? Other than posting a photograph of himself with a wig, what has he done? The fact remains that he is biologically a man. He has gone his whole life living as a man and any surgery to change that fact is going to be an elective procedure. It is not medically necessary.

I suppose next you'll want to allow people sentenced to long term prison sentences to get priority on donor lists too right?

I am, however, trying to convince you that your understanding of transgender issue is severely retrograde, inappropriate, and generally disrespectful to transgender people.

To the extent that prisons are responsible for the inmates health, and to the extent that psychological problems* are considered part of an inmate's overall health status, it seems peculiar that you'd argue hormone replacement treatment is not necessary for people like Manning.

Sorry but you'll need to play that 'woe-is-me' card somewhere else. I'm not buying it here. It's not retrograde, inappropriate, or disrespectful to say an elective medical procedure is elective. This really is about you not understanding the meaning of the word 'elective'.

[TerraPrime]

This is getting too far afield from the politics of it, so I am taking it to the LBGTQ thread.

[Inigima]

That's what I meant -- I would assume confinement is a source of unhappiness so paying for it's treatment is bizarre: first the state pays to cause a condition and then the same pays to cure it.

In any case, from that Washington Post article, it looks like the Army won't provide treatment for Manning without the inevitable lawsuit so we'll see how the courts resolve this.

Clinical depression is one of those things, like addiction, that it's difficult to wrap your head around if you've never experienced it. (I've experienced neither; this is all coming from my reading.) To me, the instinctual reaction to -- say -- alcoholism is something along of the lines of "Well, why don't you just not drink then?" which is an absolutely worthless thing to say to an alcoholic because alcoholics aren't just people who like to drink, they're people who are pathologically unable to stop. It's a medical condition. Clinical depression is similar. You aren't just "unhappy" and you can't just choose to stop being unhappy, and it doesn't matter if you think someone "doesn't have anything to be depressed about." It's a medical condition, just like alcoholism, and "just stop" is not helpful advice. If you were in prison, you would almost certainly be unhappy, that's one of the points of prison. You aren't supposed to be glad you're there. But being unhappy isn't the same thing as being depressed.

[Ser Greguh]

Clinical depression is one of those things, like addiction, that it's difficult to wrap your head around if you've never experienced it. (I've experienced neither; this is all coming from my reading.) To me, the instinctual reaction to -- say -- alcoholism is something along of the lines of "Well, why don't you just not drink then?" which is an absolutely worthless thing to say to an alcoholic because alcoholics aren't just people who like to drink, they're people who are pathologically unable to stop. It's a medical condition. Clinical depression is similar. You aren't just "unhappy" and you can't just choose to stop being unhappy, and it doesn't matter if you think someone "doesn't have anything to be depressed about." It's a medical condition, just like alcoholism, and "just stop" is not helpful advice. If you were in prison, you would almost certainly be unhappy, that's one of the points of prison. You aren't supposed to be glad you're there. But being unhappy isn't the same thing as being depressed.

Yup. We've all been sad, so that's what we register as coinciding with clinical depression, but that's an empathetic false positive and leads to a lot of misunderstandings.

[Commodore]

Steyn on Obamacare and the hierarchy of privilege

On Wednesday, the Nevada AFL-CIO passed a resolution declaring that “the unintended consequences of the ACA will lead to the destruction of the 40-hour work week.” That’s quite an accomplishment for a “health” “care” “reform” law. But the poor old union heavies who so supported Obamacare are now reduced to bleating that they should be entitled to the same opt-outs secured by big business and congressional staffers. It’s a very strange law whose only defining characteristic is that no one who favors it wants to be bound by it.

Meanwhile, on the very same day as the AFL-CIO was predicting the death of the 40-hour week, the University of Virginia announced plans to boot working spouses off its health plan beginning January 1 because the Affordable Care Act has made it unaffordable: It’s projected to add $7.3 million dollars to the university’s bill in 2014 alone.

As Nancy Pelosi famously said, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.” But the problem with “comprehensive” legislation is that, when everything’s in it, nothing’s in it. The Affordable Care Act means whatever President Obama says it means on any particular day of the week. Whether it applies to you this year, next year, or not at all depends on the whim of the sovereign, and whether your CEO golfs with him on Martha’s Vineyard. A few weeks back, the president unilaterally suspended the law’s employer mandate. Under the U.S. Constitution, he doesn’t have the power to do this, but judging from the American people’s massive shrug of indifference he might as well unilaterally suspend the Constitution, too. Obamacare is not a law, in the sense that all persons are equal before it, but a hierarchy of privilege; for example, senators value their emir-sized entourages and don’t want them to quit, so it is necessary to provide the flunkies who negotiated and drafted the Affordable Care Act an exemption from the legislation they imposed on the citizenry.

love when Steyn

, I still can't figure out his accent

[lokisnow]

one of my conservative friends is constantly posting anti obama gifs to facebook. I saw one today I thought was pretty hilarious and also sort of kind of liked:

"Hey Obama, when are you going to tell the middle east to stop clinging to their guns and religion?"