@The_Nybbler's banner p

The_Nybbler

Does not have a yacht

8 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

				

User ID: 174

The_Nybbler

Does not have a yacht

8 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 174

The legislature can't run back into session every time someone comes up with a new medical procedure to make sure that you need a license to do it.

Yes they can. Because "you may do nothing without a license unless we specifically say so" is not the law.

Some were like that, some were more like typists. According to the 1974-1975 Occupational Outlook Handbook, there were keypunch operators and data typists, both of whom basically did data entry (but not directly to the computer -- to cards or to tape). There were also "console operators", who would switch the tapes and cards in and out. The handbook includes a picture of a console operator -- a woman -- loading a reel-to-reel tape.

The 1974-75 handbook breaks down the gender in a more detailed way than the summary statistics do -- 3/5 "console and auxiliary equipment operators" were men, 9/10 "keypunch operators" were women.

Before that, programming used to be seen a lowly, dull desk job, basically not different from being a secretary, and a significant chunk of programmers were single women as a result.

This period is largely a feminist myth. If it existed, it was prior to 1960, when there were vanishingly few programmers at all.

(and before you mention ENIAC, programming that was definitely not a desk job)

Shouldn't their lawyers be able to file a writ of habeas corpus with a real court?

The cease-and-desist simply says to cease and desist illegally practicing veterinary medicine; it doesn't name specifics. Since the whole dispute is over whether ultrasound for pregnancy is "veterinary medicine", for them to stop the ultrasounds in response to that cease-and-desist would be to concede their case.

I suspect ultimately there's going to be some petty corruption here, with local vets being buddies/business partners of the Ag Board members and/or the local sheriff.

I acknowledge that the phenomenon you're describing is real, but I wish we had separate terms for "men who resent women because they can't get laid" and "men who can get laid, but resent women because of lingering grievances brought about from earlier rejections".

Accepting these as the choices is still accepting the incel-yellers frame. There is a possibility that the complaints the men have do in fact have validity and are not merely some sort of injured pride.

Faced with the choice of getting another Trump appointee, he'd cave. Besides, the Democrats have a 51-49 advantage plus the VP; they can lose one vote.

(Yeah, three "independents", all of whom caucus with the Democrats)

Your enemies are never going to concede that calling Elon Musk (with 10 kids by 3 attractive women) an incel is at all wrong. By conceding that any of their accusations have truth to them, you validate such bogus accusations as well. It is not a matter of conflict theorists not caring about the truth; it is a matter of conceding true things assists in establishing lies.

Operators became majority female in 1975, then almost 70% by 1986, though some of that may have been by separation of job titles rather than an actual change. I'm pretty sure the myth goes back to attempts by feminists to promote the idea, often relying on an article in Cosmopolitan by Grace Hopper which suggested programming was especially suited to women. Hopper, however, was recruiting, not describing an existing situation.

I know what's true and what's not; I know men with unjustified anger at women exist. But I see no reason to accept the "incel" framing of that phenomenon when it brings in all the stuff that isn't true also, and by accepting that framing I implicitly validate that too. That brings no one closer to truth.

They can just wait until after the election and usher in a replacement in lame-duck session if it turns out badly for the Democrats.

Vaughan herself didn't get involved in digital computers until 1961. The Department of Labor had only one computer-related job title then, "Computer Specialists", and it was slightly over 30% women.

The Republicans are in the minority.

On the one hand, that bridge was crossed and burned a long time ago, so I guess sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Precisely. This is just an attempt by Rufo to (as Alinsky put it) “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” It won't work, probably, because NPR is not just OK with those tweets but finds them an absolute positive.

Despite all the crying and complaining about incel killers, there's basically only three, and two were before the term came into being (Rodger and LePine).

In New Jersey and many other US states (not California, and I have no idea about Canada), property taxes are NOT based on a percentage of property's assessed value, though they are expressed that way. Instead, a municipal budget is constructed and the revenue required for that budget apportioned among the properties according to their assessed values. Doubling all the property values uniformly without changing the municipal budget would not change property tax; it would halve the tax rate.

I sincerely hope this leads to a wave of resignations within NPR, with everyone saying “Ich bin ein Berliner” as their parting words.

I think this is the wrong end of things. Berliner was the last jelly donut to leave, not the start.

Then there's a lot of indirect problems, like the existence of the ultrawealthy causing a general sense of unease and unfairness.

Oh, yes, that's certainly a problem that justifies taking away their wealth and giving what survives the process to those who complain. This is the sort of justification I'd expect from a straw villain in some Ayn Rand novel.

Why should Trump fight at all for a country he knows best as a source of graft for the Bidens?

The Israel-Hamas (plus Hezbollah) war is already in part an Israel-Iran proxy war. They didn't so much kick a hornets' nest as overstep a very fuzzy line. And Iran getting its back up over the inviolability of an embassy is pretty amusing for those of us who remember 1979.

There is a bounded amount of things of value

I suppose there's a bound, but there isn't a fixed amount of things of value, which is what your argument relies on.

For the same reason as why you want to cut the top off your power economy by having rule of law and a constitution, presumably.

The analogy makes no sense. An absolute ruler is an absolute ruler because he has power over his subjects; he's directly taking away their autonomy. Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos being wealthy does not rely on making J. Random Janitor poorer.

Bezos's wealth does not cause anyone to be poorer; there's no "strangling" of the bottom of the economy by the top.

It's a common mistake, but "misogynistic" does not mean "someone women do not like".

The problem is the safetyists have no brakes. Nothing's ever "safe enough".

Capgains taxes are fine, and even desirable if you want to lower or stabilize the gini coefficient.

And why would you want to cut the top off your economy?