Slashdot Mirror

Forbes article is lying with statistics.

Christian Science Monitor did a more comprehensive analysis and found the opposite.

One of many problems with the naive analysis is that the 1 per 94M miles includes all forms of transpo - motorcycles, 18-wheelers, buses, etc.
In fact, only 58% of traffic fatalities were occupants of passenger vehicles like cars and SUVs.

Another problem is demographics. They are typically driven by wealthy middle-aged males, a group with a better than average driving record. Generally not drunks and not teenagers who have the highest crash rate.

If you compare like cars to like - luxury sedans and SUVs then the IHS numbers are 1 fatality per 428M miles. Significantly worse than the Tesla's number.

But Tesla's number is also from a very small sample size so its so noisy you can't really do much of a comparison at all.

The loans program office had already wiped out the Solyndra loss just two years later.

The loan program was actually profitable for the government.

Right, but a small mention of "Entire family wiped out in car crash" pales in comparison to the news coverage that a Tesla just scraped a parked car .

This shows the the level of media attention does not correlate to the appropriate levels of concern. Just like the terrorist attacks. Tobacco companies kill far more Americans than terrorists. Do not ramble on on the argument that smokers choose to risk their health and life, I'm talking about second hand smoke.

Tesla's autopilot will save many lives on the motor ways. It doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be statistically better than you or I. Even though this technology is in its infancy, it is already a better than you are, statistically.

Its economics. A consumer drone costs $1000, compared to RPG grenades which were selling for $100, but now $500 according to the CSM:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World...

As the war drags on, and munitions prices rise, alternatives become more attractive.

how could you even shoot it down? And in a city, would you even be able to try shooting it down?

Shotgun. And seriously? Afraid of disturbing the peace in Aleppo?

Boeing workers have sabotaged their OWN PLANES in the past. What makes you think a nut job worker wouldn't do it? Two sources below
http://articles.orlandosentine... http://www.csmonitor.com/1997/...

Yes.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Busin...
http://charity.lovetoknow.com/...
http://www.give.org/charity-re...

http://www.csmonitor.com/Busin...
http://www.give.org/charity-re...
http://charity.lovetoknow.com/...

> Then make your account not searchable...

That feature died almost 3 years ago... http://www.csmonitor.com/Techn...

> Facebook announced Thursday the social network it is getting rid of the
> âoeWho can look up your Timeline by name?â privacy feature, meaning
> any user can be found when searched by name. Facebook says this provides
> users more autonomy over individual posts, but privacy advocates
> say this opens social networkers up to unprecedented exposure.

What else did you get wrong?

This is indeed a bad day when a hate-filled post like this gets modded +5 Insightful.

Historically, the "good" ones are silent when Islamist terrorists act. How many mosques have you seen speak out against ISIS and Islamist terrorism?

Yeah, they speak out all the time, though you wouldn't know it by reading the mainstream media. Every major terrorist event is generally followed by loads of denunciations by prominent Muslim leaders. And then there's stuff like this, where 70,000 Muslim clerics have issued a fatwa against terrorist acts.

The Islamist terrorist activities are encouraged by their "holy" books. .... I encourage everyone to read the Koran.

I'd encourage people to read other sacred texts written over a 1000 years ago when violence was much more common and compare. For example, have a look at the stuff in the Bible. Just one of those verses from Leviticus motivates dozens of killings of homosexuals every year, for example. But you don't tend to hear as much about them, because they tend to be individual killings. The main difference between Christianity/Judaism and Islam in terms of "holy" books (as you put it) is that the former tend to ignore the tenets of their scriptures more these days... compared to say a few centuries ago when they happily went around killing people in God's name too. (Heck, even in the 20th century you had genocides partially motivated by Christian sectarianism.)

The Western world has been shielded from this truth for too long. We can share a planet. We cannot share a country with these folks.

And it's people with views like this that are playing directly into the hands of the terrorists -- and by terrorists, I mean actual terrorist leaders and those motivated by political/religious ideology, not this numbnuts in France who from recent reports appears to be far from motivated by ideology. The reports are still early, but if recent media stories and interviews with family members and neighbors are to be believed, this guy was just a whackjob with a previous arrest for road rage and whose personal life had self-destructed. He doesn't appear to have been religious at all, drinking, doing drugs, eating pork, never attending services, etc.

So what about the reports that he shouted "Allahu akbar!" during the killings? Well, if he did, he was probably playing into the "terrorist" fantasy world you're putting him into.

