Slashdot Mirror

Try a real citation next time. Random local news and blogs have no place other than for low information 10 second googlers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/s...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

https://www.indystar.com/story...

Your comment is dangerous stupidity, because people believe your wild exaggerations.
The cost and number malpractice payouts has been dropping, and the "prevalence" of lawsuits is absolutely related to the arrogance of many doctors.

It's mostly because health care workers in the US make a lot more than in other countries. Here's a survey of nurse salaries in different countries.

Total executive bonuses for ~100 guys don't come close to the amount it costs to pay millions of doctors and nurses more.

Is your single payer system going to cut health care worker pay by 25-50% and keep it down?

How about we stop telling each other fanciful stories (that appeal to our personal tribal biases) long enough to do simple a little arithmetic?

Ask the washington post, cnn, nbc, or abc news. They've done a bang-up job over the last few years of making fake news all on their own. You might even remember what started it in the current era, it was Dan Rather's "fake but accurate" which offered no proof at all.

Uh no, actually, the current era began with an incident on Dateline. Of course, the fact is, those tanks did result in lots of settled lawsuits so you can be sure it wasn't entirely manufactured.

Then again, concurrent with Dan Rather, we have....real fraud that got hundreds of thousands killed, and you'll never ever bring that up.

But if you want a real conspiracy? Ask yourself why the transmovement is pushing their stuff on pre-teens, and believe that a 3yr old boy or girl "really knows they're a girl or boy." And pushing puberty blockers before they're even old enough to legally engage in sex. Think back if you can, to when you were that young and all the stupid garbage you believed. I can remember wanting to be a train. And you can bet your and my ass, that if your parents were fawning after the transmovement you'd do what they were saying just to make them happy. Why? Because your brain isn't developed enough to understand.

Man, that is a crazy conspiracy Mashiki, and you don't even have a reason to blame the reverse vampires.

Meanwhile, actual reality escapes you.

You know, you wouldn't sound so crazy if you didn't make up such hysterical bullshit, but stuck to facts. Actual provable events.

Not your foaming at the mouth hyperbole.

FYI if you want affordable healthcare, you need it to be at the state level. Not the federal level, even at that I hope you're going to enjoy shortages and healthcare rationing.

Nope, I'm a citizen of the United States, and you may not understand this, but I want healthcare EVERYWHERE in my country, and more to the point, there are some practical considerations that necessitate my ability to cross state lines to get healthcare, as the boundaries of states were not set according to population or economics. A fatal flaw, but what can we do?

Whether it's in Canada, Sweden, France or the UK, we all have rationed healthcare even if it's free.

Everybody everywhere has rationed healthcare. That's because health care resources are not infinite or unlimited.

Letting you buy some healthcare at my expense because you have more money is not a gain.

Oh, and I still have medical insurance here in Canada because that "free healthcare" doesn't cover everything.

That's a choice. Not a necessary element. If you don't like it, write your Prime Minister.

And if you want to see wait times, you can look here. I hope you don't mind waiting 30-50 days for cancer treatment to start, or 150 days for bypass surgery or 11 months to get into a pain management clinic.

And what happe

Oh, sure the media is left-wing. But for you, it's just not far enough left. I mean, when you're that far out, anyone to the right of Mao Zedong looks like a Nazi to you.

"Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is."

-- Source: New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09...

In what way does fighting in Afghanistan give us freedom?

Initially it would have been to go after Osama Bin Laden, the guy who planned the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

However, when, for two days, Bush refused every single request by troops on the ground for more troops to block Bin Laden's escape from Tora Bora because troops weren't available as he was preparing to invade Iraq, that issue went by the wayside.

The Cult of Scientology could learn a thing or two from Uber. They appear very grandiose and their vision is sociopathic to some extent as well as narcissistic. I cannot imagine how a company that would gouge so hard and yet governments do nothing about it for some strange reason.

Rather than make up numbers, why not look them up? Here are some real numbers - have fun with them.

Cost of Medicare per person per year is roughly $12000. Medicare isn't free, either - it's significantly subsidized, but the average subscriber is paying about $7600 a year. So that means that taxpayers are paying about $5400 per year per Medicare subscriber. Medicare payments currently make up roughly 15% of the total US budget, with enrollee premiums and deductibles returning a little over 60% of that.

