Hi all,
This is it, we promise... well, assuming these idiots get around to discussing the ballot questions...
Good luck, as always.
******
BB: OK, we're back!
TOA: Hold on.
BB: Hold what?
TOA: Hold ON, I said.
BB: Hold for what?
TOA: I'm reading.
BB: What do you have?
TOA: The state-sponsored opinions.
BB: Oh wow, they still do that red book?
TOA: Oh yeah, it's my favorite book. Here, take it.
BB: So you are going to vote?
TOA: Well, I'm not going anywhere, but with this mail-in thing, I can still vote.
BB: Magical.
TOA: Shall we discuss?
BB: Well, hold on, I want to finish some points from last time.
TOA: What points?
BB: Well, for starters, all those personal attacks against business bros-
TOA: What attacks? Look, whatever you want to ramble about can come later, but we should do this first, since we keep running out of time when we talk about the other stuff, and the election starts in ten minutes.
BB: Ten minutes?
TOA: Well, you know, see this?
BB: What's that?
TOA: The ballot.
BB: Oh, right.
TOA: So we'll talk about this for a few minutes, then fill out this ballot, and then if we have time-
BB: OK, whatever.
TOA: First up is...
BB: Car repair.
TOA: How'd you know?
BB: I saw, like, eight hundred commercials.
TOA: Right. Pass.
BB: Is that what you call voting?
TOA: I mean, put whatever you want.
BB: Hold on, shouldn't we talk-
TOA: No, it's a waste of time, just pick one or the other-
BB: You don't even know what it is!
TOA: Well, I don't drive, so I don't care.
BB: Great attitude. All that talk last time-
TOA: It's consistent. This is exactly what I meant. I'm happy to vote half for one and half for the other. It's the same as not voting, so just leave it blank, then-
BB: You have to vote!
TOA: I'm not informed enough to vote about cars. Honestly, I'd vote to have them removed, if-
BB: OK, well let me put it this way... are you in favor of monopolies?
TOA: No.
BB: OK, we'll vote yes.
TOA: Really?
BB: Well, specifically it's data being controlled by large corporations, but that's basically a monopoly tactic.
TOA: OK, sure.
BB: But... are you in favor of domestic violence?
TOA: Is that a serious question?
BB: OK, so we'll vote... no... you do waffle a bit, eh?
TOA: What are you talking about?
BB: I'm just reading the state-sponsored opinions.
TOA: Let me see those.
BB: OK, so now you want to vote?
TOA: There's no way it can be, I mean, you're lying-
BB: I'm reading. So reading is lying now?
TOA: Hold on.
BB: Take your time.
TOA: OK, so... this is about cars.
BB: That's what I said.
TOA: That's not what you said.
BB: The vote is about the cars, or car repair, but the opinions are about monopolies and violence.
TOA: See, this is the thing with voting, instead of solving one thing at a time on the ballot, people try to cram four or five things into one, and you get complete nonsense, which solves nothing, and furthermore-
BB: Maybe so, but that doesn't mean you should skip voting-
TOA: I'm not-
BB: Or that you should do a half-ass vote.
TOA: Well-
BB: That's #2 by the way.
TOA: What is?
BB: Ranked choice voting.
TOA: Half-assed is not what ranked choice means.
BB: Says who?
TOA: Says me. Inventing some complicated system of loops and pulleys just so my vote gets counted in full at the end for my fifteenth candidate is still a vote. I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about when I agree in part with both sides, a way to split my vote.
BB: OK, well that's #2-
TOA: No it's not-
BB: Fine, but it's definitely not #1, so let's go in order. So, what about #1?
TOA: Yeah... I see the point on "NO" but I don't see the relevance.
BB: You don't think domestic violence is relevant?
TOA: It's very important, but for this vote?
BB: You've lost your mind!
TOA: Hear me out-
BB: I don't-
TOA: Well, last week, I will tell you this, last week I got some interesting mail.
BB: Right, the ballot-
TOA: No, it was from St. Jude's Hospital, in Memphis.
BB: Saint what?
TOA: Jude.
BB: So?
TOA: So I've never been there, never given them a nickel, never said a word to them. Buddy, think about it, where we work-
BB: Your point?
TOA: So how did they get my address?
