Re:I don't hate the war, just GWB
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
You know, I couldn't make you a foe because regardless of your opinions you present them in a well thought out fashion. You are obviously not a sheep and I respect that. I couldn't brand you friend either because your fist post sounded a bit on the anti-american side for my taste. We shall see.....
I won't try and tell you that what you say is untrue. I am not sure if you are right or if the pro war side is right. War is always a bad thing and in my opinion use of force should always be a last resort.
A big part of my point, however was that the US and it's allies are not the ones that made the Security Council irrelevant. I whole heartedly disagree. The UN as a body makes a joke of itself by not standing up to it's own stated goals and resolutions and by wallowing in inaction when members break those same reolutions. Action does not have to suggest that the UN attack every country that acts in a contrary fashion, but often times threat of force is the only thing that rougue states will respond to.
What action was taken by the security council when Saddam kicked inspectors out of Iraq several years ago? None.
I suggest reading the text of the security council's 1441 resolution. The language is very strong in the expectations that were dictated. Saddam immediately began checking out how much "wiggle room" there was in that contract. If not, it would not have taken several months for inspectors to keep finding bits here and dribs and drabs there. The evidence is fairly clear.
So my question to you is, what do we ( an I do mean a collective we, not a U.S. we) do to demonstrate to states that would defy the security council in this fashion that there are consequences for their actions? None of the tactics used so far have worked, so help come up with a better idea. "More of the same" is not useful. It hasn't worked, and there is no reason to believe that it will work in the future.
Re:I don't hate the war, just GWB
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Could it not also be said that by refusing to enforce any of the resolutions drafted in response to the conduct of Iraq under Saddam Hussein's leadership that the UN has made itself obsolete?
Think about this. This guy invaded Kuwait in '91. Everyone said "Bad Saddam...you must be punished! Disarm now!". So Saddam put up a farce for the first 5-6 years, then kicked out the inspectors.
When the inspectors went back in under the new UN resolution, the language of which is VERY strong (you can read it here) Iraq was still not complying. The UN did nothing. It had done nothing for 12 years. At what point do you say "screw the security council!"?
I don't mean that to be antagonistic, but just to throw the question out there. When will the UN make itself relevant again? I believe in the concept, and that if you sign the charter that you should abide by the rulings. But...as soon as countries don't and nothing is done, the organization might as well not exist.
You make good points. The company you refer to was actually run by Cheney (sp?), but it is still true.
The place I would argue is only in the veto area. Do some research into the ties France, Germany, and Russia have with Iraq and the types of assistance they have provided over the last 12 years. It flies completely in the face of the UN Security resolutions, and I would speculate that these countries just don't want to be found guilty of such things in the international arena.
One thing that I really think people should take from what you say is that they should try not to be a member of what I call "The fellowship of the Sheep", or those that blindly go through life accepting the spoonfed propaganda that those who have like views feed them through variou media outlets.
Wishing americans dead is a good recipie for foe development.
I would not argue that attacking Iraq was a good idea. I would argue that now that we are there, we should support our troops.
Hussien has run his country into the ground in an oppressive dictatorship. People in the middle east protesting the US are also protesting Hussien at the same time. Very odd to see.
While I don't think it gives any country the right to attack another, I will say a few things in defense of the US.
1) The US gives more foreign aid in money, food, and medical supplies than any other country. This was true in 2001 and 2002, and previous to that it was second to japan since the early 90's. Perhaps you call this an extension of foreign policy, but I call it our money to help others. 11.4 billion worth in 2003. Those are just the ODA numbers. For the real story look here
2) Whenever any country needs assistance militarily they come to the US. We have fought wars and spilled the blood of our citizens in 2 world wars, the korean war, the vietnam war, the gulf war, and several more minor conflicts. Perhaps you call this an extension of foreign policy, but I call it our blood to help others.