Cost of social security per person per year is roughly $16320. It makes up about 20% of the total budget. Social Security is (ostensibly) paid for by current-worker taxes, but is certainly going to need retooling one way or another.

Military spending in 2015 was less than 16% of the US budget, although that is currently going up.

Also interest on the debt takes up 6% of the budget.

Wow! That's amazing. The title at that link: Equifax hired a music major as chief security officer and she has just retired.

Equifax Faces Mounting Costs and Investigations From Breach.

The Equifax Breach Was Entirely Preventable

But still, the Intel and Microsoft spyware seems more destructive.

The US government spends more per capita on healthcare than almost any other nation. Yes, the US government, excluding the private sector.

Per capita what? Per population? Per taxpayer? But what about in terms of healthcare received, or in terms of assessing the costs of healthcare?

Think about the difference. Then cite your sources. I'm sure you realize that hand-waved declarations of vague assertions are not especially persuasive when we know how easy it is to lie with statistics.

The problem with the US healthcare system isn't excessive stinginess by the government, it is excessive costs and excessive prices.

Indeed, among other things, it's lack of coverage. And bankruptcies.

Which isn't caused by the government being stingy, it's because the government isn't being thrifty enough by operating its own healthcare facilities. Oh wait, that's because the government is being made to be stingy under the false pretense of not providing its own healthcare facilities!

And the ACA did nothing to address excessive costs and prices (because drug companies, lawyers, and doctors tend to be big donors), instead it simply tried to force Americans to pay those excessive prices in perpetuity, which ensures that this will never get fixed.

Yes, it didn't have a public health insurance provision, let alone a healthcare provision, but we knew this at the time.

Do you not have any actual recall of the situation?

However, you forget the specific subsidies that did reduce the costs for the poor.

That some of us would have preferred hiring more doctors and providing better medical care directly, well, we didn't get a vote on that, now did we?

So if the money allocated to the border wall is unused, it does not go to healthcare

And by "healthcare", you mean the yachts and estates of wealthy doctors, insurance company executives, and pharmaceutical companies.

Now now, we're told "trickledown> " is essential by the GOP. It's their tax-plan now.

Sorry man, you've got less than you think.

But hey, at least you can get your pills.

Look, you know what's happening is due to the GOP, they're the party that's responsible now. And they're going to do their best job...of filling their own pockets. And baking

Where are these stories of people being accused of sexual harassment by touching a coworkers bare shoulder during a group picture?

Garrison Keillor, the "Prairie Home Companion" guy, just got fired for the same amount of contact.

Key paragraph:

“I put my hand on a woman’s bare back,” he wrote. “I meant to pat her back after she told me about her unhappiness and her shirt was open and my hand went up it about six inches. She recoiled. I apologized. I sent her an email of apology later and she replied that she had forgiven me and not to think about it.”

Thanks to feminism, women are now untouchables. No amount of empathy or emotional connection is permitted. You'll see more and more men adopt the "Pence rule" as the only way to avoid lawsuits.

With no statute of limitation either.

This is one thing that is horribly wrong about sexual harassment.

Putting a limit on this would help to remove the stigma and political blowback that often comes with reporting it.

Nope. It would do absolutely nothing to remove the stigma and blowback that comes with reporting it. There's still people who insist that the only legitimate rape is something that somehow prevents pregnancy.

Sorry, but there's a lot of things that are HORRIBLY WRONG about sexual harassment. It's a long list.

It would also get rid of people coming forward with ancient sexual harassment claims that are often viewed as relevant as dragging 90-year old men into courtrooms for World War II war crimes.

Been there, done that.

And we'll do it again until the last Nazi is dead, and even then, they'll still be anathema.

And we'll also declare the falsely accused to be innocent.

Don't like it? Tough.

Compared to the size of the population, isn't that a rounding error at best?

Sorta like a 0.1-0.2mm/month rise is a "rounding error at best" compared to the depth of the ocean, I suppose. Yet we still try to measure it and draw conclusions about the long-term aggregate effect.

These days it only takes about 100k/month to keep up with population growth, so a year at a rate like this and you'd end up with about 1.5 million net new jobs. That's not insignificant.

