Slashdot Mirror

Do those other countries proclaim themselves to be a "beacon of freedom"?

"The container holding cobalt was found about a kilometer away from the truck and had been opened, he said." ..."At around 1 a.m. Monday, a man armed with a handgun knocked on the passenger window. When the passenger rolled down his window, the gunman demanded the keys to the vehicle, Morales said. Both the driver and his assistant were taken to an empty lot where they were bound and told not to move. They heard one of the assailants use a walkie-talkie type device or phone to tell someone, "It's done," Morales said." http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/world/americas/mexico-radioactive-theft/ [cnn.com]

"The container holding cobalt was found about a kilometer away from the truck and had been opened, he said." ..."At around 1 a.m. Monday, a man armed with a handgun knocked on the passenger window. When the passenger rolled down his window, the gunman demanded the keys to the vehicle, Morales said. Both the driver and his assistant were taken to an empty lot where they were bound and told not to move. They heard one of the assailants use a walkie-talkie type device or phone to tell someone, "It's done," Morales said." http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/world/americas/mexico-radioactive-theft/

Since you bothered to post, you could have the decency to post a link...

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/world/americas/mexico-radioactive-theft/

http://abcnews.go.com/International/mexican-police-find-stolen-truck-radioactive-cargo/story?id=21091737

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/2013/1204/Hijacked-radioactive-material-found-in-Mexico.-How-dangerous-was-it

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/12/4/-extremely-dangerousradioactivetheftinmexicoiaea.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/stolen-cobalt-60-found-abandoned/2013/12/04/7d3fe3f8-5d42-11e3-8d24-31c016b976b2_story.html

ALREADY BEEN RECOVERED.... (and had been for hours prior to this story being posted).

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/world/americas/mexico-radioactive-theft/

How about just google it? Or read a news story or two.

Well, here's the list:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2013/full_list/

They have a website and mobile apps and are a household name for people with kids. Hmm. How about Apple?

Or maybe #66, Walt Disney. Or Time Warner. Or General Mills, or Kellogg. Or Toys R Us. Or GameStop.

Or depending on how much you like having your kids, maybe Las Vegas Sands.

Or depending on how much you liked making your kids, maybe Pfizer.

But unfortunately encumbered by a Patent, and the patent is held by a company that won't share the design.

Which makes me wonder if they'll be sued for copying the Apple lightning connector style. And before you say "OMG Apple sues over every silly patent!" remember that Samsung sued Apple for the bounce-back effect when you scroll a list and reach the end (no I'm not joking they really did).

That's what happens when you get into a patent war. Sometime tries to shake you down for the stupid patents they hold? Well, you can try to shake them down for your stupid patents as well! Patent war chests are created not because your company has actually been innovative, but because you need ammunition if another company doesn't like that you're provide strong competition to them. That's the way the game is played.

But unfortunately encumbered by a Patent, and the patent is held by a company that won't share the design.

Which makes me wonder if they'll be sued for copying the Apple lightning connector style. And before you say "OMG Apple sues over every silly patent!" remember that Samsung sued Apple for the bounce-back effect when you scroll a list and reach the end (no I'm not joking they really did).

The ratio of CEO compensation to average worker compensation is now approximately 10 times its value in 1950. This is approximately commensurate with the average increase in the Dow average adjusted for inflation.

Right; and one should hardly be surprised by this since our government continually passes more and more regulations that generally only benefits big businesses. The barrier to entry for a small or medium-sized firm to get on a public stock exchange is enormous. When competition is limited, one should not be surprised when the market can no longer efficiently remove wasteful players. Paying prices vastly more than necessary to secure a proper executive is, of course, very wasteful. But this is not a fundamental issue with CEO pay, this is an issue with regulation that keeps smaller firms out.

But why should CEOs receive the entire benefit of a growing economy when all actors have contributed to that growth? CEO compensation has no correlation with company performance.

As I see it, the problem has nothing to do with a free vs. a coerced market. The problem is that the market of executive compensation is entirely divorced from the market at large. "Stockholders... vote... for whatever the management recommends no matter how poor the management’s record of accomplishment may be". This is what I mean by oligarchy: a few privileged elites have control over this smaller market without the essential feedback cycles that stabilize prices in the larger economy.