3) Whenever a country has needed assistance to rebuild after such a war we help them do that. We pay for the war, and we pay for the rebuilding. Perhaps you call this an extension of foreign policy, but I call it our money to help others.
If it weren't for #2, all of Europe would be eating schnitzel twice over, and if it weren't for #3 Germany wouldn't be able to eat at all.
Bush's diplomatic skills are bad, but the hearts of the US population are in the right place. We do want freedom for the people in Iraq. We are sad every time we hear about another casualty on the radio in the war. Our hearts go out every time we hear about someone going hungry somewhere. The aid numbers above only reflest what the govt. does.
This Link provides the ODA numbers, and while in contrast to the link above, does also speak of the total charitable donations of the US population, which was around 34 billion last year. That's a total of at least 45 billion dollars in aid.
But...if you want to kill us off, that's fine. Just don't come knocking if you need anything.
Don't you love that, however useless this review would have been, the big deciding factor was that the game would be more fun to replay that the photo of the dumpster.
1) That's even MORE stupid.
2) If the picture had been a close-up of Natalie Portman naked instead of a dumpster, the replayability factor would have to be a 10 for the camera!
Pardon my troll. Content is everything, whether on slashdot or in your digicam.
Should it be noted that only a small percentage of the US population got drafted to go to vietnam. taking your chances in the lottery was likely a more realistic way to avoid conflict.
Joining the guard and doing a necessary duty for your country is probably a lot more than most/. posters can claim. If you haven't given up your time to do it, I would not shake a stick at those who have.
usually involves resetting her desktop to the current grandchild picture......which isn't in the right file format......which can't be changed on her machine because she doesn't have the app......which is on the local server, but can't be installed because first the keyserver software needs to go in......so the picture gets e-mailed to me so I can convert it...
and there goes 30-45 minutes because last week's picture wasn't good enough. oi.
hey are chopping out big market segemnts
on
Office 2003 and XML
·
· Score: 0
Most of us in the advertising and marketing fields are not dependant on just windows products. The lionshare of the advertising market is Mac based and could not be generally assumed to be sharing anything via XP servers. Moves like this will put a crimp on collaborative projects in the market segment.
More than likely this will create bad backlash and M$ will have to do some back pedalling to correct the mistake. It is also the type of move that will discourage big bunches of people from bothering to upgrade.
Some people don't learn unless you hit them with a brick.
If there were a system that charged people for each time a mail left their organization's server for another organization's server, this would just about kill spam. It is used because it is free. Make it cost money and the problem is solved.
How could this money be put to use? Better internet services, perhaps to offset ISP costs, etc..
This type of change would be very difficult to implement, and is perhaps not ideal. It is an option to not only keep spammers from bouncing e-mails around, but it will also REALLY make people with open relay recognize that it is a "bad thing" and shut it down. Nothing like getting a big old bill for a bunch of e-mail someone bounced off of your server to make you think about investing a small amount to fix the issue. People might take their internet services more seriously, and the IT industry might even see a bit of a boost fromk the needs of people to get compliant and out of trouble.
You said "Whahism is the strict, inflexible interpretation of islam, and also has a side order of hate . It is larger to blame for what we have experienced."
I think by the sounds of this you are a muslim, but I may be off in my assumption. I don't think I am way off in saying that it sounds like you know at least something of what you speak.
So my question is, if "Whahism" is the "strict, inflexible interpretation" of islam, then does it stand to reason that this is truly what islam teaches? Strict interpretation implies that these people are taking the literal meaning from the holy book.
If that is true, then would it also make sense for those that do not believe this or teach this are truly not muslim, but have developed their own interpretation of the religion and of a gentler allah? Would this in effect be similar to the protestant reformation of the Roman Catholic church into new Christian sects?
If that is, or technically should be the case, then would it not be in the best interests of the peaceable muslims around the world to declare it so?
