I played in a hockey game as a kid where the fumes from the Zamboni caused numerous players on both teams to get sick on the bench - you would be surprised how difficult it is to barf with a mouth guard in your mouth. But, hey, the ice was in great condition!
It's a good suggestion - unfortunately in my hometown, as I am sure is the case in many other places as well, the infrastructure is not designed to allow for bicycle and foot traffic. There are not sidewalks in many places and it would be suicide to try to ride my bike on the highway. We've become so accustomed to driving everywhere that designers often ignore the possibility (probably for cost reasons) of alternative modes of transportation.
Gravel roads are also more dangerous than paved roads. There are many gravel roads in the rural areas of my state and it is quite common to hear about a 1-car roll-over death on a gravel road.
You are right - it reminds me of when folks were rejecting the entire budget because it was 2% earmarks. 2%.
In any case, this lawsuit seems very strange. If AIG "wins" the lawsuit, then the IRS pays AIG - but since AIG is 80% owned by the government, then 80% of that money would essentially go to support the government's investment in AIG (and could conceivably be used to pay dividends back to the entity from which the money was taken!).
I suspect that the lawsuit is really about specific business practices that AIG would like to continue using in the future (assuming AIG continues to operate in the future) and would like to establish the tax-free status of those practices.
Perhaps a latent variable is missing here. It could be that there's some character trait that is causing these advanced cancer patients to pursue desperate measures - both medical (by asking for invasive measures) and religious (jumping at religious beliefs in hope of a miracle cure).
It's a big stretch to suggest that the connection between these two elements means religious people are scared of death.
It's useful because it shows that many of the students in the class were not learning anything...which is the point of education. Having a larger number of people with a bachelor's degree does not make it worth less. Having a large number of people who don't know anything have a bachelor's degree makes it worth less.
Comparing schools of today with the schools that existed 30 years ago is completely unfair. Consider the dramatic changes in society over the last 30 years: how many schools in 1971 had computers in them? Or internet access? Now computers are needed in schools because nearly every existing job requires them. So there is a huge increase in needed expenditures for schools that did not exist 30 years ago.
Also consider the dramatic changes in students over the last 30 years. Many more students now arrive at school hungry and unprepared to learn than in the 70s. So now schools have begun providing breakfast programs and remediation for students who are far behind where they need to be.
Finally, perhaps one of the biggest increases in costs has come from staffing expenditures - both in salaries and in benefits (health care costs have skyrocketed). Although teacher salaries are still low (considering the education needed to get a position as a teacher), they have improved over the last 30 years. So my point is that direct comparisons between schools of today and the schools of the 70s is completely unrealistic and ignores huge societal changes that have impacted the role of school in society.
For your point on the test scores, I would suggest reading the Manufactured Crisis by Berliner & Biddle. They point out many of the problems with using test scores over a long period of time to "prove" or "disprove" educational improvement.
and won't appeal to that crowd beyond her gender. She's pro-life and reportedly has fairly conservative political views (and has chosen to align herself with the Republican party).
Anyone who is willing to sell-out on their political beliefs just to vote for a gender lacks integrity, in my opinion. If you want to vote for McCain / Palin because they align with your political beliefs, fine. But don't vote for them just because one of them happens to be female.
In general (and certainly there are exceptions), professors don't make very much money from writing a textbook. Royalties are comically low on even the most expensive textbooks (I've heard in the range of $2.00 per book)!
The real money in writing a textbook comes from the promotion and tenure (and related salary increase) that can be earned from the publishing of a book - the increased salary over time is much larger than any payment from a textbook. So there seems to be promise from the faculty side of things in that their income, and the benefits of writing a book, would still exist, for the most part, in an open-textbook format (assuming that writing an open-textbook is recognized as part of promotion and tenure process).
There are ethical issues in requiring the use of your own textbook in a class. I've taken classes where the professor has refunded his or her royalties to the class for purchasing a copy of his or her book for that class.
