Well, actually this is a symptom of the first government act, Rent Control. The city needs to limit the use of the property by the renters, otherwise it ruins their first government market manipulation. Rent control claims to keep the housing cheap. But, if I as a renter, rent an apt at rent control rates and them sublet it to someone else at market rate, then I am taking advantage of the same market that the landlord is prohibited from taking advantage of. Also, now no one gets to live their cheap.
Everyone is back to paying market rates. Oh the humanity!
By your logic, you are a poor loser because the last election did not give you the power to force the funding of your latest freebie at my expense or allow you to dictate more of the way, I run, my life.
First, it's completely corrupt to fund the entire budget in one bill. That is what allows all this pork in the process.
Second, the Republicans have not had a chance to end Obamacare. We all know that with only the power of one house of congress they cannot repeal it.
Third, the Republicans have passed a bill funding all the rest of the government except the ACA (Obamacare)
.
Obama says, "if you don't fund everything, then I won't allow the funding of anything." Seems like Obama is the one shutting down the government.
Seriously, this is a spending bill. The Republicans are within their rights to limit spending. (In this case, the ACA).. The Democrats are also within their power to say, "Well in that case I'm going to take my ball and go home." Not fund anything.
The Republicans ran on ending Obamacare. They won the House. The entire house was up for election. Only 1/3 of the Senate was up for election. They may have won the Senate too, if all members were up, but we'll never know. Anyway, seems the Rs have no choice, but to do what they were elected to do.
I want neither, health insurance nor gov single payer. I want the freedom to pay my own way. The cost of health insurance, because of gov mandates, is too high to justify, if you are young and healthy. I should be allowed to make an adult decision, not to have health insurance. You can write me off if I get an extreme disease at a young age.
Gov single payer takes away my choice to just pay as I go. Gov should not be allowed to impose on your freedom in that way.
Most of your health care costs in life are in you later years. If you have your whole life to save for them, then you can make a decision to spend *your* hard earned money on things today, or on healthcare for later in life. It should be *your* choice. It's your hard earned money.
If you don't save, the gov should not take other peoples hard earned money, against their will, to save you.
If a charity wants to save the destitute, that's fine. No coercion is involved with charities.
While I agree that it is in the consumer's best interest to have Apple open the store to all comers I don't agree that the FTC has legal grounds to slap them with fines (I know you didn't SAY that they had it - just sort of implied that maybe they could). Anyway, the lack of open access to the store is why I don't have an iPhone and instead waited and waited and waited and finally got a Droid (which I am thrilled with). It's also why anyone who cares about this type of issue shouldn't get an iPhone. We all talk about voting with our wallets. Some even practice it. But I sure see a lot of iPhones in the hands of folks who really (if they practiced what they preached) should have known better.
How do you feel about people who new better, bought the phone and jail-broke it?
My understanding was that the hardware vendors knew that because Microsoft had started to advertise Vista and that it would require better hardware, that no-one would buy any hardware until Vista was released.
That threatened to destroy a couple of quarters for HW manufacturers.
That's why they created the certification program. Seems like this is a matter of false advertising, if they sold systems that didn't actually run Vista.
But, there are a finite number of hours in a school day, and a finite amount of material that parents are willing to let their children learn before they complain that it interferes with the dozen after-school activities that the parents have scheduled.
Learning a 2nd/3rd language is a huge waste of time. What do you really learn by adding a list of words to your brain that is a copy of the words you already know, but in a different language?
Think of the opportunity cost of all thing other things you could have learned instead that would actually help you understand the world around you.
Just pick a language already, any language (does not have to be English). There would be so much saved effort in understanding each other and passing on knowledge between civilizations. Best of all, it would make it harder for politicians to say one thing to one group and something else to another, hiding it based on language differences.
What do I not understand here?
We buy insurance because we are uncertain about our future prospects, so we can't prepare for them. Insurance is providing a useful service, what's evil about that?
Anyway, if testing is going to remove some or most of that uncertainty, we don't need insurance. Those who now now they are unlikely to get those diseases can now save the money to put toward their family, charity, etc. Those that now know that they are likely to have a disease, can adjust. They may choose to plan for these costs and save more, or they may plan to spend the money and enjoy what ever time they have.
Why should the government come in and remove these choices from people. Why should you be forced to pay for your future healthcare costs if you don't want to. Or why should you be forced to pay for someone else.
We should be allowed to choose.
It's called freedom!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, actually this is a symptom of the first government act, Rent Control. The city needs to limit the use of the property by the renters, otherwise it ruins their first government market manipulation. Rent control claims to keep the housing cheap. But, if I as a renter, rent an apt at rent control rates and them sublet it to someone else at market rate, then I am taking advantage of the same market that the landlord is prohibited from taking advantage of. Also, now no one gets to live their cheap.