Yes, and this smaller market is much easier to manipulate when it remains artificially small due to artificial barriers to entry. That said, your definition of oligarchy is quite arbitrary; even if you could absolutely measure the power the "privileged elites" have over a smaller market, at what ratio of power to size does it constitute an oligarchy? I do agree with your sentiment, and I think my paragraph above speaks to it.

The issue is that the market value of labor has plummeted in relation to productivity and in relation to the value of top earners. In the 50s one could work part time at a minimum wage job and pay rent and college tuition and walk away with a degree free and clear. Today, just to pay rent, one needs roommates or more than one part-time minimum-wage job, let alone any ability to pay for education in order to get a better job.

1950: $0.75/hour * 20 hours * 50 weeks = $750 wages $42 * 12 months = $504 rent $35 * 4 quarters = $140 tuition

2013: $7.25/hour * 20 hours * 50 weeks = $7250 wages $602 * 12 months = $7224 rent $3917 * 2 semesters = $7834 tuition

How do you measure productivity? GDP is a pretty useless measurement. Also, there is this silly notion that public sector consumption should actually be counted as production. Since there is no objective way to measure public sector "productivity" (since it is not part of a market), it should not be included in aggregates; also it is quite common for the public sector to be horribly inefficient with its "funds". Government makes up

The ratio of CEO compensation to average worker compensation is now approximately 10 times its value in 1950. This is approximately commensurate with the average increase in the Dow average adjusted for inflation.

But why should CEOs receive the entire benefit of a growing economy when all actors have contributed to that growth? CEO compensation has no correlation with company performance.

As I see it, the problem has nothing to do with a free vs. a coerced market. The problem is that the market of executive compensation is entirely divorced from the market at large. "Stockholders... vote... for whatever the management recommends no matter how poor the management’s record of accomplishment may be". This is what I mean by oligarchy: a few privileged elites have control over this smaller market without the essential feedback cycles that stabilize prices in the larger economy.

The issue is that the market value of labor has plummeted in relation to productivity and in relation to the value of top earners. In the 50s one could work part time at a minimum wage job and pay rent and college tuition and walk away with a degree free and clear. Today, just to pay rent, one needs roommates or more than one part-time minimum-wage job, let alone any ability to pay for education in order to get a better job.

1950:
$0.75/hour * 20 hours * 50 weeks = $750 wages
$42 * 12 months = $504 rent
$35 * 4 quarters = $140 tuition

2013:
$7.25/hour * 20 hours * 50 weeks = $7250 wages
$602 * 12 months = $7224 rent
$3917 * 2 semesters = $7834 tuition

I believe that raising the average wage will have a better impact on the economy as a whole than raising executive compensation. I believe that income inequality is a social ill that should be addressed through policy -- not by Marxian state capture of the means of production and not through Randian private hoarding of the means of production, but through a hybrid realistic approach like "all employees should receive stock options or profit sharing if executives do".

At some point price customisation or "dynamic" pricing must have become very useful and widespread.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/24/ramasastry.website.prices/

Your search habits fed back into a price just for 'you' at that moment on a sales site.

Alas, that was what I was interested in yesterday or at some time in the past. It's like being in a discussion with someone who keeps bringing up a point that you thought was resolved a while ago, but they think needs more exposure. Imagine how you'd enjoy such a discussion.

At some point price customisation or "dynamic" pricing must have become very useful and widespread.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/24/ramasastry.website.prices/
Your search habits fed back into a price just for 'you' at that moment on a sales site.

Well to be fair corporations do pay taxes.

Huh. That's news to me.

So they'd be in the same category as any number of mentally or physically impaired persons.

You mean, homeless on the streets as many folks are already?

We seem to have managed to recognize them as people just fine without feeling the need to just release them into the bushes.

That's why there is a shortage of psychiatric beds in most parts of the US...Ask VA State Senator Deeds regarding this: http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/25/politics/creigh-deeds-attack/
Dude was attacked by his son who had been turned away from a mental hospitals for lack of beds....

So yes, we're pretty much releasing the mentally ill into the bushes..

Not that I agree with elevating chimps to personhood, but your argument doesn't really make much sense.

My point is, these creatures cannot care for themselves in human society. They are not humans, nor should they be treated as such. They cannot be expected to participate in human society, nor should they be!
With that said, we should aim to be more compassionate to our fellow creatures on this planet.