My family has actually spent many weeks vacationing in the beach resorts of Delaware. The beaches are very clean and have a great reputation for being family-friendly (there's also a gay beach if you are interested).
The Delaware beaches draw lots of families from the Baltimore-Washington DC area, as it is within an afternoon's drive (depending on traffic).
But don't take your vacation there. One of the great things is how uncrowded it is in comparison to other beaches in the U.S.
In my region (Plains states) they posted a notice that the shipping center in Iowa is temporarily closed due to the flooding and that this may impact my shipping experience. While this is certainly not related to your experience in California, there could be something similar impacting shipping in your region (locusts, fires, etc.).
Who says natural disasters don't effect us all? I have to wait an extra day to get "Meatballs II."
Why stop there?
What about children that have a high risk of heart disease, or Alzheimer's, or cancer, or obesity, or homosexuality, or baldness...?
Aren't we all "damaged goods" in some way?
If you calculate on a per-day basis, teacher pay is relatively low for the required qualifications. Whether or not it is relatively high compared to the average family income in Maine says more about Maine than it does teachers.
The voucher issue is complicated and there are many well-intentioned and well-meaning individuals on both sides of the debate. The "success" of vouchers is also widely contested and often leads to unintended consequences: http://epx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/21/1/40
In any case, the teachers' union is powerful, and I don't agree with all of the actions it has taken. But if teachers believe that the union is not representing them, they don't have to join or can work to create a new union.
Or, they could fire you on the spot. I had a friend who worked at a dentist's office - the policy at that office was that you were immediately fired upon turning in your 2-weeks notice.
While it is courteous to give more than 2 weeks notice, particularly in some fields, you have to be careful in case your company decides that it has had enough of you.
Actually, this is the exact product I've been looking for! We have a satellite dish, but prefer to rent movies from Netflix or from the local video store (much cheaper and convenient). But to watch the streaming Netflix option, the only choice is the computer and that only works really for 1 person (as we don't have a couch in the office). Someday I imagine we'll kick the satellite dish out completely, and just rely on streaming movies, Netflix, and over-the-air television.
The $100 price tag is a little high, especially to watch a limited selection of streaming movies with bad resolution and poor sound (at least on my relatively slow DSL line). It is certainly a niche market, but will help some Netflix customers (like me).
By have a physical presence in NY, I'm deriving benefits from the state; Amazon without a physical presence in NY receives no state benefits and should not have to work as the states agent withput consideration. Since the purchaser is located in the state (and, therefore, receiving the "benefits" provided by that state), the purchaser should be subject to the same taxes as all other transactions located in that state. In this sense it doesn't matter where Amazon is located (since the tax is not directly on Amazon, although there could be some expenses they incur from the process of collecting tax). It's really a debate about where an online transaction is considered to be "located." From the perspective of a taxpayer, it seems to make more sense to "locate" these transactions based on the location of the purchaser (this is how it is approached in automobile transactions), not the seller.
The police would still need to obtain a warrant before searching your computer. It's only a breach of privacy if the police begin searching computers without warrants or if the devices are used by non-law enforcement individuals (e.g., coworkers) to snoop around on your machine while you are at lunch.
CHEA does not accredit individual schools - CHEA works at the next level to ensure the quality of accreditors who in turn perform the accreditation of individual schools. http://www.chea.org/pdf/chea_glance_2006.pdf
There are many, many.edu domains that do not represent accredited institutions. The problem is that you could get a.edu domain without consideration of your accreditation status before 2001 - in 2001 everyone with a.edu domain was "grandfathered" and allowed to keep that domain even if they were not accredited. I'm not sure what the rules are on transferring a.edu domain, but that might be another possible way to obtain a.edu domain without being accredited. http://www.educause.edu/edudomain/eligibility.asp
If you, as some researchers do, believe that space is finite and only appears infinite because of a repeating "wrap-around" effect, then you would realize that could be seeing ourselves.
In fact, if this "wrap-around" effect is true, then we should be able to find ourselves an infinite number of times!
The children don't have any choice. They live where their parents live. If their parents come to the U.S. illegally, then the children are here too.