Everyone is back to paying market rates. Oh the humanity!
It doesn't sit well with me and I won't do business that way.
Seems like the customer who can't afford the upfront cost of panels is benefiting from cheaper energy bills.
How is this unfair?
Democracy isn't about throwing a fit and refusing to do your damned job (passing a budget) because the *other guy* got something you didn't like.
... or you aren't getting something you want?
By your logic, you are a poor loser because the last election did not give you the power to force the funding of your latest freebie at my expense or allow you to dictate more of the way, I run, my life.
First, it's completely corrupt to fund the entire budget in one bill. That is what allows all this pork in the process.
Second, the Republicans have not had a chance to end Obamacare. We all know that with only the power of one house of congress they cannot repeal it.
Third, the Republicans have passed a bill funding all the rest of the government except the ACA (Obamacare)
.
Obama says, "if you don't fund everything, then I won't allow the funding of anything." Seems like Obama is the one shutting down the government.
Seriously, this is a spending bill. The Republicans are within their rights to limit spending. (In this case, the ACA).. The Democrats are also within their power to say, "Well in that case I'm going to take my ball and go home." Not fund anything.
The Republicans ran on ending Obamacare. They won the House. The entire house was up for election. Only 1/3 of the Senate was up for election. They may have won the Senate too, if all members were up, but we'll never know. Anyway, seems the Rs have no choice, but to do what they were elected to do.
I want neither, health insurance nor gov single payer. I want the freedom to pay my own way. The cost of health insurance, because of gov mandates, is too high to justify, if you are young and healthy. I should be allowed to make an adult decision, not to have health insurance. You can write me off if I get an extreme disease at a young age.
Gov single payer takes away my choice to just pay as I go. Gov should not be allowed to impose on your freedom in that way.
Most of your health care costs in life are in you later years. If you have your whole life to save for them, then you can make a decision to spend *your* hard earned money on things today, or on healthcare for later in life. It should be *your* choice. It's your hard earned money.
If you don't save, the gov should not take other peoples hard earned money, against their will, to save you.
If a charity wants to save the destitute, that's fine. No coercion is involved with charities.
IMHO.
I know, silly suggestion. But lets try getting the most qualified speakers we can, and ignore what color they are.
While I agree that it is in the consumer's best interest to have Apple open the store to all comers I don't agree that the FTC has legal grounds to slap them with fines (I know you didn't SAY that they had it - just sort of implied that maybe they could). Anyway, the lack of open access to the store is why I don't have an iPhone and instead waited and waited and waited and finally got a Droid (which I am thrilled with). It's also why anyone who cares about this type of issue shouldn't get an iPhone. We all talk about voting with our wallets. Some even practice it. But I sure see a lot of iPhones in the hands of folks who really (if they practiced what they preached) should have known better.
How do you feel about people who new better, bought the phone and jail-broke it?
My understanding was that the hardware vendors knew that because Microsoft had started to advertise Vista and that it would require better hardware, that no-one would buy any hardware until Vista was released.
That threatened to destroy a couple of quarters for HW manufacturers.
That's why they created the certification program. Seems like this is a matter of false advertising, if they sold systems that didn't actually run Vista.
But, there are a finite number of hours in a school day, and a finite amount of material that parents are willing to let their children learn before they complain that it interferes with the dozen after-school activities that the parents have scheduled.
Learning a 2nd/3rd language is a huge waste of time. What do you really learn by adding a list of words to your brain that is a copy of the words you already know, but in a different language?
Think of the opportunity cost of all thing other things you could have learned instead that would actually help you understand the world around you.
Just pick a language already, any language (does not have to be English). There would be so much saved effort in understanding each other and passing on knowledge between civilizations. Best of all, it would make it harder for politicians to say one thing to one group and something else to another, hiding it based on language differences.
What do I not understand here? We buy insurance because we are uncertain about our future prospects, so we can't prepare for them. Insurance is providing a useful service, what's evil about that? Anyway, if testing is going to remove some or most of that uncertainty, we don't need insurance. Those who now now they are unlikely to get those diseases can now save the money to put toward their family, charity, etc. Those that now know that they are likely to have a disease, can adjust. They may choose to plan for these costs and save more, or they may plan to spend the money and enjoy what ever time they have. Why should the government come in and remove these choices from people. Why should you be forced to pay for your future healthcare costs if you don't want to. Or why should you be forced to pay for someone else. We should be allowed to choose. It's called freedom!