It has also been done before for the same reason

http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/dominos-pizza-drone/index.html

Government kicks in $755 a month, for a toal of $1006. But ultimately you can't ignore what real individuals pay, as Congress is learning as employees threaten to quit government work if they have to buy their own insurance through government exchanges. Older workers were shocked to learn that this means paying 3x-4x their old premium contribution. While Obamacare does bring affordable coverage to those with limited income, the so-called "good deals" may be financially crippling to those whose incomes make them exempt for subsidiaries (starting at about $45K for individuals) if they have to purchase their own insurance through the exchanges. Adding insult to financial injury, a younger billionaire could pay a lower premium that's less than half the cost paid by someone older who makes $45K.

Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans October 1, 1989
http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/assuring-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans

You mean the event titled "Health Care for the Poor and Underserved." So why did the Democrats do a one-size fits all for the whole country instead of expanding Medicare/Medicaid? And I don't see how something from 1989 has anything to do with the previous Democrat-Controlled Congress in 2009-2010 session years.

Obamacare's hidden parentage
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/10/daily-chart-1

In other news the word "the" is also found a large percentage of documents when cross-referenced. (That's really grasping at straws cherry-picking random words/ideas from "any" bill/topic, like "Nursing home transparency" being used in the chart on the page you linked to)

Timeline of the health care law
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/supreme-court-health-timeline

Your own link proves the opposite since the Dates mentioned when the ACA was passed was under "Democrat" control of congress. (You just proved my point)

A healthcare history lesson for the GOP
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/15/opinion/la-oe-mansbridge-obamacare-democrats-single-payer-20131015

I'm not sure what this article was getting at but it was way after the ACA was passed and after Democrats lost control in the house.

The entire ACA/ObamaCare was/is/and will be a DEMOCRAT/LIBERAL caused problem! Republicans/Conservatives had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

No need to repeat here.

You can have your own opinion, but you can't have your own facts.
The legislative and ideological history of the law is out there for you to read.
You must have slept through a year of headlines and negotiations to have such a poor grasp of the what happened with the law.

And you have yours but your "facts" did not address the majority of my Opinion (most were from way before or way after it's passage and have nothing to do with it when it was done)

Name one Republican who voted for the "Current" bill when it was passed.

Name one Republican who wrote any of the law/amendments when it was being drafted 09-10. (Dems held them in backrooms in the middle of the night after they went home, sounds real honest of them doesn't it?)

It was DEMOCRATS who wrote and passed the current law when they had a super-majority. Passed under the most corrupt practices ever seen (bribes, backroom last-minute deals to even their "own" party, labor unions/lobbyists/obama/democrat BFFs getting exemptions,etc...) They even argued before the Supreme Court that it was not a tax at the same time telling the justices that they had the authority under the tax laws since it was a tax (they even called them out on it a few times)

This law would have "NEVER" passed in the first place from even Democrats if they went around saying what they are now about the details. (which is why it should be repealed and the whole thing started over from scratch with an honest debate by both parties)

You mean the "Plan B" that had absolutely no Republican input (they were locked out of the committee rooms)

Plan A was a single payer system.
The most generous way to describe the Republican position on Plan B (the individual mandate) is that they were for it before they were against it.

Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans October 1, 1989
http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/assuring-affordable-health-care-for-all-americans

Obamacare's hidden parentage
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/10/daily-chart-1

Timeline of the health care law
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/supreme-court-health-timeline

A healthcare history lesson for the GOP
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/15/opinion/la-oe-mansbridge-obamacare-democrats-single-payer-20131015

The entire ACA/ObamaCare was/is/and will be a DEMOCRAT/LIBERAL caused problem! Republicans/Conservatives had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

You can have your own opinion, but you can't have your own facts.
The legislative and ideological history of the law is out there for you to read.
You must have slept through a year of headlines and negotiations to have such a poor grasp of the what happened with the law.

And DSL is much, much shittier than fiber. Good riddance.

Losing POTS/wire does not mean the telcos will willingly replace it with fiber. Not even when your talking about the US leaders in fiber Verizon.

Major Telcos also tended to divest themselves of rural areas they have no desire to upgrade and serve. Now just exactly how do all those funds they collect in rural support fees from urban areas go from their pockets to those non-urban Telcos? And how does the time value of money come into play?

No he doesn't have it backwards. The (campaigning part of the) NRA has specifically demanded crackdowns on the mentally ill in response to the latest shootings. The NRA (again, the lobbying group) is generally considered a right wing group by most standards, to the right generally of the core NRA's members indeed.

at least they've finally gotten a clue, this is probably the first time ever that they've stopped pushing to keep guns available to criminals and the mentally ill.

now, if only they could see how guns could be, you know, dangerous for people who can't aim at anything because they're blind. gives a whole new meaning to "firing blind."