The globe does not fucking care where CO2 comes from. It DOES care about total concentration.
China is adding another 700 coal plants around the globe over the next 5 years (and that is just what is STARTED today
As of August 2017, this alone will increase coal plants by 43% over today's amount. That is more than what the entire western wold burns and is more than 2/3 of what CHina does on their own.
As to paris accord, it is fucking joke. It is doing NOTHING to stop CO2 production. Not even slowing it down. The reason why most nations are backing it is because they do not have to do a damn thing. And it's backed by idiots that do not work on the CO2 issue.

Educate yourself.
As this one says, they are doing 700 plants and will expand coal based electricity world-wide by 43%. IOW, china will add more coal plants just in 5 years than the entire western world has today. In fact, since China has around 58% of current coal plants, they will add 2/3 of what they have.

Tim Cook didn't want to help the FBI find possible accomplices to Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik. But Apple will help the Chinese government have "more aggressive government involvement online to combat terrorism and criminals".

If there were enough profit for Apple, I wonder if Cook would help the Chinese government track down peaceful protesters like Liu Xiaobo. I hope not. RIP, Liu Xiaobo. 1955-2017.

Well, I believe this concept to be outdated. A bit like the "intellectual Property transfer rights". Nowadays, the paptent holder for IP rights dwelves in tiny european countries. The countries made a business model out of stealing fiscal product of their neighbor. Nobody complains, because everybody uses them. Hell the president of the european commission was the "tax evader in chief" as head stateman of Luxembourg for the better part of his career. Honestly, It would be much simpler to tax the benefits of the company based on their profit, country by country. After all, what is the meaning of the location of the headquarter of a multinational in our connected world ? Nowadays, Apple transfered its headquarter in a tiny british Island known for its very low corporate tax (zero). https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1... Oudated context.

How Israel Caught Russian Hackers Scouring the World for U.S. Secrets

Israeli intelligence officers looked on in real time as Russian government hackers searched computers around the world for the code names of American intelligence programs.

What gave the Russian hacking, detected more than two years ago, such global reach was its improvised search tool â" antivirus software made by a Russian company, Kaspersky Labs.

In 2001, NYTimes increased newsstand prices in southern california to $0.50 with $1.50 for sunday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02...

I have no idea how much a delivery subscription cost at that time.

That's $0.50 * 52 weeks * 6 days = $156.

Add Sunday for $1.50 * 52 weeks * 1 day = $78.

Add those and you get $234.

A $15/mo subscription is $180.

I am not sure how much of the NYT's costs come from the printing and distribution of phyisical newspapers, but I would have expected the prices to go down as a result of the digital editions.

Then again, as someone else said, their costs are subsidized by advertising, so they aren't really passing the straight costs onto their users anyway. That's why many sites still have advertising even for their paying subscribers, which is a deal breaker for me.

Not every union contract has terms that benefit only one side.

Indeed. But my claim was that this benefits zero sides.

By specifying a maximum bonus, the airline doesn't end up in a bidding war with the pilots, with the pilots as a group staging a sick-out unless they get 10x their pay.

Sick outs are anyway an illegal labor activity. The APA was fined millions for it.

It's a way to limit liability, and even though it makes this tougher to deal with it's a good safety valve.

Indeed. And good safety valves always have an emergency bypass that can be used in rare events.

Exactly. In 'An Inconvenient Truth he showed the affects of a 20 foot sea level rise on various bits of the UK

http://www.global-warming-trut...

Impact of 20 Foot Rise in Sea Level

In 1992 they measured this amount of melting in Greenland. 10 years later this is what happened. And here is the melting from 2005. Tony Blair's scientific advisor has said that because of what is happening in Greenland right now, the map of the world will have to be redrawn. If Greenland broke up and melted, or if half of Greenland and half of West Antarctica broke up and melted, this is what would happen to the sea level in Florida.

Global Warming induced sea rise fffect on Florida

This is what would happen in the San Francisco Bay.

A lot of people live in these areas. The Netherlands, the low-countries: absolutely devastating.

https://www.ipcc.ch/publicatio...

The instrumental record of modern sea level change shows evidence for onset of sea level rise during the 19th century. Estimates for the 20th century show that global average sea level rose at a rate of about 1.7 mm/yr.

Now at 1.7 mm per year 20 foot or around 6000mm of sea rise would take 3500 years! Not to mention he's being disingenuous with the Netherlands. The Netherlands isn't just 'low lying', big chunks of it are actual below sea level. They've built protective earthworks and sea walls to stop the sea coming in. If the sea level rises by 1.7mm per year they'll just need to plan to raise the height of the sea walls by on average that much plus some safety factor.