To me it is a practical question - the kids are here, so we might as well prepare them to be productive and self-supporting.
Even if the data provided by "FAIR" (the link you provided) are accurate, it is still a drop in the bucket compared to other expenditures (cost of the Iraq war: $4,681 per household, or about 6 times larger than the estimated cost of illegal immigrants). See:
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
What could be done to stop individuals from coming into the U.S. illegally? While "more" certainly can be done, it seems that there is no way to stop it. Switch places for a minute - wouldn't you do everything possible to provide the best life for your family (even if that means sneaking across the boarder)?
At least in my state, the proposal for in-state tuition for illegal immigrants ONLY applied to illegal immigrants who had graduated from one of the state's public high schools.
The problem is that the parents / family comes to the U.S. illegally, then the child is enrolled in public schools. Then the child graduates from high school and wants to (reasonably enough) attend college like the rest of his or her classmates. But, since his or her family is in the U.S. illegally, he or she is intelligible for in-state tuition rates, making the attendance at such an institution basically impossible.
So, if these individuals are going to be in the state anyway, we might as well have them be highly educated and productive (instead of the opposite). And, generally, one of the best ways to become highly educated and productive is to attend college. In the end you will end up SAVING your tax dollars by ensuring that the high school graduates of your state can become well prepared for earning a good living.
And before you go spouting off about "your tax dollars," how about some evidence for what percentage of your tax dollars go to provide these services for illegals?
Why would you pay to read an article in a journal if that same information or report were available elsewhere? It is a case of self-preservation on the part of the journal to protect itself from competition.
The internet has dramatically changed how information is accessible, and journals must respond to this new paradigm. The idea of a journal still plays an important role - by providing a process of peer review and editing for quality - but it seems the days of paying for paper copies and journals holding sole copyright of individual articles are waning.
Finally, on a related issue, as a taxpayer, why should I have to pay to read about research that I already supported through my tax dollars?
Slashdot Mirror
I played in a hockey game as a kid where the fumes from the Zamboni caused numerous players on both teams to get sick on the bench - you would be surprised how difficult it is to barf with a mouth guard in your mouth. But, hey, the ice was in great condition!
It's a good suggestion - unfortunately in my hometown, as I am sure is the case in many other places as well, the infrastructure is not designed to allow for bicycle and foot traffic. There are not sidewalks in many places and it would be suicide to try to ride my bike on the highway. We've become so accustomed to driving everywhere that designers often ignore the possibility (probably for cost reasons) of alternative modes of transportation.
Sure, they're accurate. But they're not making much money.
http://www.businessinsider.com/2008/11/hulu-profitable-please
Gravel roads are also more dangerous than paved roads. There are many gravel roads in the rural areas of my state and it is quite common to hear about a 1-car roll-over death on a gravel road.
You are right - it reminds me of when folks were rejecting the entire budget because it was 2% earmarks. 2%.
In any case, this lawsuit seems very strange. If AIG "wins" the lawsuit, then the IRS pays AIG - but since AIG is 80% owned by the government, then 80% of that money would essentially go to support the government's investment in AIG (and could conceivably be used to pay dividends back to the entity from which the money was taken!).
I suspect that the lawsuit is really about specific business practices that AIG would like to continue using in the future (assuming AIG continues to operate in the future) and would like to establish the tax-free status of those practices.
Perhaps a latent variable is missing here. It could be that there's some character trait that is causing these advanced cancer patients to pursue desperate measures - both medical (by asking for invasive measures) and religious (jumping at religious beliefs in hope of a miracle cure). It's a big stretch to suggest that the connection between these two elements means religious people are scared of death.
Why is a 50% reduction in failures a useful stat?
It's useful because it shows that many of the students in the class were not learning anything...which is the point of education.
Having a larger number of people with a bachelor's degree does not make it worth less. Having a large number of people who don't know anything have a bachelor's degree makes it worth less.