In order to make real-world use of this model, the health care industry would have us load catapults with doctors and medicines and fling them into Africa.

They're on the right track but with their health care model they're backing the wrong horse. How and when exactly did that endemic sickness that must be countered, arise?

Let's take a look at the world according to cholera [cases reported to WHO 2007-2009]. Cholera flourishes where masses of people have converged on areas without sufficient infrastructure to support them. They often do this in an attempt to escape rural poverty. It also flourishes along major rivers, such as the Ganges and historically the Thames, again where infrastructure for water filtration and sewage treatment is lacking.

Now look at the world according to (lack of) access to electricity [Numbers in Millions and % of People without access to Electricity, 2008. Source: WHO & UNDP]

Electricity means clean water and waste processing.
Cholera hates electricity.

That is because with electricity comes deeper wells, better filtration, distribution, active media filtration of surface sources and sewage treatment with water effluent ready for discharge into rivers -- along with the basics such as refrigeration for food and medicine. It was infrastructure and not better health care that eliminated the threat of cholera in North America, and other diseases besides.

And by electricity I mean real base load electricity, the power to run distribution and filtration plants and whole villages and cities. A full square meal of energy, not the 'energy happy meal toys' that are too often envisioned by North Americans as gifts to Africans -- a solar panel here or a wind turbine there, to run some tiny apartment fridge in some clinic somewhere, or a single LED light, sometimes. Solutions we could not and would not tolerate for ourselves.

The human race (at our favored levels of population density) has evolved past the point where a natural state of good health can be maintained without access to bulk electricity, which equates to drinkable tap water. This is a greater factor than access to doctors or medicine.

Obama is making the right noises about Africa with his $7 billion pledge to help Africa lift itself out of darkness with new sub-Saharan infrastructure. Remember -- this $7 billion is is NOT your hard-earned taxpayer dollars, which are all going toward repayment of interest on our national debt. This is magical unicorn money that will come from World Investment Funds and Bank perpetual money machine that is backed by International Corporate Banks that bought shitloads of worthless paper that were bailed out by Bushobama with the Fed minting virtual money that saved the banks' balance sheets from ruin, and Treasury Bonds purchased by the Chinese who have said fuck-it and have decided to give Africa their time and especially their money directly, some of which would ultimately come from us as repayment on debt to China with China becoming Africa's direct partner in infrastructure instead. This does not make sense on so many levels.

I think the United States is presently screwed on Energy but not in the conspiracy sense. It is this awful mental condition where we have lost sight of 'big electric' and 'big water' infrastructure as something we are truly vested in, regardless of whether we personally own stock in it.

I think it is why discussants in these forums never seem to discuss topics of coal, nuclear and natural gas production of electricity at any length -- and spend so much more time on the minutia

Oh yeah, the link: http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/29/showbiz/salinger-unpublished-stories/

I will end up strengthing your argument against single payer but with an opposite factoid -- you said, "2. Being that health care is on the persons dime (either directly or threw insurance) they are more likely to make decision if a particular care is worth it or not to take care of. Vs. a single payer system, where some procedures will be deemed by a higher authority as not worthy."
However a major problem with health care spending in the USA is the enormous proportion of a person's total healthcare spending which occurs in the last year of life, futilely keeping them around another couple of months. This is only possible because the person or their family are not paying those bills directly but usually through single payer Medicare. So the flaw now in single payer is not that the higher authority is too stingy, but instead is too free with other people's money, and the people directly involved are not in a position to make rational cost-benefit decisions.
"One out of every four Medicare dollars, more than $125 billion, is spent on services for the 5% of beneficiaries in their last year of life." -- http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/11/pf/end-of-life-care-duplicate-2.moneymag/

Congress didn't give themselves a pass on ACA. A few Senators spoke of it but it wasn't in the final bill.

Well, there is dispute over this.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/09/fact-check-did-president-obama-exempt-members-of-congress-from-obamacare/

"Like most large employers, the federal government contributes a portion to the premiums of its employees. In fact, like many employers, the federal government pays most of the premiums for its workers; an average of 72 percent on Capitol Hill.

