Posts by Andrew Stevenson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Shades of Charles Stross?
-
Careful Emma, someone could get hurt on that sarcasm
-
Thanks Emma, and the others who have contributed their stories. It helps in understanding a bit of my own experiences - in both the receiving and giving of support.
-
can anyone confirm or deny the rumour I heard that men get a local anaesthetic for the insertion of a catheter
I cannot confirm or deny for this application. But in case you have never had a local, they sting like anything (think lemon juice in a paper cut). Last time I had stiches I chose to forego the local...
-
it's simply that the ideology is more important than the end result
and that is the saddest thing
-
When travelling in Eastern Europe I'd keep coming across some god damn awful ugly concrete monstrosity towering over the local buildings and looking completely out of place.
They were instantly recognisable, one was the Chemistry building at Auckland University (complete with pebbled panels), another had to be the PSIS building on Featherston St, Engineering School had obviously been shipped over in my absence. Ministry of Works 'ugly things in concrete' public buildings, it almost made me homesick.
Apparently they were 'gifts' from the Soviets to their clients, who had to pay for them though, and were invariably hated.
How the design ideology got transferred to NZ I have no idea.If you say design matters, please specify good design.
-
We do social experimentation all the time, I'm sure some one could make a case that if your society is not changing then it is dying - but that's a whole 'nother thread.
You put two good cases forward Gio, with cars we accept the costs (deaths and injuries, pollution, loss of ammenity etc) and benefits they bring; with asbestos we find the costs significantly outweigh the benfits and are looking to reverse the whole policy/minimise the harm it caused. In both cases there were significant unintended consquences. What's the worst that could happen? I don't know and that worries me (perhaps I should take something for that).The argument that 'X worked over there so it should be fine here' seems dubious, we know of cases where introduction of drugs from one culture to another has caused problems (opium, alcohol). There are still issues if the drugs are a cause, a symptom of other problems, or perhaps both. Societies and cultures are complicated things, too complicated for a one size fits all approach.
The point I was trying, badly, to make is if we can't agree on what the benefits here will be, and don't know the full consequences for our society of a decision, then is it responsible for us to take that decision? -
Unintended consequences of the prohibition cause
To me the biggest argument against the legalisation of cannabis is that we don't know what unintended consequences it will cause.
Most of the thread seems to indicate we can't agree over what the intended consequences will be.Experimenting in a laboratory, or on your own body, fine.
Experimenting on the society where we live, not so good. -
Perhaps we are producing too many economists? Soaking up so much resource but adding very little value...
What is the economic value of an economist?
-
opened up the Third Way for me
meaning? Or is this one of those things we don't want to know the answer to.