If you don't mind, I'm not going to dignify him by calling him a "terrorist" -- that's insulting to actual politically motivated folks who feel the need to act violently in the name of an ideology. I'll just call this guy "Numbnuts," which is the level of respect he deserves.

From recent reports, it appears that Numbnuts was a depressed loner. In the past, some idiotic coward afraid of dealing with his own life might have quietly offed himself with a gun to the head in his own house, or maybe jumped off a bridge or something. Or maybe he would have "gone postal" and killed some family or coworkers just to take some of the people he hated with him. (Note that term go postal, remember that? Dozens of incidents of postal workers shooting up people over a decade, and I don't remember anyone calling for them all to be deported... sure no incidents on this scale, but still.)

Anyhow, Numbnuts here doesn't sound like a terrorist. He was just a screwed-up lunatic with a death wish. And if he shouted some Muslim phrase at the end, it's probably because he read some BS on the internet and people like you af

You mean several courts have divergent opinions and rulings, and the Supreme Court has yet to take it up.

Heck the big one in the 6th Circuit says the exact opposite of what you claim. I mean seriously if your going to say something is settled you might want to look up some evidence to support your opinion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/J...

Maybe the Senate will take up https://www.congress.gov/bill/... and we can resolve this once and for all.

Nuclear plants, when running normally, do not kill 28,000 birds a year.

Yawn. Don't pretend you give a shit about the birds.

In fact most nuclear plants will never have an accident at all, much less one that harms the environment.

Actually, I don't know of ANY nuclear plant that doesn't have a reported incident. Some of them by sheer neglect of thoughtfulness. S

Meanwhile these solar reflection arrays BY DESIGN will kill tens of thousands of birds a year if they are operating "properly".

The tower setting itself on fire was, to anthropomorphize the situation, an act of suicide over the guilt build up. The tower just could not take it anymore. Strange that a tower should care more for the environment than you.

Yawn. You know these incidents happen with plenty of other buildings, but you don't give a shit about them either.

Or the Fish.

So go take your whining to somebody who gives a shit.

Nuclear plants, when running normally, do not kill 28,000 birds a year.

In fact most nuclear plants will never have an accident at all, much less one that harms the environment.

Meanwhile these solar reflection arrays BY DESIGN will kill tens of thousands of birds a year if they are operating "properly".

The tower setting itself on fire was, to anthropomorphize the situation, an act of suicide over the guilt build up. The tower just could not take it anymore. Strange that a tower should care more for the environment than you.

It's as if the police union are on strike and the city is gridlocked because there are no cops to guide people through intersections. No one feels comfortable reminiscing the days when mere traffic lights (common sense small delay procedures like airport metal detectors) managed the intersections, And things moved along. It's time to roll this shit back. The problem is that no one has the courage to do it. We've been led on by stages.

1. Everybody 'needs' insurance to operate. So the shots are called by the most spineless of individuals, the decision-makers at insurance companies who, far from public view or accountability, indicate that they'd prefer to make some change that would seriously impact quality of life. When life sucks just a little more each time, they shrug. Life is not sucking for them.

2. In an atmosphere of politics driven by fear, only the most twistedly paranoid persons run the show. Paranoid security freaks have comitted us to one Faustian bargain after another. No one has ever admitted that any 'safety' measure was excessive and uncalled-for. No one,in history. Sound strange? It should. You have bought into something that embodies the worst aspects of a religion without even the clear goal of one. When fear grips the nation and life sucks a little more --- yet --- no attacks occur, they just shrug and say, that's proof that it's working. Life is not sucking for them.

3. Once upon a time, smart people created something called a 'Sunset Provision', to keep bad legislation from turning everything to shit. No one cared, no one acted courageously and the shit is now locked in, maybe for good. Obama recently extended the Patriot Act provisions --- not from any clear evidence that it has a positive effect, but because he is the latest spineless machine in a series of spineless legislative machines.

Instead of Congress repealing bad legislation, they add pages to it. And here we go again 1-2-3, 1-2-3. It's a Waltz of Doom.

It's a simple little ratchet device, that is making life suck more every day.
FYI There's a little lever on the ratchet that unlocks it.
Too bad no one has the courage to operate the lever.
Or it's someone else's job.
If you think that these days are so much better than the 60s, the 80s, the 90s, you have a great excuse not to touch the lever.

>CLICK<

There, now life sucks a little more. But just a little.

Especially differential equations from Arabic!

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2016/0508/Differential-equation-prompts-economist-s-removal-from-flight-video

This man was guilty as charged. Consider this :

He is an economist
He is a mathematician
He is Italian.

Especially differential equations from Arabic!