The new provision didnâ(TM)t account for the continued employer contribution for these federal workers who would now be buying their insurance on the exchanges. The exchanges were designed to help people without health insurance and people with overly expensive health insurance. It became clear that without their employer contribution, members and their staffers would essentially be getting a cut in pay and benefits equal to thousands of dollars. Even Grassley, the provisionâ(TM)s author, had tried to amend to law in order to allow the government to continue to contribute to lawmakersâ(TM) and staffersâ(TM) premiums.

What the Obama administration has done is rule that the lawmakers and their staffs will continue to receive the employer contribution to help them buy their insurance on the exchange.

Originally we declared Vitterâ(TM)s assertion to be wrong since any company can decide to help pay for policies that its workers purchase on the exchange so allowing representatives and staff to do so would not be an âoeexemption.â That notion has been challenged by conservative critics of Obamacare who argue that under existing federal statutes Congress had to specifically pass legislation authorizing the premium subsidies for any insurance program other than FEHBP. Since congress did not do this, the administration, at the behest of Congressional Democrats, and, according to Politico, Speaker John Boehner, unilaterally extended premium contributions. By doing this, the critics argue, the administration âoeexemptedâ Congress from the law. "

Congress isn't immune from insider trading laws and regulations.

Again, technically correct, but Congress made it so that it's extremely difficult to enforce.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/congressional_insider_trading_revisited_but_dont_tell_anyone_commentary-224674-1.html?pg=2

Make no mistake: The STOCK Act is still in effect and congressional insider trading still is banned. But it has now become extraordinarily difficult to ensure compliance with the law.

The above the law mindset isn't a function of large government.

I would strongly disagree here, as it is the tendency of any large bureaucracy, especially governments, because of the relative power-with-anonymity that individuals enjoy in such a large group, for natural human failings to become an increasing part of the culture.

Just look at Rome, or the EU, AU, & UK, or China and the former USSR. No matter the particular form of government, once it grows so large & powerful, the people making up that government become increasingly aloof and immune from the laws that punish regular citizens for things those in positions of power within that government get a pass on.

It's simply basic human behavior regarding power relationships that has been studied and confirmed in many experiments over decades.

The above the law mindset isn't a function of large government. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 signed into law by John Adams was certainly done by a federal government that thought it above th

You have entirely failed to prove your point. The OPs claim was that "No bank or financial institution will ever be able to do as much harm to a population as a bad government", not that banks cannot ever do harm. In order to prove that, you'd have to show that the Panic of 1857 was more harmful that attrocities
  like these.

Of course if working class Joe Q. Public is in the company of these "escorts" ...

Or if you're going after Countrywide or one of our other esteemed and ever-so-honest financial institutions. Doubleplusbad if the bank was in the habit of giving sweetheart loans to other politicians. Cue Eliot Spitzer. The guy was an idiot and a hypocrite for using the "escort service" the way he did, but the case is still peculiar. Why was the case never prosecuted? How many other politicos could you catch this way, but somehow never are?

The US learned quite a bit from WWII. By accounting for 50% of the world's defense spending since that war, the US has been able to permanently forward-deploy a significant fraction of its military, while maintaining a materiel edge sufficient to insure no adversary, or potential alliance of adversaries, has any remotely realistic probability of prevailing militarily against the US. In the case of the Senkaku Islands, we will fly B-52's in through the front door, advertising to God and everybody that we're openly ignoring China's "Air Identification Defense Zone" and daring the Chinese to shoot them down. The Air Force keeps the B-52 around because sometimes, there is military utility in announcing to the enemy that you don't even need your top-of-the-line shit-kickers to inflict massive butt-hurt. 51 year old Big Ugly Fat Fuckers are more than enough to get the job done.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/27/world/asia/china-japan-us-tensions/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

What the actual fuck are you on?

Watch your language, young man, if you wish your questions, however rhetorical, answered.

They [Republicans -mi] ignore all sciences, not just 'real' ones. See fracking & evolution for just a couple examples.

The only "science" in dispute over fracking is whether or not the natural gas-extraction process is dangerous to the environment. Given that the only arguments against are either sponsored by OPEC or put forward by bona-fide anti-Capitalists, it is indeed most prudent to ignore them.

As for evolution, the process is rejected by most major religions, which makes it hardly a Republican-only problem. Even among Christians Obama, for example, got a (slightly) higher share of votes, than McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012.