Al Gore is a lot of things, but he's not an idiot. He must know that showing Google Maps of NYC now mostly flooded by a 20 foot sea level rise when that rise will happen over 3500 years is dishonest. Presumably he thinks being dishonest about this is morally justified because it will get people to make changes he believes they need to make anyway. Still his motives are not pure. He bet big time by investing in a bunch of companies who'd benefit from things like emissions trading. If it doesn't happen, those companies will disappear. He'lll still be richer than Crassus of course, but not as rich as if people followed his policy recommendations.

The NYT is pretty pro Democrat but even they pointed out that he has a conflict of interest

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11...

You don't somehow think that all of the missiles that North Korea has been firing were somehow summoned by magic since the start of the Trump administration, do you? They were obviously being worked on during the Obama administration. What we are seeing is the flowering of Obama's work. (Or do you blame Her?)

For what? North Korea wasting their limited resources on a tool that's only useful when you want to provoke an ill-tempered boob who will go off on freak out over them, then erroneously claim to send an aircraft carrier to deal with it?

So what you're saying is that at best, he's par for the course. "Par" is not what we were told to expect.

Trump hasn't even been in office for a year yet and he already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than Obama achieved, has China cooperating, and missile defense is getting a big boost in funding.

Except it turns out those sanctions are a failed policy that only harms the innocent North Korean people, China is, as usual, lying, and putting money into missile defense has been a favorite way to waste tax dollars since the Reagan years.

He seems to be making progress that Obama couldn't.

So far, your examples are only repeated examples of waste, fraud, and failure.

That's not a common definition of progress. Admittedly, to somebody trying to sabotage America, it would seem different.

Lets see what happens between now and the end of the eighth year of the Trump administration.

Let's see what happens between now and the end of the next year.

I'd say this year, but eh, you won't have any results.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

it started during the reign of G. W. Bush's idiot son.

Bush signed the law creating TSA, I'll grant you that. But it was meant to merely transfer airport security from private firms to government employees (a Fascist streak so common to all people in government).

Obama didn't do enough to roll it back.

Obama not only didn't roll it back, he presided over the Agency asserting a role much wider than imagined 10 years earlier. The agency smugly reminded us all, that it is in charge of all transportation — not merely by air. He didn't have to do it — no lawmakers were pressuring him into it. The agency is part of the Executive branch and reports to the President. Had it been merely an oversight on his part, they would've remained as were in 2007. No, he caused them to expand — either by giving them explicit instructions or simply by appointing an Authoritarian-minded head.

some cop could harass you for "acting suspiciously" or whatever, but this isn't common.

Such harassment could happen, and it does happen. But it is illegal — and outrageous. Amtrak et al demanding papers is perfectly legal and commonly accepted as necessary "to keep us safe". That's the feature of the past, that I lament passing... Unlike payphones and tape-recorders.

Where was he when there was a white supremacist as a White House adviser?

According to you and yours, there is a White supremacist in the Oval Office. It does not mean, what you think it means...

That said, I strongly doubt, any of those people "supremacists" have ever told Pai anything like

• Indian cocksucker, you don't belong here. Leave the country now.
• GO BACK TO INDIA YOU FUCKING TOWEL HEAD TERRORIST

... or any of the other well-reasoned and sensible arguments collected here.

Facebook already admitted to conducting experiments on manipulating user emotions. Developing AI to accurately detect if someone is depressed would make sense as they would need to be able to determine how effective their methods are.

I doubt lawsuits will get very far - an entirely computer generated notice along the lines of "if you feel suicidal, you can call XXX-XXX-XXX to talk to someone" is going to fail tests for invasion of privacy

Sigh. Even TFS outright says "or contact local first-responders." Calling the cops on you because you might be suicidal is never the right thing to do, especially since there is a significant chance that the cops will just show up and murder you, even if people are standing by begging them not to.

and not exactly play well with a jury that can see Facebook is trying to do the right thing.

You mean "believe that" Facebook is trying to do the right thing, because they are not.

The biggest "pro-corporation" Supreme Court decision I can think of

Then you aren't very much in the way of thinking about Supreme Court decisions, or intelligent enough to realize that "big" is not always the most informative. Sometimes a more comprehensive analysis is better.

I went straight to the decision itself. I don't need to have it interpreted by a biased source such as The New York Times.