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2016/0508/Differential-equation-prompts-economist-s-removal-from-flight-video

I have some things to say about Carly that didn't really get said because she wasn't ever a serious enough candidate. A few words got out on the Christian Science Monitor here. Sorry about the survey they put you through before you can read the article.

Instead of unbearable heat and apocalyptic freezing, Americans are actually experiencing ideal weather conditions thanks to climate change: milder winters, with only small increases in summer humidity. 80 percent of the US population is experiencing better weather than it did 40 years ago

In short, current technology - no. I have high hopes for thorium reactors, if we ever put the money into making them viable.

The war will pay for itself

and

Honest, I won't shoot my load on your face.

The idea has definitely been discussed. It would seem very irresponsible to travel unarmed in pirate-infested waters such as near Somalia. However, it's not clear where this attack took place. It should be relatively safe to ship through the north Pacific or north Atlantic. I'd also expect the Southern Ocean is pretty safe because there isn't too much down there.

There's an article from the Christian Science Monitor that does a really good job of explaining the issues with protecting ships. It says that if crews are armed, pirates may retaliate if fired upon, injuring the crew or damaging the ship. Similarly, they believe that having specific armed security on ships will result in pirates getting more powerful weapons and firing from a distance. In short, they don't want to create an arms race with the pirates. There are other measures to protect ships, though they're somewhat expensive. I'd guess that shipping companies don't want to spend the money to protect ships traveling in areas where pirates aren't common.

Well then follow up with a drone strike of the base camps they use and a torpedo for the mother ship.

If that doesn't work, I am sure a B1-B or two can carry a payload to fix the problem. Just one of those can carry enough land mines and sea mines to fuck up their areas of deployment real well.

Sounds like "we don't actually want to solve the problem, just whine about it" to me. Typical pussy generation. Maybe try handing out trophies to all the pirates or something. I am sure that would work.

The deciding factor in all of this is the insurance companies. Eventually they won't insure anymore, or they will charge too high a price.

On the other hand, they could SELL tickets to guys that would love to sit around on a ship and imagine being attacked by pirates only to fend them off. 40 fat dudes with their own ammo stashes and weapons could probably hold off a lot of pirates. The ship company would just need to feed, house, and entertain them a little.

The idea has definitely been discussed. It would seem very irresponsible to travel unarmed in pirate-infested waters such as near Somalia. However, it's not clear where this attack took place. It should be relatively safe to ship through the north Pacific or north Atlantic. I'd also expect the Southern Ocean is pretty safe because there isn't too much down there.

There's an article from the Christian Science Monitor that does a really good job of explaining the issues with protecting ships. It says that if crews are armed, pirates may retaliate if fired upon, injuring the crew or damaging the ship. Similarly, they believe that having specific armed security on ships will result in pirates getting more powerful weapons and firing from a distance. In short, they don't want to create an arms race with the pirates. There are other measures to protect ships, though they're somewhat expensive. I'd guess that shipping companies don't want to spend the money to protect ships traveling in areas where pirates aren't common.

Likewise, a bakery run by Christians who oppose same sex marriage don't have to bake a cake with a pro-SSM message.

There's a bakery in Oregon that would disagree with you. There's also a farm in New York and a florist in Seattle. We are absolutely not free to refuse, unless it's against someone not on the Approved Victim List.

That means that the content on anyone's phone can be stolen. Not just anyone's phone, but the phone of every politician in the world.

If politicians want to put a back door on our phones, those politicians need to use those same phones.

Which brings up another point. The US Federal Government can hack the German Chancellor's Iphone, but not the Iphone of some nut in California?

Seeing this makes me wonder if this was the real reason for the IRS stopping to accept electronically filed returns last week. No mention of it in TFA, but the Christian Science Monitor was a bit cynical when reporting Tax filing halted by IRS computer outage. Will refunds be delayed? by putting quotes around the "hardware failure".

A "hardware failure" forced the shutdown of several tax processing systems, including the e-file system, the IRS said in a statement.

whereas the actual IRS statement was (in the same article)

The IRS experienced a hardware failure this afternoon affecting a number of tax processing systems, which are currently unavailable. Several of our systems are not currently operating, including our modernized e-file system and a number of other related systems. The IRS is currently in the process of making repairs and working to restore normal operations as soon as possible. We anticipate some of the systems will remain unavailable until tomorrow.

It's not
as atheist
as you think.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

Said nobody, ever!
However someone did say something similar: "First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you."

You can find plenty of evidence that Gandhi never said or wrote the above. Just google it. E.g. here's one http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/P...

The library isn't restricted in what books it carries...if they could carry all of them they would.

