Credit Card Dementia and Boundary Cases
Posted by Jason Kuznicki
The most interesting libertarian-related conversation I’ve read today comes from Rortybomb, by way of Andrew Sullivan, with commentary by Megan McArdle. Here’s a challenge to libertarians from Rortybomb, aka Mike Konczal:
I want to pitch to the credit card and financial industry a new innovative online survey. It is targeted for older, more mature long-time users of our services. We’ll give a $10 credit for anyone who completes it. Here is a sense of what the questions will look like:
- 1) What is your age?
- 2) What day of the week are you taking this survey?
- 3) Many rewards offered are for people with more active lifestyles: vacations, flights, hotels, rental cars. Do you find that your rewards programs aren’t well suited for your lifestyle?
- 4) What is the current season where you live? Are any seasons harder for you in getting to a branch or ATM machine?
- 5) Would rewards that could be given as gifts to others, especially younger people, be helpful for what you’d like to do with your benefits?
- 6) Would replacing your rewards program with a savings account redeemable for education for your grandchildren be something you’d be interested in?
- 7) Write a sentence you’d like us to hear about anything, good or bad!
- 8 ) How worried are you you’ll leave legal and financial problems for your next-of-kin after your passing?
Did you catch it? Questions 1,2,4,7 are taken from the ‘Mini-mental State Examination’ which is a quick test given by medical professionals to see if a patient is suffering from dementia. (It’s a little blunt, but we can always hire some psychologist and marketers for the final version. They’re cheap to hire.) We can use this test to subtly increase limits, and break out the best automated tricks and traps mechanisms, on those whose dementia lights up in our surveys. Anyone who flags all four can get a giant increase in balance and get their due dates moved to holidays where the Post Office is slowest! We’d have to be very subtle about it, because there are many nanny-staters out there who’d want to coddle citizens here. . .
I smell money — it’s like walking down a sidewalk and turning a corner and then there is suddenly money all over the sidewalk. One problem with hitting up sick people, single mothers, college kids who didn’t plan well and the cash-constrained poor with fees and traps is that they’re poor. Hitting up people with a lifetime of savings suffering from dementia is some real, serious money we can tap as a revenue source.
Clearly, only an evil person (or a libertarian!) would allow a scam like this one. Megan responds, I think rightly:
I’m not sure why this is supposed to be a hard question for libertarians. I mean, I might argue that preventing people from ripping off the marginally mentally impaired would, in practice, be too difficult. Crafting a rule that prevented companies from identifying people who are marginally impaired might well be impossible — I’m pretty sure that if I wanted to, I could devise subtler tests than “What day of the week is it?” And while the seniors lobby is probably in favor of not ripping off seniors, they’re resolutely against making it harder for seniors to do things like drive or get credit, which is the result that any sufficiently strong rule would probably have.
But it’s pretty much standard libertarian theory that you shouldn’t take advantage of people who do not have the cognitive ability to make contracts. Marginal cases are hard not because we think it’s okay, but because there is disagreement over what constitutes impairment, and the more forcefully you act to protect marginal cases, the more you start treating perfectly able-minded adults like children.
The elderly are a challenge precisely because there’s no obvious point at which you can say: now this previously able adult should be treated like a child. Either you let some people get ripped off, or you infringe the liberty, and the dignity, of people who are still capable of making their own decisions.
I’d add two responses of my own.
First, I can’t believe there’s all that much money to be had here. Anyone who wanders into Tiffany’s and back out again without remembering what they bought is, generally speaking, a bad credit risk. Mildly irresponsible people — those who slightly overspend, then have to make it up later — those are probably great for creditors. Lesson learned: If you’re not demented, don’t be irresponsible. (If you are demented, you’re not going to follow my advice anyway.)
Second, I am always amazed at how border cases are dragged out, again and again, as if they proved something against libertarianism. Border cases — How old before you can vote? How demented before a contract doesn’t bind? — are a problem in all political systems, because all systems start with a presumed community of citizens and/or subjects. We always have to draw boundaries between the in-group and the outliers before we have a polity in the first place.