Kelo v. City of New London - the land was taken for the benefit of Pfizer. [wikipedia.org]

Oh, you mean an eminent domain case?

Your mere label isn't complete.

The "liberals" twisted "eminent domain for public use" into "take property and give it to Pfizer".

Kinda hard to be more pro-corporation than that.

Who voted for that? The "liberals".

I see, so your problem is you wanted to come up with a partisan case you can rail at, mysteriously allowing you to ignore others.

Nope, GP poster set up a FALSE strawman to rail at. I selected a hugely pro-corporate decision that was decided by the "liberals" in order to demonstrate that the GP poster isn't living on Earth.

I kinda burned his strawman to the ground.

But now you've demonstrated that's beyond your level of "thought", haven't you?

O'Connor's dissent, signed also by Rehnquist and Scalia:

So I see no legal argument there. That's a political issue. Much disfavor has been brought upon judges who dared mentioned such a thing in the past. I take it you think they should act otherwise?

GP poster made no legal argument and would call those judges "pro-corporation". I PROVED him WRONG.

The legal argument is irrelevant, because the GP poster didn't bother to put any legal arguments into his fallacious strawman.

From Clarence Thomas' separate dissent:

Yet another lack of a legal argument. But yes, Thomas would want to review the Constitution, when it was written, persons could be held in bondage, and yes, even in Connecticut. So no, they weren't secure in their persons either.

But still, it's interesting how you support Supreme Court Justices taking an ACTIVIST role in decision-making, rather than deciding the law, they are deciding the morals of the case.

I see you've learned to regurgitate buzzwords, but that you're lacking in understanding.

Geez, your problem is you believe you are smart. I was responding to the FALSE POLITICAL argument of the GP poster.

And can't you fucking read? Nevermind, we know the answer to that...

I didn't say I supported ANYTHING. All I did was provide quotes from justices the GP poster WRONGLY assumed were "pro-corporation".

Yep, according to you, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas are the epitome of pro-corporation evil, right?

Doesn't matter about two of them anyway, they're dead. Thomas is still around, though, and if you want, we could read more of his opinions. You might find other things.

Again, what's the color of the sky on your planet? Cuz it ain't blue.

That's true, the sky has no such color, in fact, that color is an illusion, not a reality, and that's why the appearance of color changes based on what's lighting it.

Interesting how that relates to your own posting.

The sad thing is, you probably really do believe you're smart.

Yet you demonstrated you can't read when you attributed things to me that simply do not exist in my post.

And you can't even recognize a simple posting of facts that refutes a false politica

It's complete hypocrisy. They want to pay cheaper bills by forcing the government to regulate the telcos so the telcos treat every packet as equal.

Meanwhile Google and Facebook ban, censor or demonetize people whose opinions they dislike. Google turned a blind eye to abuse of their Youtube by paedophiles that eventually resulted in advertisers boycotting it.

And Google openly mess with the ranking on Youtube and Google search so people they agree with rise to the top and people they disagree with are hidden from search.

And Facebook launched a non neutral net in India

https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com...

I.e. they only support net neutrality for telcos because it will save them a few pennies on their broadband bills. Their platforms are not neutral politically in the US and outside the US they're happy to offer walled gardens which are not neutral either.

If they actually had any principles they'd want both them and the telcos to be common carriers. And not launch non neutral services outside the US.

The biggest "pro-corporation" Supreme Court decision I can think of

Then you aren't very much in the way of thinking about Supreme Court decisions, or intelligent enough to realize that "big" is not always the most informative. Sometimes a more comprehensive analysis is better.

Kelo v. City of New London - the land was taken for the benefit of Pfizer. [wikipedia.org]

Oh, you mean an eminent domain case?

Who voted for that? The "liberals".

I see, so your problem is you wanted to come up with a partisan case you can rail at, mysteriously allowing you to ignore others.

O'Connor's dissent, signed also by Rehnquist and Scalia:

So I see no legal argument there. That's a political issue. Much disfavor has been brought upon judges who dared mentioned such a thing in the past. I take it you think they should act otherwise?

From Clarence Thomas' separate dissent:

Yet another lack of a legal argument. But yes, Thomas would want to review the Constitution, when it was written, persons could be held in bondage, and yes, even in Connecticut. So no, they weren't secure in their persons either.