BB: It's probably-
TOA: Oh, here we go, the business bro-
BB: See, the personal attacks-
TOA: I know how they got it, so I can spare you the creative gymnastics.
BB: OK. How?
TOA: They bought my data.
BB: From?
TOA: I don't know, someone else.
BB: Great.
TOA: It's true, and it's obvious. You business bros, you have so little imagination, you're left to sell my data so you can afford to fly yourselves to conventions.
BB: Whatever. You probably gave it to them and forgot-
TOA: Anyway, I'm sympathetic to the "NO" argument here, but this idea about privacy? No thanks. That ship sailed long ago.
BB: Right, but that's no excuse.
TOA: No excuse?
BB: Just because someone else makes it easy for criminals doesn't mean you should just let it slide for everything else.
TOA: I'm not talking about letting it slide, I'm talking about something that doesn't exist. If someone wants to track location using car data, like, I don't really understand the argument. So people don't have their phones in the car with them? Just track the phone. Apparently, anyone can buy my address, so we always know where the car is eventually arriving. Isn't all that stuff easier than car data, easier to track?
BB: You're ignoring my point. It's like saying people can carry around swords because other people can carry around guns.
TOA: But that's missing my point. This is about car repair, and whether independent car repair shops are on the same playing field as the big corporations. It's not what you said. If you are so concerned about cyberstalking, put a cyberstalking question on the ballot.
BB: There's no need, it's already against the law, this just makes it easier to break the law.
TOA: This law is already broken.
BB: OK, well.
TOA: You just think corporations deserve their monopoly profits. That's all this is.
BB: No, just playing-
TOA: You probably think the COVID vaccine should cost $10K per person, too-
BB: Well, now who's bringing in irrelevant things?
TOA: You think COVID is irrelevant?
BB: It's very important, but for this vote?
TOA: You've lost your mind!
BB: Hear me out-
TOA: OK, really, like I said last time, and the time before, this is why I don't debate, and this is why I don't care-
BB: What does this have to do with debating?
TOA: Just vote for whatever, because this is just a detail that doesn't matter, that's all a debate is, it's like Monday Night Football, or the commentary for it, just people yelling about something that doesn't matter, and that they barely understand. We know corporations are steamrolling small businesses anyway, every economic indicator is struggling right now except the stock market, and honestly we all know anyone can get your data, you know this, if they don't already have it-
BB: No-
TOA: Plus, are we suddenly concerned with domestic violence? Seriously? I'm supposed to believe this? If we are so concerned, why does nobody listen to victims, or believe them at all in the case of women? Why do we make victims bear the burden of proving self-defense, as if they weren't being attacked enough already, from their abusers-
BB: OK, right, see this is what I said last time, and the time before, you blame the system for everything, but you refuse to participate in it at all, and that's too bad, because you know it would work a little better if you tried to make it work-
TOA: What's working? Monopolies are illegal - we have monopolies in every market. Violence is illegal - we have violence in every city and town. This vote is meaningless.
BB: Meaningless?
TOA: Well, this question, at least. It's not going to change anything.
BB: Fine, just give me the ballot, I'll vote.
TOA: Which way?
BB: I thought you didn't care?
TOA: I don't.
BB: OK, I won't tell you.
TOA: Fine. You can vote on #2 as well.
BB: Really? I thought you wanted, what did you call it, compromise voting?
TOA: This isn't it.
BB: How so?
TOA: I mean look at this, it's nonsense, you can just tell reading the state-sponsored opinions that even the experts don't know what this is.
BB: Bull.
TOA: It's true. These opinions are both false. Look at this, on one side, ranked choice will strengthen democracy, on the other, winners are determined by a false majority. What the hell are they talking about?
BB: Let me see those opinions.
TOA: Here.
BB: OK...
TOA: OK?
BB: OK.
TOA: OK what?
BB: OK, I don't follow.
TOA: It's not that hard.
BB: Would it kill the state to include an example of how a hypothetical ballot might be counted?
TOA: Right? That's what I'm saying.
BB: When did you say that?
TOA: It's... never mind.
BB: Honestly, the "NO" opinion makes a compelling case, but I can't visualize it.
TOA: Well, it's simple, think of it like rolling a die-
BB: A die? Like Joseph?