What makes the classical liberal/libertarian approach so valuable is in fact that it draws so few boundaries. Where other systems depend on class boundaries, race boundaries, religious boundaries, and so forth — with annoying boundary issues at every stop along the way — libertarians make it as simple as I think it can be. We presume that all mentally competent adults are worthy of liberty until they prove themselves otherwise.
The boundary cases are still there, but they are fewer and more tractable. Konczal just wandered into one of them. It proves much less than he thinks.
During my “free time” – I know, ha-ha right? – one of my passions is researching and either verifying or debunking strange and wild claims. In fact, together with a good friend from the UK, we started a website devoted to investigating such bogus science claims. While that research started primarily focused on Ufology, lately we’ve started branching out into fringe science and physics.
One of the most amazing things that you’ll discover when you start poking around into the field of fringe science is that it’s a field filled with about 90% scam artists (most researchers label them as snake-oil salesmen), and 10% legitimate science. Many of you have probably seen some of the outlandish bogus science claims related to free, renewable energy technologies, anti-gravity devices and the like – but there is also some remarkable research taking place in legitimate labs across the country. One example would be brain-wave interfacing with computer systems, a cutting-edge technology which even the U.S. Army is currently exploring.
Now, the fact that there could be legitimate science mixed in with all of the bogus science claims leads countless risk capital investors to throw their money away by investing in many of the snake-oil salesmen schemes. Due diligence only goes so far – some of these con-artists are brilliant at making quantum physics theory sound practical. So, where should people go to try and verify whether any of these fringe science claims are legitimate?
I’m going to resist the urge to plug my own website, because there are so many sites out there that have been at this work for far longer – so here are the top 5 websites where you can research wild and bogus science claims.
Exploring Fringe Science – To Debunk Or Not To Debunk?
Exploring the world of the strange and unusual can be difficult for a lot of people. While you want to open your mind enough to the possibilities – as a friend of mine once told me, you also don’t want to open up your mind so much that it becomes a wind tunnel. To truly explore the edge of science, you need to maintain a conservative, guarded yet open-minded approach. The following websites will help you with that, so that you can explore these amazing new areas of science without slipping off the cliff and falling down a bottomless rabbit hole.
The first website is also one of my favorites – The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.
The “Committee” is more popularly known as “CSI-COP” since 2006, they changed their Acronym to simply “CSI,” and they publish the magazine called the Skeptical Inquirer. The organization is run by founder and Chairman Paul Kurtz, Chairman Richard Schroeder, President Ronald A. Lindsay, Executive Director Barry Karr and Research Fellows Joe Nickell, Massimo Polidoro and Richard Wiseman.
As a team, and with the support of Fellows and writers from across the world, this organization and website stands as a beacon of truth for all serious investigators in the areas of the paranormal and fringe science.
The next excellent resource for hard-hitting reviews of the latest fringe research is Popular Mechanics.
Popular Mechanics is the first place that I often go during my lunch break if I’m in the mood to discover the latest news in science. Covering areas like space, the environment, robotics, health and more – this is the place where it’s all happening. The writers at Popular Mechanics are highly credentialed and very intelligent. They aren’t taken in by junk science – but they do report on the latest and coolest scientific discoveries and research of the day.
The next fringe Science site that I’d like to call your attention to is Robert Carroll’s The Skeptic’s Dictionary. While I realize the word “skeptic” has poor connotations among many people who are interested in paranormal and fringe science, it is actually those who get labeled as “skeptics” that make the most scientific progress, because they focus on legitimate science, verified facts and they are not distracted by all of the nonsense.
Robert Carroll retired from teaching philosophy in 1977. His credentials stand on their own – having taught courses in things like Logic & Critical Reasoning, Critical Thinking About the Paranormal and World Religions. He also published Becoming a Critical Thinker in 2000 and The Skeptic’s Dictionary in 2003.