If only that were true.

Venezuela should be producing 3.5 million barrels daily according to their own projections, yet they struggle to produce even half.

So you're saying that Venezuela struggles to produce 1.75 mbd? Do you realize it's a bit hard to give credit to anything you say after this?

The new PDVSA only hires people loyal to the government, everything else is secondary, resulting in accident after accident, the biggest of all resulting in one of the biggest explosions in history.

If you read the article you linked, Venezuelan officials say it was sabotage. Of course, maybe they lie, or they're sincere but wrong. All I can see with my own eyes is that the whole western world seems so intent on destroying them that people even post ridiculous numbers to discredit them on slashdot forums. So it could also be that they're right.

That is why the government is now focused on begging the other OPEC members to lower production. Oil price is their convenient excuse, the real reason is their inability to compete with well run companies.

Venezuela pushing to lower global production is not new, it dates from the creation of OPEC (more or less at their initiative).

PS: There is a lot of investment in the oil industry in Venezuela (too much according to some), and a lot of cooperation with foreign companies.

Venezuelan oil production is doing ok. Not great, but ok. What you're saying is more propaganda than truth. The current selling price is a much worse problem than the amount of production.

Venezuela should be producing 3.5 million barrels daily according to their own projections, yet they struggle to produce even half.

The root reason being Chavez' firing of all managers of PDVSA (the oil company) in a national broadcast in 2012, tooting a whistle and pulling out red cards, like a football referee; and the subsequent firing of most employees. This was his short sighted reaction to their joining of a national strike that lasted a month, aimed at pressuring him into leaving office.

These people took years of training and experience to middle eastern countries, making them rich. The new PDVSA only hires people loyal to the government, everything else is secondary, resulting in accident after accident, the biggest of all resulting in one of the biggest explosions in history.

That is why the government is now focused on begging the other OPEC members to lower production. Oil price is their convenient excuse, the real reason is their inability to compete with well run companies.

Add that to their strategy of managing PDVSA as their personal wallet for populist campaigns, as opposed to development and reinvestment in the oil industry.

This is a short summary of what happened to PDVSA, the goose that laid the golden eggs, until Chavez destroyed it.

So yeah, its not just about selling price.

and a State where these people vote, and prove their stupidity often. After all, y'all had a Governor by name of Mark Sanford

It's very entertaining to be lectured about stupidity by people who don't know the difference between North Carolina and South Carolina.

Yes, I've noted that I was incorrect about Sanford.

But since we're here, and have now included me in that stupid group - I'll note that I was incorrect about where Sanford was Governor, and now representative. But there is a rather big difference, If I make a mistake, I'll admit it. In South Carolina, they reward it.

Probably the reason I got confused is that the same type of people think that KKK billboards are good, and Solar panels are evil are the same type of people who go on and on about morals and family values and fiscal responsibility, yet re-elect a guy who used government money to leave his wife at home to go fuck his south American mistress, and then lie about it. He was "Hiking the Appalachian trail " as he put it. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/P....

Not to put to fine a point on it, but these are the same people who gleefully spent millions to impeach a different guy for getting a free blowjob.

Yeah - I'm stupid...

Their argument was never that Iraq was behind 9/11, it was always that the devastation of 9/11 proves we cannot wait until after an attack and treat it like a law enforcement measure because the risk to innocent human life was now too large.

As quoted from here:

"In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11."

"Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago."

"Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding Al Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression, as it seeks to maintain American support for a possible war against Iraq and demonstrate seriousness of purpose to Hussein's regime."

If we are to accept your reasoning, then we have to admit that the Bush Administration was inept, at the very least. But, in reality, it wasn't the president alone who made these repeated references, it was the entire administration. Then we have that ugly Powell appearance with the vial full of white powder not to mention that wonderful "artist's rendition" of the terrorist headquarters known as Tora Bora - which never existed.

When taken as a whole, we find that no other answer can be arrived at other than this was a deliberate, false dialog meant to confuse the American people and did so successfully.

The problem is what we are seeing is a need to create a false narrative which proves those who originally created these lies know that they have been pegged as liars. Does it bother you that you are one of those people spreading a false narrative designed to cover the deceit which caused tens of thousands of Iraqis to be killed with a likely hundred thousand or so maimed? Can't you understand that it was those actions which you are trying to hide that led to us having to deal with ISIS?

Either way, what you need to know is that you are the problem, not part of the solution.

The Bush Administration never said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. That's a false narrative that was pushed by anti-war activists back in 2002.