I agree that the sins of christians from the crusades are abominable, but I think most would have to agree that those sins were committed in a different world, and a world that we have risen above. I use "we" losely to imply the more technologically, culturally, and socially advanced societies, those that one might term the more civilized nations. It is time for the muslims of those nations to help their brothers rise above this as well.
YES!! And this is never reported as part of the teacher's yearly earnings!
You can make some good cake tending bar for 10 weeks in the summer. knock it down to 6 weeks vaca (*sniff* poor things;) and you could make a nice extra 8K AND probably only have to claim about 40% of it in taxes (not exactly honest, but people earning tip wages are required by law to claim a minimum of 10% of their check totals...and everyone I know claims exactly the minimum)
How often have you sat down and played a game for a while and thought to yourself "wouldn't it be cool if it could work this way?
I play some computer games, role-playing games, and miniature games. To be able to have some impact on the content and playability would be fantastic, especially if you got paid for it.
This is of course assuming that the company in question wanted your opinion and not for you to be a lemming.
I believe that was the case for you and could be for others. And, I have friends that are teachers and that is not the case. Some put in lots of time and others put in very minimal time.
I am certainly not trying to make absolutes here...just point out that the information discrepencies are significant.
Something to consider...I don't know your level of experience teaching, but I would guess that the one class is it. It would seem to me that the time you spent preparing and grading would go down significantly with experience. Once you've taught the class a few times and know the relative outline, you can re-use it. That would tend to suggest that the "average hours" numbers really should be broken into experience levels.
And hey.,..the 16 weeks vacation or so doesn't exactly suck. The pay numbers are also skewed by this...
What's interesting is the way that lots of these surveys report and deal with those numbers.
For instance, if you were to read the information here:
http://www.calnews.com/Archives/1YB_II_sal.htm It would suggest that full-time teacher hours worked per year range from around 1350 to 1820. If you take this and extrapolate it to 40 hours by 50 weeks as most full-time people do, the wages earned per year , say $37k at the tall end of the hour scale, translates to about 50K based on an average work year.
Then, at AFT.org, they present a different picture. they show teacher wages in comparison to other jobs and even do a little cost of living index (which looks a bit skewed to me, comparing what I know of living both in Maine and in Massachusetts). Somewhere in there it even shows that in Maine, 33.5ish percent of the money paid in salary is paid again in bennies.
As I said in my first post, it was just something I read ina a magazine. Not anything substantial, just some magazine survey.
Pay is not always the most important consideration. My finace was a teacher, but she left the profession for exactly the reasons you describe, even though at the time the best work she could find was at a grocery store in the cash office.
Private schools, especially catholic schools, often pay less than public schools do because they do not have the same level of funding that public schools do. They depend on tuition and alumni contributions to be successful. The thing is that in those cases, the parents tend to be more involved with the kids, even if only because they are paying for the school, but more likely because they cared enough to pay for the school (AND could afford to). this is not to say that parents of public school kids don't care, but more to say that the level of involvement by the parents of private school children tends to be higher and therefore the school atmosphere is often better.
It is a sad state when in order to protect the rights of students, the teachers have to pay the price. Often the actions of one teacher will cause a frenzy because everyone worries about their kids. The ironic thing is that we all have heard the saying "don't punish everyone for the actions of one person".
Cest la Vie. I don't have any kids yet, but the prospect is nerve-wracking.
Interesting. Well...you never know where magazine surveys are gettign their information. I am not the god of Maine teacher salaries, so I certainly don't know for sure. It's possible that the information was skewed by university professors.
Anyways...47K for teachers on average would make me happy. It's a good wage for a respectable profession. 20K would not make me happy. Hopefully this will become a general correction trend.
Once again, it was in a magazine. Like, with paper and ink and stuff, so it would not be in my browser history.
I am not saying that they are overpaid...just that they are not being underpaid.
And...as I said...this does not mean there aren't other problems such as old books, schools in disrepair, poor food, not enough teachers/classrooms too large. These are all problems that need to be fixed. JUST PERHAPS salary is not one of them.