TOA: It means one dice.
BB: One dice?
TOA: OK, forget dice, think of it like this, you go order a pizza.
BB: OK.
TOA: With a group.
BB: With a group?
TOA: Are you listening?
BB: Go on.
TOA: Ten people. Let's say four want pepperoni, and the other six want a different thing each. You'd ask those six what their second-choice was, right?
BB: Well, couldn't you order multiple pizzas?
TOA: OK, forget pizza-
BB: What if a couple people were allergic to pepperoni?
TOA: Who could be allergic to pepperoni?
BB: This is a waste of time.
TOA: Right-
BB: Here's what I think. I think, if you don't win enough votes, who cares how they break the tie? Let's just vote again.
TOA: Well, that's not on the ballot.
BB: I don't care, that's what I think.
TOA: Yeah, because even organizing one election is leading to complete chaos-
BB: Who told you that?
TOA: That's what it is, right now.
BB: OK, well you believe anything you hear, look, it doesn't matter, OK, here's what we do. In ranked choice, you still get your top vote, same as always. After that, it's whatever, but who cares? Just do it, the main function is preserved, and if it doesn't work, it's easy enough to go back to the old way.
TOA: It's not that simple-
BB: It is. This isn't a new voting system, this is a new tiebreaker. So who cares? Obvious candidates will still win, and it's a very easily reversible decision.
TOA: It's a better system-
BB: Right, we're on the same side.
TOA: Yes, but-
BB: So let's vote, and move on-
TOA: But you don't get-
BB: Who cares how I feel about it? We're on the same side.
TOA: Yeah I know, but still-
BB: See, this is the issue, you talk about change, but it's more important to you that everyone thinks the same thing, feels the same thing, means the same thing. I bet if nothing changed except everyone's feelings, you'd consider that a success.
TOA: What are you talking about?
BB: This debate, the whole point, is to figure out our votes, not so we can pat each other on the back.
TOA: OK, so?
BB: And we did, we both agree on #2, but you are still going on and on-
TOA: I'm not going on-
BB: You are. And it's not relevant at all. What matters is actions, what matters is your vote, in this case, because that's what is going to happen next. Who cares if I vote because I think it's less stupid, rather than good?
TOA: Right, that attitude, it'll get everyone into this mess again in four years.
BB: No, it won't, because I think Biden is less stupid, so I'm going to vote for him. I'm not going to pretend he's a good idea just to make you more comfortable. And even if Trump runs again next time, even if he runs with Bernie, whoever runs against him is going to remain less stupid in my eyes, so that'll be my vote-
TOA: Right, I got it, OK? But that's, like I don't think Biden-
BB: Plus, again in four years? See, obviously you don't vote, elections happen much more frequently-
TOA: Enough, you in such a rush to get back to work, to get back to your silly life, you vote for a party instead of a candidate, or vote for your personal economics instead of your community. Actions are nonsense without some underlying idea to stitch it all together, it just becomes activity, and much easier to undo or reverse. If you think without a larger idea, everything becomes a slippery slope, every fleeting idea just undermines whatever larger concept you might have in your mind at the moment, like a house of cards tumbling-
BB: Wait, stitch it together? What stitch? I gave you stitches-
TOA: What stitch? Like the way you bring it together-
BB: Yeah, what's your underlying idea?
TOA: Well, just ending poverty, I guess-
BB: Good, well I said vote "YES" on #1 if you hate monopolies, and those lead to poverty-
TOA: Well-
BB: The point is, if everyone solves a problem, or a stitch as you say, the problems get solved. If everyone votes for what they want to happen next, and campaign to get the unconcerned people to vote for their solution, then the right thing happens next.
TOA: The right thing?
BB: Right, that's the system.
TOA: No, that's not right.
BB: Why not? When you vote for just a party, or you vote for yourself, that's really just a way to look at your underlying idea, your stitch is just that the party is good, or that if everyone did better individually it adds-
TOA: No, because that's what leads to this, you end up looking at each thing line by line, and you forget the whole idea, you just want to know what your party thinks, or your bank account. Anyway, that's what I mean by stitches, some idea that forces you, even if you contradict how your other votes measure up against someone else's criteria, because without something at the core you end up looking at the question on its own and you stop thinking about what you want to accomplish. You just forget that sometimes these ballot questions are just details, and maybe we're better off spending time on larger ideas that encompass all the details, and help us work on these stitches, as you call them.