You mean to tell me that more than two out of three Americans who believed that Saddam was behind 9/11 did so because anti-war activists back in 2002. pushed that line? That lie was still poisoning the discourse of one out of three American voters in 2007. Apparently, the drive by, liberal, mass media was involved on pushing this lie too. This lie was foisted upon the world by the Bush Administration. What bothers me most is that you (or the people who told you the lie you're repeating) know that this was not only a despicable lie but one that they felt needed to be countered or the lie you are regurgitating never would have seen the light of day.

What's frightening is that you'd choose a crazy bigoted egomaniac over a fairly unremarkable Democrat who has become the devil incarnate to right-wingers somehow. I never understood the incredible amount of hate that US conservatives have for Hillary. Since she's a huge war-hawk by Dem standards, you'd think they might even find her more tolerable.

hillary was beloved by republicans back when. “I have a sense that she is one of the more competent members of the current administration and it would be interesting to speculate about how she might perform were she to be president,” -Dick Cheney http://dailycaller.com/2011/09... "Look, if we had a Clinton presidency, if we had Erskine Bowles as Chief of Staff of the White House or president of the United States, I think we would have fixed this fiscal mess by now. That's not the kind of presidency we're dealing with right now." - Paul Ryan http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bi... “Having started as a secretary and eventually become a chief-executive officer, I not only have great admiration and respect for Hillary Clinton and her candidacy and her leadership, but I also have great empathy, I must tell you, for what she went through,” -Carly Fiorina http://www.todayszaman.com/wor... “I happen to like Hillary Clinton; I think she’s done a good job for the ... secretary of state’s position, and I have high respect for her and think a great deal of her.” - Orrin Hatch http://www.politico.com/story/... “I think the international star is Secretary Clinton. She has done a really tremendous job.” John McCain http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2... "She's dedicated to her job, she loves her country, I think she is a good role model, one of the most effective Secretary of States, greatest ambassadors for the American people that I've known in my lifetime." -Lindsey Graham http://www.thestate.com/news/p... "I think she's done a fine job. The problem isn't Hilary Clinton, who's great," -Condoleeza Rice http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_...

EAST BERLIN — East Germany finally admits it is choking in pollution. But it is too poor to clean up. This is the dilemma facing the (East) German Democratic Republic as it celebrates the gala 35th anniversary of its founding this week. A UN report six months ago identified East Germany as the most polluted country in Europe

http://www.csmonitor.com/1984/...

In the case of Czechoslovakia, the state was told to concentrate on heavy industry. This concentration on heavy industry depleted the country's natural resources at an extraordinarily fast rate and produced an excessive amount of pollution. [...] While pollution was increasing, records and information relating to pollution became increasingly inaccessible to the public. Students who tried to make the public aware of the problems were arrested and detained by the police.[2] Often no records were even kept on the industrial effects on the environment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

There are numerous environmental issues in Russia. Many of the issues have been attributed to policies during the Soviet Union, a time when officials felt that pollution control was an unnecessary hindrance to economic development and industrialization. As a result, 40% of Russia's territory began demonstrating symptoms of significant ecological stress by the 1990s, largely due to a diverse number of environmental issues, including deforestation, energy irresponsibility, pollution, and nuclear waste.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

You seriously didn't know this? Socialism and communism have been environmental disasters, while capitalist and free market countries, foremost the US, have done extremely well at protecting the environment and focusing on clean industrial processes.

You don't start teens off in ambiguous hard to drive conditions, but rather low traffic side streets or empty parking lots, etc.

We don't need self driving cars that are perfect from the start, merely good enough to drive us most places most of the time, and do not have accidents in the areas that are suitable for it to drive.

This might be true if we lived in a "rational" society. We don't. We live in a society whose concerns are driven by media hype. These days, the media seems to be on the side of self-driving vehicles because they seem really cool and awesome as a concept.

But the media is fickle and could change its mind the moment something more sensational happens.

We've already seen issues with idiots using the Tesla "autopilot" feature in ways it wasn't intended, and the company is starting to rein in its use to prevent idiots from using it in cases where it's likely to fail.

The thing most people seem to be forgetting is that most cars are effectively multi-ton projectiles that easily have the potential to kill. And it's not feasible to expect human drivers to take over in a split second to stop an accident when the software fails.

All it takes is one idiot who puts a car into self-driving mode in a place where the software can't handle it yet, and that car inadvertently causes an accident involving a schoolbus and kills a couple kids (or even hits a family traveling in a van on vacation or whatever). Can you imagine the fallout??