Robert is obviously the perfect guy to run one of the best investigative sites on the net that focus on weird and wacky claims, covering topics like ETs and UFOs, Junk Science, New Age and Paranormal. I encourage you to visit Skepdic.com and support Robert Carroll in his efforts to promote logic and reason.
It goes without saying that one of the greatest and best-known Skeptics (with a capital “S”) of all time is the amazing James Randi.
I had the pleasure of interviewing James Randi back in 2007 while I was investigating some particular scientific claims related to parapsychology. Randi has a great deal to say on the topic of parapsychology – in fact he played a major role in the history of the movement – at one point injecting his own team of two amateur magicians into the “scientific” research of parapsychologists. Through his efforts, he exposed how easily parapsychologists can be fooled by simple magic tricks.
Today, James Randi is considered the “hit man” of Science – mostly because he takes a no-holds-barred approach to attacking especially ludicrous paranormal claims and driving them directly into the ground. His website is one of the most entertaining places to learn the true nature of many of the claims produced by junk scientists.
Finally, if you simply want to discuss particular fringe claims with other open-minded skeptics like yourself – I highly recommend that you head over to Physics Forums.
While the majority of the site is dedicated to mainstream science and physics discussions – even entire areas devoted to science education, mathematics and engineering, you’ll discover the Scepticism & Debunking section under the PF Lounge area. This section is one of the most active and entertaining forums on this site – where you can discuss and analyze some of the latest unexplained phenomena claims. Just be ready for some lively conversation!
Do you have your own favorite places to go when you want to research weird science claims? Share your own resources in the comments section below.
http://www.webjam.com/gabrielle71 http://www.prlog.org/10248797-reitbuyercom-offers-opportunity-to-onlinereal-estate-stock-traders-in-albuquerque-new-mexico.html http://www.prlog.org/tag/online-stock-trading/ http://www.prlog.org/10219817-online-traders-discover-reits-and-real-estate-mutual-funds-to-be-good-investment.html http://www.prlog.org/10248797-reitbuyercom-offers-opportunity-to-onlinereal-estate-stock-traders-in-albuquerque-new-mexico.html http://www.webjam.com/gabrielle71
Credit Card Dementia and Boundary Cases
Posted by Jason Kuznicki
The most interesting libertarian-related conversation I’ve read today comes from Rortybomb, by way of Andrew Sullivan, with commentary by Megan McArdle. Here’s a challenge to libertarians from Rortybomb, aka Mike Konczal:
I want to pitch to the credit card and financial industry a new innovative online survey. It is targeted for older, more mature long-time users of our services. We’ll give a $10 credit for anyone who completes it. Here is a sense of what the questions will look like:
- 1) What is your age?
- 2) What day of the week are you taking this survey?
- 3) Many rewards offered are for people with more active lifestyles: vacations, flights, hotels, rental cars. Do you find that your rewards programs aren’t well suited for your lifestyle?
- 4) What is the current season where you live? Are any seasons harder for you in getting to a branch or ATM machine?
- 5) Would rewards that could be given as gifts to others, especially younger people, be helpful for what you’d like to do with your benefits?
- 6) Would replacing your rewards program with a savings account redeemable for education for your grandchildren be something you’d be interested in?
- 7) Write a sentence you’d like us to hear about anything, good or bad!
- 8 ) How worried are you you’ll leave legal and financial problems for your next-of-kin after your passing?
Did you catch it? Questions 1,2,4,7 are taken from the ‘Mini-mental State Examination’ which is a quick test given by medical professionals to see if a patient is suffering from dementia. (It’s a little blunt, but we can always hire some psychologist and marketers for the final version. They’re cheap to hire.) We can use this test to subtly increase limits, and break out the best automated tricks and traps mechanisms, on those whose dementia lights up in our surveys. Anyone who flags all four can get a giant increase in balance and get their due dates moved to holidays where the Post Office is slowest! We’d have to be very subtle about it, because there are many nanny-staters out there who’d want to coddle citizens here. . .
I smell money — it’s like walking down a sidewalk and turning a corner and then there is suddenly money all over the sidewalk. One problem with hitting up sick people, single mothers, college kids who didn’t plan well and the cash-constrained poor with fees and traps is that they’re poor. Hitting up people with a lifetime of savings suffering from dementia is some real, serious money we can tap as a revenue source.