While it sounds like I am pulling this out of my butt because I can't quite remember what magazine I am quoting from, last week my g.f. and I were looking over a list of occupational salaries. The average teacher in Maine makes $47k per year. That's better than Massachusetts, where the costs of living are significantly higher.
I agree that there are problems in the schools. Better food and exposure to arts is important. higher pay for the teachers in this case does not appear to be a need.
I agree with this. Being a reporter doesn't give you the right to enter a top secret area illegally. Of course, the example is a bit more extreme in nature, but I guess it gets the point across.
It does give you the right to report in print that you have done so, regardless of how stupid it is to announce to the world just where they can easily penetrate U.S. security.
In the end I wouldn't be surprised to see his butt thrown in jail for admitting to violating top secret security in print and compromising U.S. national security.
I am always surprised at the willingness of the media in the U.S. to compromise the safety of the people by leaking any information they can get their hands on. I won't argue their right to do it, just the horse-sense of it.
I work in the printing/publishing industry, and paper is the largest single single expens by miles, including the lease on the press (big), rent/mortgage (big), the ink (bigger), or payroll (bigger still).
To make $5 million in grodd profit, you could easily spend almost 6 in just ink and paper! Then add in the other expenses.
Publishing on the web is nothing comparitively. Even the consumable cost of T-3 bandwidth would be a dron in the well by comparison.
Speaking from an American point of view, I think it has something to do with our sense of personal space and what things invade that space
Think of all the distances we have in day to day life. There's bank line/teller distance, ATM distance, (for men) Urinal distance (Different at a football game from at the mall) , elevator distance (which changes per number of people on the elevator), bar room distance, and so on.
Cellphones invade some American's sense of space. Not everyone's, and perhaps not just Americans, but certainly we are high on the scale.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, I couldn't make you a foe because regardless of your opinions you present them in a well thought out fashion. You are obviously not a sheep and I respect that. I couldn't brand you friend either because your fist post sounded a bit on the anti-american side for my taste. We shall see.....
I won't try and tell you that what you say is untrue. I am not sure if you are right or if the pro war side is right. War is always a bad thing and in my opinion use of force should always be a last resort.
A big part of my point, however was that the US and it's allies are not the ones that made the Security Council irrelevant. I whole heartedly disagree. The UN as a body makes a joke of itself by not standing up to it's own stated goals and resolutions and by wallowing in inaction when members break those same reolutions. Action does not have to suggest that the UN attack every country that acts in a contrary fashion, but often times threat of force is the only thing that rougue states will respond to.
What action was taken by the security council when Saddam kicked inspectors out of Iraq several years ago? None.
I suggest reading the text of the security council's 1441 resolution. The language is very strong in the expectations that were dictated. Saddam immediately began checking out how much "wiggle room" there was in that contract. If not, it would not have taken several months for inspectors to keep finding bits here and dribs and drabs there. The evidence is fairly clear.
So my question to you is, what do we ( an I do mean a collective we, not a U.S. we) do to demonstrate to states that would defy the security council in this fashion that there are consequences for their actions? None of the tactics used so far have worked, so help come up with a better idea. "More of the same" is not useful. It hasn't worked, and there is no reason to believe that it will work in the future.
Could it not also be said that by refusing to enforce any of the resolutions drafted in response to the conduct of Iraq under Saddam Hussein's leadership that the UN has made itself obsolete?
Think about this. This guy invaded Kuwait in '91. Everyone said "Bad Saddam...you must be punished! Disarm now!". So Saddam put up a farce for the first 5-6 years, then kicked out the inspectors.
When the inspectors went back in under the new UN resolution, the language of which is VERY strong (you can read it here)
Iraq was still not complying. The UN did nothing. It had done nothing for 12 years. At what point do you say "screw the security council!"?
I don't mean that to be antagonistic, but just to throw the question out there. When will the UN make itself relevant again? I believe in the concept, and that if you sign the charter that you should abide by the rulings. But...as soon as countries don't and nothing is done, the organization might as well not exist.