You keep spouting that number. You're off by a factor of ten. In 2009, it took US $343,927/year to be in the top 1%. That's the bare minimum. The average 1%er gets $960,000/year. That was in a bad year for the stock market. In a good year for the stock market, like early 2008 or most of 2013, it takes a minimum of $424,000/year to be in the top 1%.

So give it a rest with the $35k. As Warren Buffet famously said, class warfare has been practiced for over 30 years, by the wealthy against the rest of us, and they're winning.

The US has more prisoners per capita and also more total prisoners than any other country on earth. This is a huge drag on the economy. Not only is there a massive cost for keeping all of these mostly non-violent people imprisoned, we are also deprived of their contribution to the economy. Locking someone up often destroys not just their life but the lives of their children and other family members.

Passing more laws against non-violent crimes to lock up more non-violent people is going full tilt in the WRONG DIRECTION!

FTFA:

"We apparently caught them between runs, so to speak, so this takes away one tool they have in their illegal trade. The law does help us and is on our side," says [Lt. Michael Combs with State Highway Patrol].

Lt. Combs is delusional if he thinks his "side" can possibly win their war on drugs. It is possible that outlawing secret compartments is a natural extension of the war on drugs but that just shows how idiotic and insane the war on drugs is. Even if they took away all of our remaining civil liberties, the war on drugs would still be unwinnable. How much more must the American people sacrifice for the sake of this unwinnable war?

OTOH, Mr. Gurley is lucky he was not pulled over in the state of New Mexico where at least two different people have been forced to undergo enemas, colonoscopies, and anal probing based on acting nervous after a routine traffic stop:

After Eckert was pulled over, a Deming police officer said that he saw Eckert "was avoiding eye contact with me," his "left hand began to shake," and he stood "erect (with) his legs together,"

We are wasting billions of dollars; we are destroying millions of lives; we are militarizing our civil police departments; we are trashing our civil liberties; and we are destroying at least one neighboring country all in the name of a war on drugs that is impossible to win. It is stupid, it is sick, it is insane. It must stop.

Hmm...I wonder if you have something there. The "generation y" (the generation I'm a part of, actually) mostly seems to value "being a badass" (or something to that effect, I don't quite know how to name it.) By that, I mean this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/desmond-hatchett-30-kids_n_1528850.html

That is today's "alpha male". A pathetic loser who has done jail a few times, but that is where selective selection is carrying us, so who am I to judge. That and of course, this:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/justice/knockout-game-teen-assaults/

I would imagine (and hope) that one of the requirements of the US military is that our CPUs and technology must be produced here for national security reasons.

You hope in vain.

So true. There are plenty of places with a cost of living far below a place like DC or Silicon Valley which pay decently enough that you end up way ahead.

For comparison, CNN's site has a cost of living calculator, and the US census site has several pages about cost of living worth looking at.

Not to mention that pile of cash is going to trip off all the drug dogs from a mile away because 90 percent of U.S. bills carry traces of cocaine.

It's true enough that the world doesn't revolve around you or me. "Government" is a lovely, abstract concept. The problem is: governments are made up of people. Individual people who can make mistakes or take deliberately evil actions. Like spying on ex-lovers, harassing disliked colleagues, or causing problems for companies that they don't like.

The NSA overreach means that tens of thousands of people have access to data that should never have been collected. Can you be sure that you, your family and your friends - that no one you care about has ever pissed off any of those tens of thousands of people? That no one you care about ever will?

It's bad enough that the government has access to this data, which might be misused officially. However, the real problems arise from the fact that the data exists: it can, will and already has been misused by individuals.

When I go to the voting booth, the only options I seem to have are "status quo" and "status quo". Corporate profits are at record highs, yet wages are getting lower. Unless the country forms one union, there's nothing stopping Corps and CEOs from bleeding the 99% dry. Right now, the only way I could "fight" this is to do a one-person strike. You can guess far that would go.

Just checked back. Looks like i was modded to zero and you were modded to 5. I just googled "aca enrollment success" and found plenty. Here's a link (or it didn't happen, right?): http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/19/politics/obamacare-enrollment-update/

It seems very silly to have to link to evidence in order to have a conversation here. I know you were just pointing out that i did not counter his argument and just made a snarky remark about it. But I was not intending to carry a flag for either side. Was just pointing out how he had to exclude any success links to make his point.

People are crazy about this ACA stuff.

Apple's legal research team are working on splitting the Litigon, a particle with quantum spin which is capable of detecting where and when someone has violated their Intellectual Property.