It doesn't matter whether a human driver could have avoided the accident or not. The headlines will just read "AI CAR KILLS KIDS." The (probably rich) guy who drove it will be horrified as he gets sued, leading other rich guys to avoid buying the cars. The car company, engineers who designed the software, etc. will also get sued. And heaven help them if they built in some small choice in their software that led the car to drive into the bus rather than effectively "committing suicide" if the collision was avoidable... suddenly all those ethical debates about whether it's okay to kill kids on a bus rather than doing a potentially suicidal maneuver to avoid it will come into play.

By this point, Congress and state leaders will step in and start banning these cars until safety issues can be worked out. Self-driving cars will be set back at least a decade or two as they are subjected to ridiculous regulatory constraints that human drivers would never have to deal with.

Will this nightmare scenario come true? I'm sure every executive who is betting on self-driving cars hopes to heck it doesn't. And any of them who have any good sense are trying their best to ensure the cars are as nearly "perfect from the start" as they can make them, to avoid this nightmare scenario.

Of course, in additional to living in a society driven by media hysteria, we also live in an economy driven by greed -- so despite safety concerns, I'm also sure that many of these companies are trying to beat their competitors in getting these self-driving systems out.

But your analogy with a "teen driver" doesn't work at all. People who own these cars will use them inappropriately, even if warned not to. And if AI cars kill someone (even if it couldn't be prevented), it's not going to be a teen losing a license or going to prison... it could ruin the whole industry for decades.

The WSJ article on Bernie Sanders claims that his policies will add $18T to the national debt isn't true.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich/2015/0921/Opinion-Four-reasons-why-The-Wall-Street-Journal-attack-on-Bernie-is-bogus

You think a product the government invents out of nothing that the government forces you to buy through a market the government forces you to use at prices the government sets... is a free market?

You mean....like health care reform based around a mandate to buy for-profit insurance, which was the cornerstone of right wing health care plans for 25 years until y'all lost your shit the second it was proposed by a Democrat?

You're a moron. No really. You're actually stupid. Kill yourself.

Awww, did wiidle baby wingnut have his mind blown by an epiphany? You're as much of a brain dead partisan troll as an Obamabot. The centrist way would be to phase out coal over ten years while building nuclear. The leftist way would be to take a cool trillion dollars out of the annual imperial budget, and spend it on wind, solar and mass transit. Which, by the way, would only lead to the greatest economic boom this country has ever seen due to the number of jobs created.

Carbon trading is a conservative, capitalist "solution" to climate change, and that's just a fact you're going to have fucking deal with.

... its been common knowledge from the start and has been reaffirmed repeatedly... here is Obama doing it again:
http://www.rt.com/usa/obama-sh...

but it goes back to reagan... just doing some basic google searches gets me this:
http://www.thereaganvision.org...

Do I need better links than that... fine... its a waste of time but whatever:
https://www.larouchepub.com/ot...

That is Bill Clinton saying he would also share missile defense tech with Russia... LIKE REAGAN.

But lets see if I can find a better link.
http://www.washingtonexaminer....

That cites that the Russians even opposed a shared missile shield.

I mean... do I really need to go on? I'm sure I do... I'm sure you just couldn't accept anything short of the giant 18 inch dildo right up your ass... Sigh... why is it so annoying to find these links. Its a fucking well known fact but all I can get are sideways references to it. God damn it.

http://www.heritage.org/resear...

Another link referencing the same thing.

Every US president since Reagan has supported the idea of sharing the tech with Russia. Every single fucking one.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Comme...

That's Henry fucking Kissinger saying the idea is a good one.

I think I've got enough there that you can see the US has had this position from the very beginning and has not wavered from it since. The Russians basically are addicted to scaring people. They don't feel right with the world unless they make people afraid which is part of why the US and Russia don't get along. We're never going to be afraid of those idiots.

There are big cultural differences between the US and the Russians. They think hissing at us like a fucking snake is going to get them respect at the table. That is the LAST thing we'll ever respect. Hissing at us gets this response:
https://youtu.be/SoswyNaAIUA?t...

The Russians just don't get it. You don't get the US's respect by acting like a punk.

As to you never hearing this before... it has been in the policy from the beginning and repeated by every president in this context from the start. So your failure to hear it is on YOU. Feel shame.

Basically, Obama and the advisers he picked decided that the only way to pass a health care bill was to give the Republicans and the corporations everything they wanted.

Riiiight. Which is why every single Republican Senator and Congressman voted against it.

If you read that Washington Post article I linked above, you will see that the complaint of the progressives is that Obama gave the Republicans everything they said they wanted, but they still opposed it. The progressives thought that Obama was making a stupid, unnecessary compromise that wouldn't even work, and they turned out to be right. Even when Obama gave away the store, the Republicans still opposed him in every way they could.