Clearly, only an evil person (or a libertarian!) would allow a scam like this one. Megan responds, I think rightly:
I’m not sure why this is supposed to be a hard question for libertarians. I mean, I might argue that preventing people from ripping off the marginally mentally impaired would, in practice, be too difficult. Crafting a rule that prevented companies from identifying people who are marginally impaired might well be impossible — I’m pretty sure that if I wanted to, I could devise subtler tests than “What day of the week is it?” And while the seniors lobby is probably in favor of not ripping off seniors, they’re resolutely against making it harder for seniors to do things like drive or get credit, which is the result that any sufficiently strong rule would probably have.
But it’s pretty much standard libertarian theory that you shouldn’t take advantage of people who do not have the cognitive ability to make contracts. Marginal cases are hard not because we think it’s okay, but because there is disagreement over what constitutes impairment, and the more forcefully you act to protect marginal cases, the more you start treating perfectly able-minded adults like children.
The elderly are a challenge precisely because there’s no obvious point at which you can say: now this previously able adult should be treated like a child. Either you let some people get ripped off, or you infringe the liberty, and the dignity, of people who are still capable of making their own decisions.
I’d add two responses of my own.
First, I can’t believe there’s all that much money to be had here. Anyone who wanders into Tiffany’s and back out again without remembering what they bought is, generally speaking, a bad credit risk. Mildly irresponsible people — those who slightly overspend, then have to make it up later — those are probably great for creditors. Lesson learned: If you’re not demented, don’t be irresponsible. (If you are demented, you’re not going to follow my advice anyway.)
Second, I am always amazed at how border cases are dragged out, again and again, as if they proved something against libertarianism. Border cases — How old before you can vote? How demented before a contract doesn’t bind? — are a problem in all political systems, because all systems start with a presumed community of citizens and/or subjects. We always have to draw boundaries between the in-group and the outliers before we have a polity in the first place.
What makes the classical liberal/libertarian approach so valuable is in fact that it draws so few boundaries. Where other systems depend on class boundaries, race boundaries, religious boundaries, and so forth — with annoying boundary issues at every stop along the way — libertarians make it as simple as I think it can be. We presume that all mentally competent adults are worthy of liberty until they prove themselves otherwise.
The boundary cases are still there, but they are fewer and more tractable. Konczal just wandered into one of them. It proves much less than he thinks.
During my “free time” – I know, ha-ha right? – one of my passions is researching and either verifying or debunking strange and wild claims. In fact, together with a good friend from the UK, we started a website devoted to investigating such bogus science claims. While that research started primarily focused on Ufology, lately we’ve started branching out into fringe science and physics.
One of the most amazing things that you’ll discover when you start poking around into the field of fringe science is that it’s a field filled with about 90% scam artists (most researchers label them as snake-oil salesmen), and 10% legitimate science. Many of you have probably seen some of the outlandish bogus science claims related to free, renewable energy technologies, anti-gravity devices and the like – but there is also some remarkable research taking place in legitimate labs across the country. One example would be brain-wave interfacing with computer systems, a cutting-edge technology which even the U.S. Army is currently exploring.
Now, the fact that there could be legitimate science mixed in with all of the bogus science claims leads countless risk capital investors to throw their money away by investing in many of the snake-oil salesmen schemes. Due diligence only goes so far – some of these con-artists are brilliant at making quantum physics theory sound practical. So, where should people go to try and verify whether any of these fringe science claims are legitimate?
I’m going to resist the urge to plug my own website, because there are so many sites out there that have been at this work for far longer – so here are the top 5 websites where you can research wild and bogus science claims.
Exploring Fringe Science – To Debunk Or Not To Debunk?