But still, it's interesting how you support Supreme Court Justices taking an ACTIVIST role in decision-making, rather than deciding the law, they are deciding the morals of the case.

Yep, according to you, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas are the epitome of pro-corporation evil, right?

Doesn't matter about two of them anyway, they're dead. Thomas is still around, though, and if you want, we could read more of his opinions. You might find other things.

Again, what's the color of the sky on your planet? Cuz it ain't blue.

That's true, the sky has no such color, in fact, that color is an illusion, not a reality, and that's why the appearance of color changes based on what's lighting it.

Interesting how that relates to your own posting.

Look at all the other countries laughing their asses off at us.

So? People laugh even when they're the fools.

This, as a Spaniard it always amuses me how can people vote without an official ID and how try to enforce that is considered racist.

So a Spaniard is uneducated as to the particulars of American bigotry and racism, as well as the political drive to keep IDs from people? This random, unknown, unidentified person is suppose to know better than any of the multiple federal court judges who have heard the testimony and seen the evidence in Texas, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Alabama, and more?

Sorry guys if it sounds rude, but it makes your Election look as the election from some African cheap dictatorship.

Yeah, an expensive African dictatorship would do a much better job of faking elections, but you know Republicans...cheap.

In here (Spain) you have to bring a national Country-provided ID, national driver's license or passport. All of them have a picture on them to easily figure out if you're that person or not.

Oh goodness, does he or she even know that the National Government of the United States only produces one of those(directly), and the latter is not used or useful to the vast majority of Americans who won't want to bother with the trouble and expense? Or does he or she even know about the court hearings that revealed how DMVs were impeding and misforming citizens who wanted IDs, including the free ones they were supposed to provide?

You wanna vote? Proof that you are a citizen with right to vote.

None of those documents provide any such thing. In fact....watch out.

Any other way sounds like bullshit to me.

That's nice, now what's it got to do with the actual problems people have with the Voter ID system as implemented?

Oh wait, you still deny knowledge of it.

When you have millions of illegals who know they can go vote without repercussion, who know they are at increased risk of deportation under one candidate over another, and who know their access to government provided services are liable to be limited under one candidate, of course some number will vote.

Then you can find them, and identify them. And invalidate every single election, because if you believe millions voted, then you have a serious problem with your entire government. Throw everybody out, and reform things.

They broke the law to cross the border. They will not scruple at voting illegally.

Of course, we've identified some Trump voters who acted illegally.

Odd that you're not calling for their prosecution. Where were their scruples?

Hmm.

It's not one example, it's just the latest outrage. It happens all the time. Your news doesn't report on it? Well I kind of doubt they're going to tell you when they're lying. I mean, duh. Watch the alternative media, get out of your bubble. It's been lie after lie after lie. Deliberate lies. I mean, just look at this.

Here's an example of the kind of propaganda the MSM engages in all the damn time. The following New York Times article contains a "minor factual error" that's not at all germane to the topic of the story: it refers to Philando Castille as "an unarmed black cafeteria worker" despite all sorts of reporting to the contrary that he was armed, informed the cop that he was armed, and was high as a kite at the time he reached down fast and sudden to grab his license. That's the sort of "tiny alleged problem" that matters in context.

New York Times prejudiced against India.

"Of all places" is a very patronising way to describe India, which is one of the leading manufacturers in automobile industry with various auto giants having its manufacturing facilities in India. This is not the first time NYTimes has shown its prejudice against India. Earlier, they had published an op-ed about India that was centered around the CBI raids at the residences of Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy, the founder promoters of NDTV. The editorial was titled 'India's Battered Free Press' which read like a textbook case of how it has been distorting the truth. NYTimes' former Delhi bureau chief Ellen Barry had also indulged in white-washing the 2002 Godhra carnage where as many as 59 people were burnt alive in a train. She had also spread lies to insult the victims of Godhra carnage in her report on Gulbarg Society verdict. NYTimes also encourages troll-like behaviour while reporting on democratically elected public representatives where being 'liberal' is associated with smoking, drinking and Hindu woman having Muslim friends and boyfriend.

https://theintercept.com/2017/11/05/four-viral-claims-spread-by-journalists-on-twitter-in-the-last-week-alone-that-are-false/

NYC covers an area of what, 30 square miles? if that?? Yet due to its population density, it has control over the entire state,

Really? It looks like the opposite to me. The NYC subway is falling apart, yet the NY state governor recently forced the subway system to pay millions of dollars to bail out ski resorts in upstate NY.

