naked cap: The American Healthcare System Shows Why We Can’t Trust Free Market Spin Doctors.

Because the biggest savings associated with single-payer come from reduced payments to service providers, the switch would require American doctors and administrators to work for significantly less than they currently earn. But how painful would those sacrifices be?

Many I know went into healthcare to help people, not necessarily to feather their nests. If the overall emphasis changes from the current model, would not the former make for better healthcare? I constantly hear physicians complaining about how things are currently, the lack of time to diagnose patients properly, the excessive electronic records documentation to collect insurance billings, etc.  It points strongly (to me) that they'd like to simply do their jobs and return to their domiciles at the end of a workday with feelings of accomplishment.

NY Review of Books: The Question of Hamlet.

It’s hard to think of another work whose interpretations so uncannily identify what the play calls the “form and pressure” of “the time.”

Related to this, another link: Atlantic, How Roseanne Divides the Left. Do you not remember the "Dukes of Hazzard", "Carter Country", etc.? Television shows throw us programming in what they decide is the flavor of our culture, as channelled through the stereotyped personality of our Presidents. Some have pointed to things like Trip Tucker's resemblance ["Star Trek: Enterprise"] and accent to George W. Bush.

Guardian.UK: Have I already met my soulmate? You asked Google – here’s the answer.

We seem to know far too much about how love starts and recklessly little about how it might continue.

Ultimately, I find the whole 'soul mate' concept a load of claptrap. So what if a relationship can be hard at times? Put in the work, the rewards come. A relationship is not something you 'cruise control'. We all change, in so many ways, over the years. Adjustments are necessary.

I forget where I read it, but I loved the concept of there being three people in any given relationship. A "you", a "me", and a "we". All three need to be healthy. If there is no individuality, or if there is no "we", it's time to reassess the relationship. Because there isn't one.

Nice Marmot: Gloom and Doom.

It's viewing negativity bias with negativity bias, and sharing that view as a positive.

I get exhausted from nonstop 'happy-happy, joy-joy', esp. on Instagram. Martin Seligman, in his book Learned Optimism pointed out that while optimists are happier overall, pessimists see the world most accurately.

Much to ponder in that simple conclusion. Authentic and somewhat cynical, or fantasy and happy?

'Course that's an older book. YMMV.

CBS: Maryland school shooting — Austin Wyatt Rollins was in relationship with victim that ended recently, police say.

Letting young adolescents get near weapons has never been a great idea. The brain, shocked by the flood of new hormones, just doesn't work right. Remember after Endless Love, 1981, the spate of house fires from lovelorn teens deciding to copy the movie? So now today, we have 'mass shooter' copycats. I fear this may not be the only one. Parents, talk to your adolescents about reasonable responses to unrequited love. I think many have 'lost the thread' ...

Recode: Tinder and Instagram are ‘crippling’ relationships, sex therapist Esther Perel says.

"It no longer has to do with being socially isolated,” Perel said. “It has to do with experiencing a loss of trust and a loss of capital while you are next to the person with whom you’re not supposed to be lonely."

Sitting next to someone, face lit blue, doing the jiggery-pokery with their little screens, yeah. You see couples sitting, walking all over Santa Fe - faces glued to their screens. Every so often one of the pair will have a crestfallen look. But the photo here - could she be any happier about it all?

Ars Technica: Two months of daily GTA causes “no significant changes” in behavior.

Don't know why I bother to comment. Some want to use narrowly-focused, ill-aimed science to excuse guilty pleasures.

I'm done with this one, until science crafts a proper study. These were all well-adjusted adults. Not the demographic we see in mass shootings or expressions of armed rage. Noone I see claims these young men were created by violent gaming; it was a single factor in a multifarious confluence of factors. It surely didn't help their psychoses.

Correction: Only idiot politicians believe video games take an innocent and make them violent.

I say artificially created violence traumatizes some, energizes some, ennervates some. I've seen all three effects in my 58 years of life.

Not a study (yet) has the subtlety to tell the difference. Until I see what I routinely observe in the real world, this is just poking around the outskirts of the issue, as if afraid to delve too deep.

You're welcome to disagree; I just know what I see, have experienced.

Marginal REVOLUTION: Is America as polarized as you think?

The comments devolve in typically modern fashion. Look at the original posted study. We may be no more polarized than normal; it's simply weak study participation. Or ... it could be that science is fooling itself again (whichever way you parse it). 

In person, I see lots of angry people. Less talking, more stonewalling than normal. But even the hardest stone wall gets worn down. Say, by repeated mass shootings. The walls eventually 'come a-tumblin' down.'

[Sorry, I didn't intend italics. Squarespace lost its mind on that one. It's Friday night, and I'm too damned lazy to recreate it from scratch.]


SciAm: Why We Choose Ill-Matched Romantic Partners (And How to Stop).

There was the guy who did his business with the bathroom door open. Or the girl who would lick utensils clean and put them back in the drawer.

There are so many subtle pressures over relationships. Speaking from my own history, I had the best relationships when I was not coming at them from a place of 'need'. I feel the modern concept of 'soul mates' is ultimately destructive. As if one can put everything on autopilot and just sail along. A good relationship requires constant tending. Rilke has a line about each partner 'protecting the individuality of the other', which appeals to me as a loner ... yet I find a really good philosophy in the concept of there being *three* actual personas in a relationship: "There's a 'me', there's a 'you', and there's a 'we'. If the 'we' is not healthy, is not nurtured, there is no relationship.

There is a lifetime of challenge and opportunity in that, "maintaining the 'we'."