We have been studying matter vs Litigon collisions for quite some time at Apple's Hardly Imaginary Particle Smashing Toroidal Experiment Research fascillity (aka: The HIPSTER Collier). Through friction with other manufacturers Apple's outsourced supply chain provides a never ending stream of Litigons -- Sometimes even through interaction with itself (as TFA demonstrates).

When Litigons collide with normal matter in reality they produce a veritable golden shower of Bogons. This led to the discovery of the Bogosity Field; Now known publicly as the "Apple reality distortion field" in guerrilla marketing campaigns. Apple holds the exclusive patent for the Bogosity Field retroactively and in perpetuity through creating new devices with which to fill the blank in: "Bogons on a ___." [computer, phone, PDA / tablet, set-top box, watch, glasses, Maxwell Smart's shoe, etc.]

Due to the nature of quantum uncertainty it is not observation of the Litigon itself which detects the location and time of infringement, but rather via inference after witnessing the speed and direction of the technology segment's charged Progress particle (The Progress-ion), after collision with Apple's Bogons.

I read the /. piece, then I came across this news item. Even with automation, how do you land at the wrong airport?

Especially when you park your DreamLifter at the wrong airport

Here's a recent CNN news story about why we don't have Yucca Mountain. The answer is Harry Reid unilaterally blocking it and appointing staunch anti-nuclear activist as the head of the NRC.

I don't know why they can't work. We seem to be capable of registering moter vehicles and recording their sales between private parties.

And how did this stop someone who saw fit to drive into a boardwalk with the intent to kill?

Hack our drones and crash them into our own ships. Apparently, a navy cruiser with one of the most advanced air defense systems was no defense for a malfunctioning drone. This is how we lose the war folks.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/17/us/drone-malfunction-duplicate-2/ :-(

You ask ANY of the guys that are actually in the streets, or people that live in edge neighborhoods... crime is going up and going up rapidly.

Perception of crime may be going up. Fear of crime may be going up. Actual crime is going down.

--this is probably, however, simply a function of the aging of the population rather than the effects of policies. The largest component of crime is teenagers and early twenties.

99% of what you hear from your local,state or federal government is 100% BS to simply calm you down.

Unfortunately, when you dismiss all data that disagrees with what you have already decided to believe, you can never learn anything.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2012/june/crimes_061112/
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0524/US-crime-rate-is-down-six-key-reasons
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/29/justice/us-violent-crime/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dimond/crime-reduction_b_2878003.html

If crime rates are going down, then why is my local police getting military grade equipment and gear? Cripes for the last sports event here they had M16 machine guns in the open and wearing full military armor.

The equipment used by police departments has no relationship to the amount of crime.

I think what's being searched might be reasonably kept secret but the government should never have the right to force you into an anal probe

They shouldn't have the right, but that doesn't mean they don't do it anyway.

Most instate Universities with room and board are around $18,000/yr. So, a 4 year degree is in the neighborhood of $72,000. I don't know what mid-size cars you drive, but that's pretty steep. College has become anything but more affordable. If it had been, there would have been less need for student loans, not more.

Average college debt is about $36k. That's because parents support their kids, people work to support themselves, and low income students get financial aid. I got financial aid and worked in college.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/17/pf/college/student-debt/

It is becoming more and more rare for someone who works behind a desk to not benefit greatly from a college education. And that is not just to get a job; it really does help educate the workplace. Most people do not have the self-motivation to educate themselves so an extra 4 years of "forced" education is useful.

Giving people four years of free room and board while getting an art history degree is not "forced education", it is allowing them to waste another four years of their lives.

Yes, we have the example of Flight 93 but I think that's an exception to the rule

No so much:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/29/world/asia/china-plane-hijack-foiled/

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=man-attempts-to-hijack-thy-plane-in-istanbul-reports-say-2011-01-05

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-149289/Italian-plane-hijack-foiled.html

This the same Bigelow that laid off half his workers just two years ago?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/20/uk-space-business-bigelow-idUSLNE79J01T20111020

Oh yeah! But now suddenly it's Moon Hotel time?

Oh wait, didn't someone else want a space hotel?

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9705/25/japan.space/

Well, it's only been 16 years, maybe they need 50 more?

for decades, and is a nation that much more frequently faces domestic terrorism. What are the chances they have a better, and cheaper method? Oops, they use common sense. Never mind.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/11/yeffet.air.security.israel/