[citation needed]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

You're right though, really no provable connection between Trump and his campaign-manager son.

Sorry, I saw it in the New York Times.

Sorry I don't always consider Fox news a valid source, especially Shep. But keep on ignoring the actual bribes, we all see what liberals are now... Scream sexual harasser right up until one of their Senators is one then SUDDENLY it is acceptable.

Liberals stand for women? Not so much, not if those women might cost them a vote in the Senate. LOLS

The point of the (well written) original article was that Damore had handled things poorly due to his condition, not that his opinions arose due to his condition.

Wow, today's first winner in the reading comprehension test.

I'll do you further honour by not even awarding you a gold star, which you would humbly decline in any case, recognizing that this "amazing" feat of yours was merely degree of difficulty 1.0 (had Slashdot not degenerated into some kind of Special Olympic group hug for the reading impaired).

Pinker vs. Spelke — 2005

On 22 April 2005, Harvard University's Mind/Brain/Behavior Initiative held a debate on the public discussion that began on January 16th with the public comments by Lawrence Summers, president of Harvard, on sex differences between men and women and how they may relate to the careers of women in science. ...

It's interesting to note that since the controversy surrounding Summers' remarks began, there has been an astonishing absence of discussion of the relevant science ... you won't find it in the hundreds of articles in major newspapers; nor will find it in the Harvard faculty meetings where the president of the [smuggest] university in America was indicted for presenting controversial ideas.

This entire debate just seems fated to devolve into Plastafarianism.

Plastafarianism is a religious order that believes that human behaviour is so infinitely malleable, that no observed human behaviour whatsoever can't be adequately (and preferably) explained by environmental cues or conditioning.

Failure to share the perspective that such explanations are universally adequate, complete, satisfactory, and decisively preferable in all discourse dimensions will get your balls cut off.

Plastafarianism believes that whatever evolutionary biology brought to the male/female table has already undergone so many cultural face lifts, it's surpassed the 3.0 emjay* threshold of utterly obscured, obliterated, and eradicated (UOOE).

[*] An exponential scale where 0.5 emjays is defined as precisely fifty M.J. years (The Evolution Of Michael Jackson's Face 1958 FROM 2009).

Earnest discussion of effects above and beyond the 3.0 emjay threshold is either a form of cultural psychosis or culpable gullibility (at which point, the though police arrive in their giant white hats, bearing shrink-wrap David Byrne white suits, and powerful white heat guns).

One of the old tenets of feminism is that once we kick all the old hidebound alpha males out of political office, the world will become a kinder and gentler place—because the women who will slot in to replace these males really are wired differently, biologically. Unfortunately, the XX chromosome test hasn't proved much better at screening out assholes than your mother's tired, old Y chromosome test.

Why Some Teams Are Smarter Than Others — 18 January 2015

Finally, teams with more women outperformed teams with more men. Indeed, it appeared that it was not "diversity" (having equal numbers of men and women) that mattered for a team's intelligence, but simply having more women. This last effect, however, was partly explained by the fact that women, on average, were better at "mindreading" [cognitive empathy] than men.

Huh, women might perform better than men in some corporate settings due to a possibly innate biological advantage (though Plastifarianism would deny that any such biological factor—even a relatively strong effect*—could withstand the lawfully established 3.0 emjay UOOE social pertinence filter).

[*] Plastifarians are presently hard at work reha

Termites - who just *love* to feed on dead trees (including timber houses), collectively release a *lot* of methane and CO2.

http://www.ghgonline.org/metha...
https://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/...
http://www.nytimes.com/1982/10...

Termites are a major vector for converting trees back into greenhouse gases.

I provided you with a whole page of links and quotes where the NYT lied. WTF more is it going to take? Did you even read what Elon Musk wrote? "When the facts didn't suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts." They have the in-car telemetry that contradicts what the New York Times printed. There are tons of graphs with the source data. The Times lied again and again in the article.

Glenn Thrush of Politico was exposed seeking Podesta's approval of articles about Clinton. Even Thrush wrote "please don't tell anyone" and "I'm such a hack". The smoking gun: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

The consequences for Thrush? He was hired by the New York Times after the election. What does it say about a company that it does these kinds of things? How does a person like that ever find a job in journalism, much less at the NYT? What the hell?