You make good points. The company you refer to was actually run by Cheney (sp?), but it is still true.
The place I would argue is only in the veto area. Do some research into the ties France, Germany, and Russia have with Iraq and the types of assistance they have provided over the last 12 years. It flies completely in the face of the UN Security resolutions, and I would speculate that these countries just don't want to be found guilty of such things in the international arena.
One thing that I really think people should take from what you say is that they should try not to be a member of what I call "The fellowship of the Sheep", or those that blindly go through life accepting the spoonfed propaganda that those who have like views feed them through variou media outlets.
Wishing americans dead is a good recipie for foe development.
I would not argue that attacking Iraq was a good idea. I would argue that now that we are there, we should support our troops.
Hussien has run his country into the ground in an oppressive dictatorship. People in the middle east protesting the US are also protesting Hussien at the same time. Very odd to see.
While I don't think it gives any country the right to attack another, I will say a few things in defense of the US.
1) The US gives more foreign aid in money, food, and medical supplies than any other country. This was true in 2001 and 2002, and previous to that it was second to japan since the early 90's. Perhaps you call this an extension of foreign policy, but I call it our money to help others. 11.4 billion worth in 2003. Those are just the ODA numbers. For the real story look here
2) Whenever any country needs assistance militarily they come to the US. We have fought wars and spilled the blood of our citizens in 2 world wars, the korean war, the vietnam war, the gulf war, and several more minor conflicts. Perhaps you call this an extension of foreign policy, but I call it our blood to help others.
3) Whenever a country has needed assistance to rebuild after such a war we help them do that. We pay for the war, and we pay for the rebuilding. Perhaps you call this an extension of foreign policy, but I call it our money to help others.
If it weren't for #2, all of Europe would be eating schnitzel twice over, and if it weren't for #3 Germany wouldn't be able to eat at all.
Bush's diplomatic skills are bad, but the hearts of the US population are in the right place. We do want freedom for the people in Iraq. We are sad every time we hear about another casualty on the radio in the war. Our hearts go out every time we hear about someone going hungry somewhere. The aid numbers above only reflest what the govt.
does.
This Link provides the ODA numbers, and while in contrast to the link above, does also speak of the total charitable donations of the US population, which was around 34 billion last year. That's a total of at least 45 billion dollars in aid.
But...if you want to kill us off, that's fine. Just don't come knocking if you need anything.
right...well...Natalie is arbitrary. Whatever gets you rocks off would work.
grits?
Don't you love that, however useless this review would have been, the big deciding factor was that the game would be more fun to replay that the photo of the dumpster.
1) That's even MORE stupid.
2) If the picture had been a close-up of Natalie Portman naked instead of a dumpster, the replayability factor would have to be a 10 for the camera!
Pardon my troll. Content is everything, whether on slashdot or in your digicam.
Should it be noted that only a small percentage of the US population got drafted to go to vietnam. taking your chances in the lottery was likely a more realistic way to avoid conflict.
/. posters can claim. If you haven't given up your time to do it, I would not shake a stick at those who have.
Joining the guard and doing a necessary duty for your country is probably a lot more than most
usually involves resetting her desktop to the current grandchild picture... ...which isn't in the right file format... ...which can't be changed on her machine because she doesn't have the app... ...which is on the local server, but can't be installed because first the keyserver software needs to go in... ...so the picture gets e-mailed to me so I can convert it...
and there goes 30-45 minutes because last week's picture wasn't good enough. oi.
Most of us in the advertising and marketing fields are not dependant on just windows products. The lionshare of the advertising market is Mac based and could not be generally assumed to be sharing anything via XP servers. Moves like this will put a crimp on collaborative projects in the market segment.
More than likely this will create bad backlash and M$ will have to do some back pedalling to correct the mistake. It is also the type of move that will discourage big bunches of people from bothering to upgrade.