Exploring the world of the strange and unusual can be difficult for a lot of people. While you want to open your mind enough to the possibilities – as a friend of mine once told me, you also don’t want to open up your mind so much that it becomes a wind tunnel. To truly explore the edge of science, you need to maintain a conservative, guarded yet open-minded approach. The following websites will help you with that, so that you can explore these amazing new areas of science without slipping off the cliff and falling down a bottomless rabbit hole.
The first website is also one of my favorites – The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.
The “Committee” is more popularly known as “CSI-COP” since 2006, they changed their Acronym to simply “CSI,” and they publish the magazine called the Skeptical Inquirer. The organization is run by founder and Chairman Paul Kurtz, Chairman Richard Schroeder, President Ronald A. Lindsay, Executive Director Barry Karr and Research Fellows Joe Nickell, Massimo Polidoro and Richard Wiseman.
As a team, and with the support of Fellows and writers from across the world, this organization and website stands as a beacon of truth for all serious investigators in the areas of the paranormal and fringe science.
The next excellent resource for hard-hitting reviews of the latest fringe research is Popular Mechanics.
Popular Mechanics is the first place that I often go during my lunch break if I’m in the mood to discover the latest news in science. Covering areas like space, the environment, robotics, health and more – this is the place where it’s all happening. The writers at Popular Mechanics are highly credentialed and very intelligent. They aren’t taken in by junk science – but they do report on the latest and coolest scientific discoveries and research of the day.
The next fringe Science site that I’d like to call your attention to is Robert Carroll’s The Skeptic’s Dictionary. While I realize the word “skeptic” has poor connotations among many people who are interested in paranormal and fringe science, it is actually those who get labeled as “skeptics” that make the most scientific progress, because they focus on legitimate science, verified facts and they are not distracted by all of the nonsense.
Robert Carroll retired from teaching philosophy in 1977. His credentials stand on their own – having taught courses in things like Logic & Critical Reasoning, Critical Thinking About the Paranormal and World Religions. He also published Becoming a Critical Thinker in 2000 and The Skeptic’s Dictionary in 2003.
Robert is obviously the perfect guy to run one of the best investigative sites on the net that focus on weird and wacky claims, covering topics like ETs and UFOs, Junk Science, New Age and Paranormal. I encourage you to visit Skepdic.com and support Robert Carroll in his efforts to promote logic and reason.
It goes without saying that one of the greatest and best-known Skeptics (with a capital “S”) of all time is the amazing James Randi.
I had the pleasure of interviewing James Randi back in 2007 while I was investigating some particular scientific claims related to parapsychology. Randi has a great deal to say on the topic of parapsychology – in fact he played a major role in the history of the movement – at one point injecting his own team of two amateur magicians into the “scientific” research of parapsychologists. Through his efforts, he exposed how easily parapsychologists can be fooled by simple magic tricks.
Today, James Randi is considered the “hit man” of Science – mostly because he takes a no-holds-barred approach to attacking especially ludicrous paranormal claims and driving them directly into the ground. His website is one of the most entertaining places to learn the true nature of many of the claims produced by junk scientists.
Finally, if you simply want to discuss particular fringe claims with other open-minded skeptics like yourself – I highly recommend that you head over to Physics Forums.
While the majority of the site is dedicated to mainstream science and physics discussions – even entire areas devoted to science education, mathematics and engineering, you’ll discover the Scepticism & Debunking section under the PF Lounge area. This section is one of the most active and entertaining forums on this site – where you can discuss and analyze some of the latest unexplained phenomena claims. Just be ready for some lively conversation!
Do you have your own favorite places to go when you want to research weird science claims? Share your own resources in the comments section below.

When Marshall Kirkpatrick posted the other day that Facebook could become the largest <b>news</b> reader I had an inkling that it already was. Today, new data released from Hitwise confirms my suspicions: Facebook is indeed the largest <b>news</b> …
Read our Rebellion apologises for AVP demo issues <b>News</b> for PC, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3.
Last night we saw one of the best debates about media and politics in general, and Fox <b>News</b> in particular, that I've seen on TV in a while. That it was conducted by a professional talk-TV bloviator (Bill O'Reilly) and a late-night …
http://www.shumakerelays.com/