What really happened was the exact opposite of what you say. Obama and his advisors crafted a heath care bill which was so liberal, not only did it lose all the Republicans, it was in danger of losing a good chunk of the moderate-center Democrats as well. All the compromises you claim were made to appease Republicans, were in fact put in to appease moderate Democrats. Most of them didn't like it either, but were under enormous pressure by the far-left wing of the Democrat party to get this passed while they still had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (10 months from 2009-2010).

I don't know where you get your idea of "far-left wing." I went to City College of New York at a time when I could sit at one lunchroom table with the Communists, another table with the Trotskyites, and another table with the Socialist Workers Party. Those were the people who were supporting Fidel Castro, fighting against the Vietnam war, and sitting in with Martin Luther King (and getting arrested in the process). So maybe you could call them far-left.

The left wing of the Democratic Party in Congress is probably represented by the Progressive Caucus, which includes Bernie Sanders and John Conyers. I don't know why you call them "far" left, unless it just makes you feel good to throw out inflammatory adjectives.

The Progressive Caucus supports a single-payer, Canadian-style system, where the government replaces the insurance companies, and negotiates with drug companies. That's not Obamacare. The Progressive Caucus members weren't even allowed into Obama's White House Health Care Summit in 2009, until they complained. Obama first promised them a single payer option, and then took it back when Karen Ignani, head of the insurance industry lobbying organization, threatened to pull another "Harry and Louise." Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, was always hostile to the Democratic left and in one famous incident called them "fucking retarded." (Which you can look up on Google.)

You can't blame this one on the Republicans. Its legacy will rest entirely upon the Democrats because it was 100% Democrat-drafted, passed, and signed.

Obamacare was modeled on a Heritage Foundation plan. I can blame it on the conservatives, Democrat and Republican:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Busin...
The irony of Republican disapproval of Obamacare
The Democrat's version of health insurance would have been cheaper, simpler and more popular. But we enacted the Republican version. So why are they so upset? Because it an achievement for the Obama administration.
By Robert Reich October 28, 2013

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the...
The Heritage Foundation disowns its baby

Hey, let's not forget the Wikleaks Funnies while we're at it, such as when they presented a Nigerian scam email as proof of US military corruption. ;)

the military impose rules of engagement requiring positive ID of the bad guy before you shoot

What, you think we have to ID those journalists and harmless regular folks (kids no exception) before blasting 'em off the map? STOP THAT UN-AMERICAN TREASONOUS BULLSHIT.

Do you think ocean currents can move heavy metals from Japan to the West Cost?

yes, absolutely. The only question is how much. How much mixing will occur? But yes, radioactives are absolutely carried by currents.

Do you think ocean currents can move heavy metals from Japan to the West Cost?

yes, absolutely. The only question is how much. How much mixing will occur? But yes, radioactives are absolutely carried by currents.

I remember reading that Chinese shoe factory workers were having their wages double every 3 years - for the last 15 years or so.

CSMonitor has an article which mentions that labor costs are rising 15-20% a year in china, and they're up to $6/hour average - barely under US minimum wage. Add quality issues, delays in product delivery, delivery costs, and automation here in the USA, and 'reshoring' is a thing.

Even if a lot of it's going to Mexico. Thing is, once China approaches equity, then the other southeast asian countries, followed by Mexico, where are manufacturers going to go for cheap labor? Africa? I get the feeling that by the time that happens, Chinese firms will be looking to outsource themselves to save costs(and I've heard they already are), and you end up going from around the worlds richest 50% looking to outsource to the poorest 50%, to 90% of the world looking to outsource to the remaining 10%. IE there just won't be enough 'poor' remaining in the world to absorb the demand for cheap labor. So outsourcing will have to come to a practical end.

The Iowa caucus process has a caucus vote before the actual caucusing. Sadly, a lot of people go home after the vote but before the caucusing starts. Also sadly, the media lazily reports on and misleads the public into thinking that the initial caucus vote is relevant in the process.

Two things happen, one after the other: First there is a caucus vote. But it's only after that vote that the caucusing itself starts, which selects delegates to go to district and state conventions where the national delegates get selected. It's who those delegates support and who they vote for at the national convention that counts. The caucus vote doesn't make any difference to that process.

Again, the selection of the national delegates, and who they vote for, has *nothing* to do with the caucus votes that are reported on in TFA--those caucus votes are as much of a straw poll as the Iowa straw poll is, and sadly enough many people are taken in by that.