Comparing schools of today with the schools that existed 30 years ago is completely unfair. Consider the dramatic changes in society over the last 30 years: how many schools in 1971 had computers in them? Or internet access? Now computers are needed in schools because nearly every existing job requires them. So there is a huge increase in needed expenditures for schools that did not exist 30 years ago.
Also consider the dramatic changes in students over the last 30 years. Many more students now arrive at school hungry and unprepared to learn than in the 70s. So now schools have begun providing breakfast programs and remediation for students who are far behind where they need to be.
Finally, perhaps one of the biggest increases in costs has come from staffing expenditures - both in salaries and in benefits (health care costs have skyrocketed). Although teacher salaries are still low (considering the education needed to get a position as a teacher), they have improved over the last 30 years. So my point is that direct comparisons between schools of today and the schools of the 70s is completely unrealistic and ignores huge societal changes that have impacted the role of school in society.
For your point on the test scores, I would suggest reading the Manufactured Crisis by Berliner & Biddle. They point out many of the problems with using test scores over a long period of time to "prove" or "disprove" educational improvement.
and won't appeal to that crowd beyond her gender. She's pro-life and reportedly has fairly conservative political views (and has chosen to align herself with the Republican party).
Anyone who is willing to sell-out on their political beliefs just to vote for a gender lacks integrity, in my opinion. If you want to vote for McCain / Palin because they align with your political beliefs, fine. But don't vote for them just because one of them happens to be female.
In general (and certainly there are exceptions), professors don't make very much money from writing a textbook. Royalties are comically low on even the most expensive textbooks (I've heard in the range of $2.00 per book)!
The real money in writing a textbook comes from the promotion and tenure (and related salary increase) that can be earned from the publishing of a book - the increased salary over time is much larger than any payment from a textbook. So there seems to be promise from the faculty side of things in that their income, and the benefits of writing a book, would still exist, for the most part, in an open-textbook format (assuming that writing an open-textbook is recognized as part of promotion and tenure process).
There are ethical issues in requiring the use of your own textbook in a class. I've taken classes where the professor has refunded his or her royalties to the class for purchasing a copy of his or her book for that class.
My family has actually spent many weeks vacationing in the beach resorts of Delaware. The beaches are very clean and have a great reputation for being family-friendly (there's also a gay beach if you are interested).
The Delaware beaches draw lots of families from the Baltimore-Washington DC area, as it is within an afternoon's drive (depending on traffic).
But don't take your vacation there. One of the great things is how uncrowded it is in comparison to other beaches in the U.S.
In my region (Plains states) they posted a notice that the shipping center in Iowa is temporarily closed due to the flooding and that this may impact my shipping experience. While this is certainly not related to your experience in California, there could be something similar impacting shipping in your region (locusts, fires, etc.).
Who says natural disasters don't effect us all? I have to wait an extra day to get "Meatballs II."
Why stop there?
What about children that have a high risk of heart disease, or Alzheimer's, or cancer, or obesity, or homosexuality, or baldness...?
Aren't we all "damaged goods" in some way?
What salary would you prefer teachers earn?
If you calculate on a per-day basis, teacher pay is relatively low for the required qualifications. Whether or not it is relatively high compared to the average family income in Maine says more about Maine than it does teachers.
The voucher issue is complicated and there are many well-intentioned and well-meaning individuals on both sides of the debate. The "success" of vouchers is also widely contested and often leads to unintended consequences:
http://epx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/21/1/40
In any case, the teachers' union is powerful, and I don't agree with all of the actions it has taken. But if teachers believe that the union is not representing them, they don't have to join or can work to create a new union.
Or, they could fire you on the spot. I had a friend who worked at a dentist's office - the policy at that office was that you were immediately fired upon turning in your 2-weeks notice.
While it is courteous to give more than 2 weeks notice, particularly in some fields, you have to be careful in case your company decides that it has had enough of you.
