The Havens Center is a self-described progressive organization which seeks "social and political change." Its biennial Real Utopias Project "examines various basic institutions ... and focuses on specific proposals for their fundamental redesign." Ah, there's nothing like a fundamental transformation, is there? A link to one of the Real Utopia Projects which brought me to this website, Using Pensions for Social Control of Capitalist Investment, is interesting to say the least. And the others are just as eerie.
Cloward and Piven, anyone? Or more of a "nudge"?
Showing posts with label social justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social justice. Show all posts
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Black Panthers' Racism
I always knew they were racists, but now I know they're Anti-Semitic. I was just waiting for him to make a Zionist or Jewish slur at the beginning (subtly hidden in the Gaza/media reference), but he did pull through later on in the video when talking about Zionists controlling Obama. Then he goes into all the usual revolutionary/Black Power nonsense. Called the Tea Party racists and links Black Panthers with the Palestian "brothers and sisters." Then decried SB 1070 racism; I wonder if he even read it.
h/t Patch
h/t Patch
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Is the US #37 in health care in developed nations?
This is based off of a study done by the UN/WHO; an anti-US bias exists right there. Even they admit their data is "hampered by the weakness of routine information systems and insufficient attention to research" and that, when good numbers weren't available, they "developed [data] through a variety of techniques." And as those in the UN often do, they also just blindly believed what governments around the world told them about their systems (can we really believe corrupt regimes like Cuba?).
The study's criteria include how progressive your tax system is as well as a subjective (i.e. what they think) measure of "fairness." This is the category which reduced our "grade" in the study the most, by getting 54th on this "fairness" scale. Their idea of "fairness" is like that of "equality of results," the idea behind the progressive "social justice" doctrine which tries to make everyone equal despite obvious inequalities in a population [Life isn't fair, but let's try our darndest to make it that way, even if we have to resort to socialism]. If two people go into a hospital and can only be cured by an expensive treatment, it is better in the eyes of the UN's standard to have both die than to have one live, even if one can afford it.
The only 2 ways to achieve "fairness": "The healthy subsidize the sick" or "the rich subsidize the poor," with the first one being a basic tenent of insurance and the second one being the basic tenent of socialism. So, with a study that requires socialism to have a good health-care system, how can a non-socialist country (as of now) like ours be judged fairly against others?
In order to figure out how to judge countries on "fairness," the WHO just conducted a survey, 1/2 of the respondants of which were themselves. And after the survey was "checked for consistency and bias," the UN then put 62.5% of the study on some sort of "equality" as defined by the UN.
And we're supposed to believe this statistic when the entire study is stacked against the US by an anti-American organization like the United Nations?
Next, how does Cuba stack up, really?
The study's criteria include how progressive your tax system is as well as a subjective (i.e. what they think) measure of "fairness." This is the category which reduced our "grade" in the study the most, by getting 54th on this "fairness" scale. Their idea of "fairness" is like that of "equality of results," the idea behind the progressive "social justice" doctrine which tries to make everyone equal despite obvious inequalities in a population [Life isn't fair, but let's try our darndest to make it that way, even if we have to resort to socialism]. If two people go into a hospital and can only be cured by an expensive treatment, it is better in the eyes of the UN's standard to have both die than to have one live, even if one can afford it.
The only 2 ways to achieve "fairness": "The healthy subsidize the sick" or "the rich subsidize the poor," with the first one being a basic tenent of insurance and the second one being the basic tenent of socialism. So, with a study that requires socialism to have a good health-care system, how can a non-socialist country (as of now) like ours be judged fairly against others?
In order to figure out how to judge countries on "fairness," the WHO just conducted a survey, 1/2 of the respondants of which were themselves. And after the survey was "checked for consistency and bias," the UN then put 62.5% of the study on some sort of "equality" as defined by the UN.
And we're supposed to believe this statistic when the entire study is stacked against the US by an anti-American organization like the United Nations?
Next, how does Cuba stack up, really?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)