If the caucus-goers vote in that caucus vote that they are supporters of candidate A, but then vote for delegates who are supporters of candidate B, then it's candidate B that they're truly giving support to, (as those delegates will then vote for national delegates who are supporters of candidate B.)

The winner of the Iowa caucus process is the candidate who gets the most delegates supporting them, not the candidate who ended up winning the "caucus vote" poll that was done before caucusing started.

Confusing the two things is conceptually no different than a person telling a telephone pollster that they are voting for candidate A but then later in the ballot box actually voting for candidate B. It is also no different conceptually from the media continuing to report on poll numbers after an election and neglecting to report on the actual election numbers.

Winning means actually getting delegates. You can call winning a poll that has no effect on anything winning if you want, but it's a pointless use of the term.

Articles at the time talking about this:

• http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/08/28/yes-ron-paul-won-the-iowa-caucuses
• http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2012/0618/Ron-Paul-wins-Iowa!-Does-that-matter
• http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2012/05/breaking-news-ron-paul-wins-iowa-yes-iowa/#4127101=0

Vehicles are for the most part a depreciating asset so don't worry it will be worth the melt/salvage value in less time than you think. I don't get new vehicles but go and find the best older one I can and drive it until it isn't worth fixing or until it gets totaled. This seems to be economically the best way as I enjoy the rollilng upgrade everyone else gets but instead of costing me tens of thousands of dollars in depreciation it instead cost me less than $10,000 and I end up putting a shit ton of miles on it also.

I would love to get a nice new car exactly what I want and see if I can give this guy a run for his money but I wouldn't mind having his car either as he takes care of his stuff. I usually end up getting vehicles in the $8,000-$10,000 range and they last 4-6 years putting 25,000 to 30,000 miles a year on them. The ones with shorter lives have all been hit and totaled but even then all but one of them had over 200,000 miles on it when it went off to the junk yard. The most recent one that stupid automatic transmission went out at just over 260,000 miles and would have been a $6,000+ repair on a car that would have only been worth $2,000 with a good transmission. I hate automatic transmissions as they really are the weak point in most vehicles now days.

We don't know they are scooping up cell phone data...

From TFA

"Some of the aircraft can also be equipped with technology that can identify thousands of people below through the cellphones they carry, even if they're not making a call or in public. Officials said that practice, which mimics cell towers and gets phones to reveal basic subscriber information, is rare."

The FBI admits they are scooping up cell phone data.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/U...
Source:
https://philanthropy.com/artic...
Data:
https://philanthropy.com/inter...

As a former resident of NC, I call BS. Attorneys General are not puppets for the states. They are lawyers, but they're also elected (NOT appointed!) officials that offer legal advice and represent state governments in courts, but also have the right to represent the citizens of states and take legal action on their behalf as well. NC's Attorney General is also the state's highest law enforcement officer. They swear an oath not just to uphold NC state laws, but to uphold federal laws - and federal laws always take precedence. AGs have WIDE discretionary power to decide for themselves what action the state should take regarding legal challenges and court rulings.

As Attorney General, one can advise a state NOT to contest a federal ruling that strikes down the state ban. NC has no law compelling an Attorney General to contest federal rulings that strike down state laws, either.
http://www.ncdoj.gov/About-DOJ...

The AG of VA did nothing that his previous AGs hadn't already done - he chose not to contest a ruling. He did not fail in his duties. VA is trying to pass a law requiring the AG to defend the state's position, but good luck - as it's in conflict with the AG's responsibility to protect citizen's civil rights and uphold federal law. Any attempt to argue that the gay marriage bans are constitutional given the legal precedents set by even SCOTUS themselves would be spurious at best - and any good AG would advise against a lawsuit and not go forward with one.
http://www.washingtontimes.com...

NC is very upset with its AG for the statements he made declaring the state law indefensible as well as his personal belief that it's a bad law. Sure, he'll prepare the best case he can should the state force him to go to SCOTUS to defend their crap law, but anyone that's read the SCOTUS rulings and the federal court rulings based upon them knows there's no other way to interpret the law. SCOTUS will have to issue a ruling contrary to their earlier opinions for any state to have a chance to argue their marriage ban laws are constitutional within the framework they've been given.

http://equalitync.org/latest/n...

It should be noted that the NC AG is only now giving up after exhausting ALL options because all arguments his office has proposed have been rejected by various federal courts in other cases. To continue would be expensive and futile. The VA AG simply came to the same conclusion much earlier.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/L...

What are you talking about? What post are you responding to you because I don't really see any earth is failing kinda posts. Are you trying to say that they are completely harmless. Because that's a bunch of BS