Actually, this is the exact product I've been looking for! We have a satellite dish, but prefer to rent movies from Netflix or from the local video store (much cheaper and convenient). But to watch the streaming Netflix option, the only choice is the computer and that only works really for 1 person (as we don't have a couch in the office). Someday I imagine we'll kick the satellite dish out completely, and just rely on streaming movies, Netflix, and over-the-air television.
The $100 price tag is a little high, especially to watch a limited selection of streaming movies with bad resolution and poor sound (at least on my relatively slow DSL line). It is certainly a niche market, but will help some Netflix customers (like me).
What if the proposal from Google was to create Google-brand cigarettes? How would you have voted?
The comparison you make to Linux / Firefox is not the same thing as being a shareholder in a (massive) company.
The police would still need to obtain a warrant before searching your computer. It's only a breach of privacy if the police begin searching computers without warrants or if the devices are used by non-law enforcement individuals (e.g., coworkers) to snoop around on your machine while you are at lunch.
CHEA does not accredit individual schools - CHEA works at the next level to ensure the quality of accreditors who in turn perform the accreditation of individual schools.
.edu domains that do not represent accredited institutions. The problem is that you could get a .edu domain without consideration of your accreditation status before 2001 - in 2001 everyone with a .edu domain was "grandfathered" and allowed to keep that domain even if they were not accredited. I'm not sure what the rules are on transferring a .edu domain, but that might be another possible way to obtain a .edu domain without being accredited.
.edu domain represents an accredited school are described in this site:
http://www.chea.org/pdf/chea_glance_2006.pdf
There are many, many
http://www.educause.edu/edudomain/eligibility.asp
Some tips on determining whether or not a
http://www.chea.org/degreemills/default.htm
If you, as some researchers do, believe that space is finite and only appears infinite because of a repeating "wrap-around" effect, then you would realize that could be seeing ourselves.
In fact, if this "wrap-around" effect is true, then we should be able to find ourselves an infinite number of times!
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_19_164/ai_110737294
What kind of beer?
I wouldn't be surprised if it is "Busch light". I wouldn't drink that stuff during a drought.
The children don't have any choice. They live where their parents live. If their parents come to the U.S. illegally, then the children are here too.
To me it is a practical question - the kids are here, so we might as well prepare them to be productive and self-supporting.
Even if the data provided by "FAIR" (the link you provided) are accurate, it is still a drop in the bucket compared to other expenditures (cost of the Iraq war: $4,681 per household, or about 6 times larger than the estimated cost of illegal immigrants). See: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
Of course, the national debt is about $79,000 per person. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
What could be done to stop individuals from coming into the U.S. illegally? While "more" certainly can be done, it seems that there is no way to stop it. Switch places for a minute - wouldn't you do everything possible to provide the best life for your family (even if that means sneaking across the boarder)?
At least in my state, the proposal for in-state tuition for illegal immigrants ONLY applied to illegal immigrants who had graduated from one of the state's public high schools.
The problem is that the parents / family comes to the U.S. illegally, then the child is enrolled in public schools. Then the child graduates from high school and wants to (reasonably enough) attend college like the rest of his or her classmates. But, since his or her family is in the U.S. illegally, he or she is intelligible for in-state tuition rates, making the attendance at such an institution basically impossible.
So, if these individuals are going to be in the state anyway, we might as well have them be highly educated and productive (instead of the opposite). And, generally, one of the best ways to become highly educated and productive is to attend college. In the end you will end up SAVING your tax dollars by ensuring that the high school graduates of your state can become well prepared for earning a good living.
And before you go spouting off about "your tax dollars," how about some evidence for what percentage of your tax dollars go to provide these services for illegals?
Why would you pay to read an article in a journal if that same information or report were available elsewhere? It is a case of self-preservation on the part of the journal to protect itself from competition.
The internet has dramatically changed how information is accessible, and journals must respond to this new paradigm. The idea of a journal still plays an important role - by providing a process of peer review and editing for quality - but it seems the days of paying for paper copies and journals holding sole copyright of individual articles are waning.
Finally, on a related issue, as a taxpayer, why should I have to pay to read about research that I already supported through my tax dollars?