BB: That's the same thing.
TOA: No, it's not. These questions, and their state-sponsored opinions, don't amount to a principled debate. It's just two arguments. When you decide by argument, you get weird outcomes, or you get sheep. Just because someone articulately explains rank choice voting doesn't mean it's better than the current system, but of course no one is really going to articulately explain the current system, right? I vote, you vote, we count to two. Who wins with that kind of argument? It's just what it is.
BB: Oh, so you like the system now?
TOA: I don't like this system, where people debate. No one asks the relevant question - it's not which side is right, but whether which side is, I don't know, right enough?
BB: Right enough?
TOA: Right enough? I don't know how to put it, I just know it's one thing to make a better case, but sometimes a case should have to be really good, twice as good, to merit the vote.
BB: OK, smart guy, problem with that is, no one ever knows for sure.
TOA: I'm pretty sure-
BB: Right, that's the thing, you call out Trump for being a fascist, but you'd take power, too, claiming you'll do good. Were you complaining about all the other presidents who were busy expanding their own power? I have a better shot at understanding the rank voting nonsense than your logic, or-
TOA: What's so hard about it?
BB: Like I know? It's all riddles from you, rolling dice or dies or whatever. Just say what you mean.
TOA: Well...
BB: You want-
TOA: Want?
BB: You do!
TOA: What is?
BB: Just say it, you want a dictator, but a different kind, one you pick-
TOA: Look, whatever you think, it's not about dictators, it's that at some point it's true for any union, when the parts just don't work together anymore, it's best to move on.
BB: Yeah, so like division?
TOA: Right, blue to the right, red to the left, or right, or what's left, you know-
BB: Secession?!? That's crazier than a dictator, actually.
TOA: I don't think it's crazy, though I don't think it's the right idea anymore, or all that likely.
BB: In the country?
TOA: The what?
BB: Wait, what do you mean, anymore?
TOA: Like I used to think-
BB: Oh no-
TOA: Will you let me finish?
BB: Uh, maybe, but if you are going-
TOA: OK-
BB: You know what I think? I think you're watching too much TV.
TOA: I don't watch TV!
BB: OK, but whatever it is, too much, too much Peacock, I don't know, I know what your problem is, you think this is new, and you're jumping to conclusions. Settle down, because you have no perspective, this is how it always goes, and it always turns out the same.
TOA: No perspective?
BB: Sure. None.
TOA: Always the same?
BB: Always.
TOA: Whatever.
BB: Go back and read what people said about Bush, or even Reagan. None of this is new, honestly, you could clip the quotes and it would sound like it's about Trump, you wouldn't know which red-faced president they were talking about-
TOA: How is that an argument?
BB: How is it not? Go back and read what Baldwin said about our society in the fifties, or the sixties, you won't know if he wrote from a typewriter or a time machine, like some of his stuff could be published next Tuesday and no one would know the difference-
TOA: It just proves that there's been no progress.
BB: All we've had is progress. What it proves is that you and everyone else just spend more time reading about it, in smaller increments, than ever before. Like you read something on Twitter before it even becomes a story, of course it's all fake news, like going to the ER every time you cough, and all that happens is you just work yourself up into a frenzy-
TOA: Like you think comparing today to the fifties is progress?
BB: No, I'm saying people are writing the same things. If you did a comparison, you'd see real progress.
TOA: This isn't progress. Go outside, talk to people, it isn't good enough.
BB: That may be, we have a long way to go, but it's progress. This system has led to plenty of progress, and with this system there will be plenty more.
TOA: But why wait another seventy years? You want our grandchildren still battling for civil rights? That isn't progress.
BB: Right, just like people sitting around talking isn't progress. What are you doing for civil rights?
TOA: Well-
BB: You know, forget that, think about this instead - you know how you like to talk about civil wars happening so soon?