Some people don't learn unless you hit them with a brick.
If there were a system that charged people for each time a mail left their organization's server for another organization's server, this would just about kill spam. It is used because it is free. Make it cost money and the problem is solved.
How could this money be put to use? Better internet services, perhaps to offset ISP costs, etc..
This type of change would be very difficult to implement, and is perhaps not ideal. It is an option to not only keep spammers from bouncing e-mails around, but it will also REALLY make people with open relay recognize that it is a "bad thing" and shut it down. Nothing like getting a big old bill for a bunch of e-mail someone bounced off of your server to make you think about investing a small amount to fix the issue. People might take their internet services more seriously, and the IT industry might even see a bit of a boost fromk the needs of people to get compliant and out of trouble.
Just an idea...
You said "Whahism is the strict, inflexible interpretation of islam, and also has a side order of hate . It is larger to blame for what we have experienced ."
I think by the sounds of this you are a muslim, but I may be off in my assumption. I don't think I am way off in saying that it sounds like you know at least something of what you speak.
So my question is, if "Whahism" is the "strict, inflexible interpretation" of islam, then does it stand to reason that this is truly what islam teaches? Strict interpretation implies that these people are taking the literal meaning from the holy book.
If that is true, then would it also make sense for those that do not believe this or teach this are truly not muslim, but have developed their own interpretation of the religion and of a gentler allah? Would this in effect be similar to the protestant reformation of the Roman Catholic church into new Christian sects?
If that is, or technically should be the case, then would it not be in the best interests of the peaceable muslims around the world to declare it so?
I agree that the sins of christians from the crusades are abominable, but I think most would have to agree that those sins were committed in a different world, and a world that we have risen above. I use "we" losely to imply the more technologically, culturally, and socially advanced societies, those that one might term the more civilized nations. It is time for the muslims of those nations to help their brothers rise above this as well.
Do cans of AOL CDs count as spam? They probably taste better.
YES!! And this is never reported as part of the teacher's yearly earnings!
;) and you could make a nice extra 8K AND probably only have to claim about 40% of it in taxes (not exactly honest, but people earning tip wages are required by law to claim a minimum of 10% of their check totals...and everyone I know claims exactly the minimum)
You can make some good cake tending bar for 10 weeks in the summer. knock it down to 6 weeks vaca
(*sniff* poor things
It is called "chinese overtime", but not officially.
The formula is( (weekly salary/number of hours worked)*(number of hours worked - 40) + weekly salary.
It's not a very fair formula, but it is legal as long as it meets minimum wage standards.
How often have you sat down and played a game for a while and thought to yourself "wouldn't it be cool if it could work this way?
I play some computer games, role-playing games, and miniature games. To be able to have some impact on the content and playability would be fantastic, especially if you got paid for it.
This is of course assuming that the company in question wanted your opinion and not for you to be a lemming.
I believe that was the case for you and could be for others. And, I have friends that are teachers and that is not the case. Some put in lots of time and others put in very minimal time.
I am certainly not trying to make absolutes here...just point out that the information discrepencies are significant.
Something to consider...I don't know your level of experience teaching, but I would guess that the one class is it. It would seem to me that the time you spent preparing and grading would go down significantly with experience. Once you've taught the class a few times and know the relative outline, you can re-use it. That would tend to suggest that the "average hours" numbers really should be broken into experience levels.
And hey.,..the 16 weeks vacation or so doesn't exactly suck. The pay numbers are also skewed by this...
What's interesting is the way that lots of these surveys report and deal with those numbers.
For instance, if you were to read the information here:
http://www.calnews.com/Archives/1YB_II_sal.htm
It would suggest that full-time teacher hours worked per year range from around 1350 to 1820. If you take this and extrapolate it to 40 hours by 50 weeks as most full-time people do, the wages earned per year , say $37k at the tall end of the hour scale, translates to about 50K based on an average work year.