Paul Krugman Lies. Gets 8k+ retweets. . . "Ok, It's not true". 160 retweets. It's a simple matter of psychology: post misleading news, wait for people to react, it's something known as "impression formation". Once an impression has been formed, it sticks. This is how they psyop the masses. This is how they persuade people. A lot of these people will never check the news, they'll never check the sources, they'll never look for the original testimony, and they'll never see the truth.

Too often we label whole groups from a perspective that uncritically accepts a stereotype or unfairly marginalizes them. As one reporter put it, words like moderate or centrist "inevitably incorporate a judgment about which views are sensible and which are extreme." We often apply "religious fundamentalists," another loaded term, to political activists who would describe themselves as Christian conservatives.

We particularly slip into these traps in feature stories when reporters and editors think they are merely presenting an interesting slice of life, with little awareness of the power of labels. We need to be more vigilant about the choice of language not only in the text but also in headlines, captions and display type.

-- Source: New York Times

So let me get this straight: if they would be working any other job to pay their 50K/year tuition bill, that income would be taxed before they get to pay the bill, correct ?

Teachers and researchers, their income is also taxed, correct ?

So why would one expect to not be taxed on what is very clearly income ?

Get some knowledge dumb-ass; they do work. From The House Just Voted to Bankrupt Graduate Students:

I’m a graduate student at M.I.T., where I study the neurological basis of mental health disorders. My peers and I work between 40 and 80 hours a week as classroom teachers and laboratory researchers, and in return, our universities provide us with a tuition waiver for school. For M.I.T. students, this waiver keeps us from having to pay a tuition bill of about $50,000 every year ...

To get the complete picture on gun deaths, you need to compare the USA to other countries.

If it were true that "more guns make us safer", then the USA should be the safest country in the world when it comes to gun deaths. Sadly, no.

The House tax bill also sets the capital gains tax rate on inherited property to 0%. No taxes ever for the wealthiest families. Not double taxation. Not single taxation. Zero taxation. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1...

Multiple women accused him of masturbating in front of them WITHOUT their consent. He admitted it.

Don't take my word for it, here's a couple of sources from different sides of the political spectrum confirming it:

http://www.foxnews.com/enterta...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1...

Without these waivers, you would have to work like the rest of us. Instead, you get free education.

Fuck you, whiny children. Get a job.

Get some knowledge dumb-ass; they do work. From The House Just Voted to Bankrupt Graduate Students:

I’m a graduate student at M.I.T., where I study the neurological basis of mental health disorders. My peers and I work between 40 and 80 hours a week as classroom teachers and laboratory researchers, and in return, our universities provide us with a tuition waiver for school. For M.I.T. students, this waiver keeps us from having to pay a tuition bill of about $50,000 every year ...

"The Times completely missed the story, and misled its readers in the process."

-- Source: New York Times

The entire media endorsed Hillary. How did anyone miss this? It was big news.

Use the median income. The minimum-wage is a red-herring:

No, it isn't, and I'll tell you why in just a moment.

The median income tells you whether wage raises are actually happening--unless your country is so broken that everyone makes minimum wage because the employers are your slavemasters.

Not everyone, but enough to make a significant difference.

Now I understand how smuggler networks made 5 billion, just in 2015... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0...

You mean like the successful Keystone pipeline that just leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in South Dakota?

My tripwires will not let me go to that site, but seriously? 20 years?

You think Detroit was destroyed in the last 20 years?

First, there was decentralization. Strikes, inspired by union negotiations and a refusal by blacks and whites to work side by side, were halting progress, according to "Detroit, Race and Uneven Development," co-written by Joe T. Darden. Factories were built in the suburbs and in neighboring states so that if there was a protest in one factory, work could still continue elsewhere. But as the factories spread out, so too did the job opportunities.

When the industry then experimented with automation, replacing assembly-line jobs with machinery, tens of thousands of jobs were lost. The industry shrank even more during the energy crisis in the 1970s and the economic recession in the 1980s. And foreign competition caused profits to plummet.

When you start hating foreigners, it doesn't take long to start discounting their research. Not that I'm comparing the degree, but you are aware that the Nazis didn't like 'Jewish' science, right?

You won't compare the degree, but I will. Your side thinks that reason itself is a white male construct.

The only reason SJWs haven't put everyone into concentration camps is because they can't get away with it.