TOA: Uh, I've never-
BB: Right, maybe not you, but people like you, talking about violence, talking about unresolvable issues, let me remind you, if this is the first time you think anyone in this country has disagreed, then you need a history lesson, or maybe two-
TOA: Yeah, maybe so, and maybe I thought about it for a minute or two myself, but I think I've understood something recently, and it really is history, unlike whatever you think it is, which sounds like just excuses-
BB: Excuse me?
TOA: It occurred to me that this is pretty much the norm, this is the status quo as you say, as you business bros love so much, but what's different is that we're definitely in the middle of something at the moment, I call it a really loud death rattle-
BB: A death rattle, please-
TOA: It's the end of a certain point of view, which is probably being made worse by certain things like social media and the pandemic, so everyone think this situation is much worse than ever before. I'm not sure about that.
BB: Right, that's what I said.
TOA: Not really, because I think the outcome isn't more of the same, but anyway, I know what you mean about certain things. I don't buy it. Still, I'm pretty sure we'll all be marching toward the left again.
BB: Marching what?
TOA: Like, to the left. It's just what happens, as time passes societies tend to move to the left, it's generally slow but for some reason lately it's been really slow, honestly America is moving so slowly the left here is like center-right in some other countries, or so I've heard. They've marched right past us, or left us behind, maybe.
BB: Trust me, you have nothing in common with the center-right.
TOA: Well, not here, but anyway on top of that even a step left for a society is always more like a cumulative one, two steps left and one step right. I just think we've had our right foot stuck in the mud a little longer than usual. Right? Like think about this guy we know, he's really a liberal guy in so many senses of the term, and he's explained to us that it took him two decades to get his head around the idea that some women might not change their last name at the start of a marriage. Two decades! And this guy is, like, probably reciting the Green New Deal from memory at this very moment. These things, they take time.
BB: OK, but I'm really confused now, since you sound like you are in on the system again-
TOA: No, I just can't figure out what's taking so long right now. Like, 2020, and we're setting emissions records? It's insanity.
BB: Compelling theories, crap as always, but I don't think any of it is really true at all, or at least necessarily so, folks move right pretty often, especially as they get older, or become rich, or just become too invested in a certain kind of status quo, and America is getting older, richer, and probably a little comfortable with the status quo, right?
TOA: True, and maybe that's a piece of it, but I still think more people just move further left, so I think cumulatively it's always a leftward shift. I guess on balance the two steps left outweigh the rightward step you describe.
BB: So what's your point?
TOA: Well, the thing I'm starting to worry about is that this period of time, this death rattle as I think of it, isn't about just a point of view, since that always changes-
BB: Wait, like how?
TOA: I don't know, I just mean what's considered progressive changes over time. Like when Bernie finally becomes president in, what, 2080? If his campaign is the exact same message as today, it's probably considered a conservative ticket.
BB: Well, with all the inflation we're gonna have from this coin shortage, everyone will probably be a billionaire by then, Bernie won't like that-
TOA: Right? What I'm saying is, like even Trump wants to protect preexisting conditions, OK? Or at least he says so-
BB: For what it's worth-
TOA: Right, but honestly, is anyone going to be caught supporting that kind of policy? I actually believe him, I mean technically right now we all have the same preexisting condition, lack of COVID immunity-
BB: That's a big stretch-
TOA: Well, for insurance not really, preexisting conditions just mean risk data, and the likelihood of being more costly, so if you don't have the COVID vaccine, it does get the same treatment, at least in the sense that the insurance company is less interested in having you in in its membership pool.
BB: Right, but-
TOA: But if everyone gets this vaccine for the same low price, well isn't that how health care is supposed to work?
BB: Well, technically that's true, but you can still discriminate if the preexisting condition is something indirect, like poverty, I would argue that since poverty is so closely associated with bad health outcomes the way we charge for insurance is a form of preexisting condition, and should be something to consider as well.
TOA: Oh, good point.
BB: But right, in the current moment, everyone is singing the same tune about protecting people with these preexisting conditions.
TOA: But tell me, oh great business bro, in all your infinite business wisdom, how can you run private insurance if you can't price discriminate? Where does the money come from, if you can't rob from the sick, or selectively enroll members that are unlikely to ring up large claims?
BB: Well, that's probably true. Like charging the same price for flood insurance on a hill as you do at the coast.
