Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - The 9th Doctor

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1]
1
Introductions / Re: albany ny yo
« on: May 24, 2012, 03:46:34 pm »
It's funny that you discuss federalism on your blog.  I studied federalism quite a bit while in law school and I think you're giving the concept of subnational governance short shrift.

Suffice it to say that federalism makes a great deal of sense, but is often coopted by various political factions.  There's no particular reason why it has to be associated with slavery / denying gays the right to marry, or rather, no particular reason why the states would get those issues wrong and the federal government would get it right.

The easiest rationale for federalism is by looking at Congressional earmarks.  When the federal government pays for things that return a strictly local benefit (e.g., when the federal government pays for resanding of New Jersey's beaches), NJ representatives in Congress get to reap the political benefits with very little of the cost (e.g., higher taxes).  In other words, you get to impose externalities on everyone else.  Really, it should be NJers who decide how much they are willing to pay for those beaches to be resanded, and whether they are worth the benefit returned.

Of course, federalism requires some amount of preemption, and indeed in the US practically everything is preempted by the federal government, either expressly or implicitly (implicitly because of a natural conflict, or sometimes because the federal law is designed to be comprehensive and any state law in the same "field" is deemed preempted -- see ERISA, NLRA, etc.).

The real value of federalism is just, well, different people want different things.  Some states want to pay more in taxes and get more services.  Others want to pay less and get fewer.  You get closer democracy when people are closer to their government.
Hmmm, I disagree with a lot of this.  The essence of my disagreement is that ‘local’ government is worse and worse the more that technology reduces the significance of distance.  The relevance of state identity has declined by a factor of dozens over the centuries.  And to the extent that state identity remains, it’s mostly parochial, and not in a positive way.  When things get bigger and more streamlined, the potential for disfunction goes down and accountability goes up.  When things are local and diffuse, the reverse happens.  The ‘particular reason’ that states would be more likely to get major issues wrong is that they’re more insular and provincial, less cosmopolitan, more secure in their practices and habits, etc. 

Now, if you are a conservative, those might sound alright.  But I’m trying to make an argument about why federalism is structurally conservative – and that’s something that has been true throughout American history. Go back to John Marshall and Alexander Hamilton.  Without them, we might never have empowered the national government in the early 19th century – and the rest of our history might never have happened. 

While I’m not in love with earmarks, I don’t see the problem being a federalism issue at all.  Earmarks are a perfectly rational response to the problem of complicated lawmaking.  It’s a form of logrolling, that allows you to cultivate majorities on big appropriations bills.  If you really want to get rid of earmarks, you can do so.  But it comes at the cost of erasing the practical arrangements necessary to make law.  Or: you can eliminate some of the other significant hurdles: the de-facto-60-vote-filibuster, Senate malapportionment, multiple veto points, etc.

Searching the archives, I see I wrote about this back in 2010:
http://www.heartachewithhardwork.com/2010/11/im-falling-all-over-you-like-a-bad-jacket.html

Also, any idea what’s wrong with the olneyce account?

2
Introductions / Re: albany ny yo
« on: May 24, 2012, 02:33:11 pm »
For some reason my real (olneyce) account isn't working right now.  Won't let me reply to any threads.  But couldn't let this conversation go by without comment.

I actually ranked every singles Beatles song on my blog a few years back:
http://www.heartachewithhardwork.com/2006/05/beatles-from-worst-to-first-1-206-191.html

Out of 206 songs, I would say only the bottom 10 or so are 'bad.'  The bottom 50-60 are only so-so: some very good elements, but not fantastic.  But I have "Till There Was You" at #141, and I would say everything from that point up is an actively good song. 

I like Asimov quite a bit, but it's very much in spite of the awkward writing.  I think the original Foundation books are especially good, in part because they're more vignettes than actual full novels.

3
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Where's the official app?
« on: April 28, 2012, 02:56:03 pm »
No, they are both future incarnations of The Doctor, also starting with D.
[shifty eyes]

4
Dominion Isotropic / Re: People to avoid on isotropic
« on: February 25, 2012, 12:26:25 am »
I suppose I should have expected it given his name.

21:18 The 9th Doctor: good luck!
21:22 jackass: fuck you
21:23 The 9th Doctor: ??

To be fair, I had pursued a strategy that beat his strategy, so...

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/24/game-20120224-212548-0ffe2023.html

5
Council Room Feedback / Re: Expansion Data
« on: February 24, 2012, 11:55:49 pm »
This happens if you've never won a game without Goons.  Which is plausible, because Goons is just that awesome.  At one point, I had like a -70 or so effect with for Noble Brigand, because I'd never bought it and won.
Interesting.  I just played this game where I didn't buy Goons and won and was pondering this very question.

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/24/game-20120224-205012-f6e1d9a5.html

Some of it was simple perversity--I wanted to see if I could beat someone good without going for Goons.  But I think it was actually a pretty decent circumstance to avoid Goons.  The only trashing was from Jack - which is not conducive to a Goons engine, and provides a nice counter since it lets you discard green cards and draw better ones.  Witches on the board meant there were curses to gum up the works.  Jack+Witch is pretty solid for a Big Money deck, and since I definitely wanted both of those, there was a real risk of major terminal collision if I started getting Goons, too.  Is completely ignoring Goons the right call here?

6
Game Reports / Re: Dear My Opponent: I am Sorry
« on: February 22, 2012, 05:49:04 pm »
Dear avenger,

Monument/Chapel is the #25 best opening, which usually would be pretty nice for you.  Unfortunately, I started 5/2 and was able to open Mountebank/Chapel, which is the #1 opening.

Consider that there were also Cities and Bridges on the board and the result was not pretty.

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201202/22/game-20120222-144335-6a0f5e98.html

While it was pretty much inevitable given the starting hands, I would have to think that opening Swindler/Chapel or even Swindler/Swindler is the right move here as the 4/3 player.  Seems like the only chance is to hit one of the opening buys of your opponents before they have a chance to play them.

Pages: [1]

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 19 queries.