Then, at AFT.org, they present a different picture. they show teacher wages in comparison to other jobs and even do a little cost of living index (which looks a bit skewed to me, comparing what I know of living both in Maine and in Massachusetts). Somewhere in there it even shows that in Maine, 33.5ish percent of the money paid in salary is paid again in bennies.
As I said in my first post, it was just something I read ina a magazine. Not anything substantial, just some magazine survey.
Pay is not always the most important consideration. My finace was a teacher, but she left the profession for exactly the reasons you describe, even though at the time the best work she could find was at a grocery store in the cash office.
Private schools, especially catholic schools, often pay less than public schools do because they do not have the same level of funding that public schools do. They depend on tuition and alumni contributions to be successful. The thing is that in those cases, the parents tend to be more involved with the kids, even if only because they are paying for the school, but more likely because they cared enough to pay for the school (AND could afford to). this is not to say that parents of public school kids don't care, but more to say that the level of involvement by the parents of private school children tends to be higher and therefore the school atmosphere is often better.
It is a sad state when in order to protect the rights of students, the teachers have to pay the price. Often the actions of one teacher will cause a frenzy because everyone worries about their kids. The ironic thing is that we all have heard the saying "don't punish everyone for the actions of one person".
Cest la Vie. I don't have any kids yet, but the prospect is nerve-wracking.
Interesting. Well...you never know where magazine surveys are gettign their information. I am not the god of Maine teacher salaries, so I certainly don't know for sure. It's possible that the information was skewed by university professors.
Anyways...47K for teachers on average would make me happy. It's a good wage for a respectable profession. 20K would not make me happy. Hopefully this will become a general correction trend.
Once again, it was in a magazine. Like, with paper and ink and stuff, so it would not be in my browser history.
I am not saying that they are overpaid...just that they are not being underpaid.
And...as I said...this does not mean there aren't other problems such as old books, schools in disrepair, poor food, not enough teachers/classrooms too large. These are all problems that need to be fixed. JUST PERHAPS salary is not one of them.
no need to troll...
While it sounds like I am pulling this out of my butt because I can't quite remember what magazine I am quoting from, last week my g.f. and I were looking over a list of occupational salaries. The average teacher in Maine makes $47k per year. That's better than Massachusetts, where the costs of living are significantly higher.
I agree that there are problems in the schools. Better food and exposure to arts is important. higher pay for the teachers in this case does not appear to be a need.
You know...however much I am inclined to disagree with the lawn analogy vs. the top secret government base, that was some funny shit
I agree with this. Being a reporter doesn't give you the right to enter a top secret area illegally. Of course, the example is a bit more extreme in nature, but I guess it gets the point across.
It does give you the right to report in print that you have done so, regardless of how stupid it is to announce to the world just where they can easily penetrate U.S. security.
In the end I wouldn't be surprised to see his butt thrown in jail for admitting to violating top secret security in print and compromising U.S. national security.
I am always surprised at the willingness of the media in the U.S. to compromise the safety of the people by leaking any information they can get their hands on. I won't argue their right to do it, just the horse-sense of it.
I work in the printing/publishing industry, and paper is the largest single single expens by miles, including the lease on the press (big), rent/mortgage (big), the ink (bigger), or payroll (bigger still).
To make $5 million in grodd profit, you could easily spend almost 6 in just ink and paper! Then add in the other expenses.
Publishing on the web is nothing comparitively. Even the consumable cost of T-3 bandwidth would be a dron in the well by comparison.
Speaking from an American point of view, I think it has something to do with our sense of personal space and what things invade that space
Think of all the distances we have in day to day life. There's bank line/teller distance, ATM distance, (for men) Urinal distance (Different at a football game from at the mall) , elevator distance (which changes per number of people on the elevator), bar room distance, and so on.
Cellphones invade some American's sense of space. Not everyone's, and perhaps not just Americans, but certainly we are high on the scale.