TOA: This thing is already coming apart at the seams, but people are still clinging to some idea, and no one can really explain it, they just cling to it, like they did with newspaper, or coal power, just like they are doing now with racist systems, and I'm thinking, why just private health insurance? Why not the whole system? Aren't we at a point where too many people are clinging to outdated ideas that are clearly falling apart? Maybe it's not about ideas, maybe it's about the system-
BB: Well, it's always possible-
TOA: Why isn't it entirely possible that these specific things aren't separate problems, but rather all symptoms of a larger issue, that being the collapse of our current system?
BB: Yeah, but this system is pretty resilient.
TOA: How so?
BB: Look at it right now, we were founded by a bunch of racists who didn't want to pay taxes, and now we have a racist in charge who doesn't want to pay taxes.
TOA: Yeah, you can put it that way-
BB: In the context of a system, the last four years wasn't just proof that it's working, it was like seeing a prophecy come to fruition.
TOA: OK, but that ignores a lot of other stuff.
BB: Yeah, it ignores that people still look at the Constitution like it's relevant, even though it was written hundreds of years ago by pretty vile people, at least according to today's standards, white supremacists is the only fair term-
TOA: I see that, but it's ignoring some stuff, right? We're really rethinking some basic assumptions, or so it seems like, about daily life, and it's happening all over. You see it when people lose jobs for their roles in maintaining toxic status quos, or you see it with statues, I mean that Columbus statue a few blocks away? It isn't coming back anytime soon, and that park is probably being renamed sooner rather than later.
BB: Yeah, but these are just actions, sure, meaningful actions, but they don't change things. The name of a park?
TOA: I guess I'm not sure. I guess I'm not sure, because what we really need to do, as you mentioned earlier, is look all the way back to the start, and figure out what the heck we're thinking when we blindly follow some of our founding ideas, and what it means when we block everything else out. Like if someone came to you and said they ran their business based on some ideas written down in 1776, would you invest in that business?
BB: Well, that's different-
TOA: My numbers might be off, but the formula is solid. Think about it, we're in 2020, and it took a pandemic, not technological progress or the increased value of leisure time or just plain common sense, it took a pandemic to get a majority of our states around on mail-in voting. It took a pandemic! And every study I've seen says this increases voter turnout, using a technology as old as America itself.
BB: Oh, that reminds me-
TOA: And if we put these people on trial, or even just TV-
BB: Which people?
TOA: The people in charge of voting, like running elections, if we put them up there and said "why did you wait until 2020, almost two and a half centuries after America was invented, to do this really simple thing to increase voter turnout?" You know what they'd say? They'd say - we always did it that way.
BB: OK, but this reminds me-
TOA: And you know what else they've said that about? Like literally every problem in this country's history, they said it about-
BB: Wait, can you-
TOA: Like, in my mind, this stuff, it's too simple, if the only defense is "that's the way we always did it"-
BB: But like, what did you do in the last four years to get this going?
TOA: What do you mean?
BB: Like you talk about it now like this is so obvious, but what's the point? You weren't out there getting this going, trying to change the system-
TOA: Why should I? It's not my charge.
BB: Maybe so, but it's not a great excuse, right? This is what I meant last time, like why not just find a problem and solve it? Maybe you do it through work, you get the people in charge to give everyone time off to vote, right? Like that's the point.
TOA: Well-
BB: Never mind, this reminds me anyway, we actually have to cast this ballot.
TOA: Oh, right.
BB: OK, let's seal this thing, and hit the road, we are way over time, and probably about to get kicked off the internet-
TOA: OK, what do we have?
BB: Let's see - #1, car repair, I voted -
TOA: Wait, I said I didn't care about it.
BB: OK, whatever, #2, half-assed choice, we said "YES".
TOA: OK.
BB: And... your buddy Trump-
TOA: What are you talking about, your buddy-
BB: He's not my buddy-
TOA: Well, you business bros all stick together-
BB: Whatever, give me that pen.
TOA: Wait, can you use a pen? Not a #2 pencil?
BB: Huh?
TOA: To fill it in? Where's the instructions?
BB: There are instructions?
TOA: Goodness, let's just go, we'll figure it out.
BB: OK, until next time?
TOA: Next week?
BB: What, no! Next election, which is... you'll figure it out, I'm sure.
TOA: OK, until next time.
