*** January 2011 low content thread ***

Brian Anderson:

I'm not supporting what he said. I just wanted to see if there were any refutations that came up.

Van Jones has some points, but he only looks at the bad effects, and not at the ways plastic enhances the lives of the poor. It is a cheap, strong and durable material without which many modern amenities wouldn't be possible. How many poor people could afford indoor plumbing if it wasn't for inexpensive plastic pipes? Plastic especially benefits the poor because they are the ones for which greater abundance makes the greatest difference. And it equalizes standards of living because it makes new technology affordable for everyone are not just toys of the rich.

This dislike of plastic is not really rational but has more to do with the feeling that it is "unnatural". It seems certain people are in the process of establishing kosher laws of what resourses humanity can use, based on the emotional gut reaction they have about them. You know, wind energy is good, the government should subsidize that, but plastic and nuclear energy is bad, let's ban that.

Brian Anderson:

I'm not supporting what he said. I just wanted to see if there were any refutations that came up.

I watched about half of the clip:

 

He claims plastics are poisonous in use -> doesn't offer any evidence

He claims plastics are burned which causes dangerous chemicals to be released -> doesn't offer evidence that this happens -> doesn't show why this alleged problem is tied to the plastics itself. Why can't we just bury it? Why do they burn it? What about government not enforcing private property laws against this? Why would this only harm poor people?

He claims oil causes global warming -> doesn't offer anything to the issue

He claims poor people don't have choices and have to go for plastics -> Seems like plastics are good then. Esp. considering he doesn't offer any evidence why it's poisonous.

 

Plus, he had stupid jokes.

Grade: F

It is a cheap, strong and durable material without which many modern amenities wouldn't be possible. How many poor people could afford indoor plumbing if it wasn't for inexpensive plastic pipes? Plastic especially benefits the poor because they are the ones for which greater abundance makes the greatest difference. And it equalizes standards of living because it makes new technology affordable for everyone are not just toys of the rich.

Awesome. See, I don't think like that right away for some reason. It always takes someone to give me a starting point and then I can branch out. Thank you.

Lisa van Damme, founder of the Montessori-based Van Damme Academy, and contributor to many Objectivist publications, destroys the cult of excellence (Amy Chua):

Pt2 - response to critics

Winner of Ayn Rand Institute's Atlas Shrugged Video Contest:

The irony is that he is talking about divergent thinking, but he is completely caught up in the paradigm that schooling is the concern of the collective. Notice how he says societies educate their children, as if children are owned by society. That is the problem in the first place, the assumption that education is to be administered by the state. You can reform state education, but you can never make it work. It is time for people to realize that the free enterprise system won. Why do they believe that free enterprise can deliver cars and computers better than the government, but somehow schooling and health care are an exception?

Penn and Teller remind us why Libertarianism is awesome

Aw yeah, look at anarchy gettin' all mainstream.

I agreed with this guy until 7:29 when he starts talking about economics. He can't connect morality to economics.