You're missing the scare-mongering by many nations in the EU that have regions with aspirations of self determination, eg. Italy & Spain. They do not like the idea of other countries allowing break-away regions, and threaten barring Scotland re-entry to the EU as a warning to their own dissatisfied citizens. Even China has had a few politicians pipe up, because they fear the impact Scottish independence might have on dissidents in places like Tibet. Of course, it is all rubbish. Scotland has something far more precious to the EU than it's oil and gas, which only make a difference to the other constituent parts of the Union. Scotland has vast fisheries which are shared with the EU at large, over which it would gain sovereign control.
The hatred of the drug companies or any company(corporation) is just the hard liberal/progressive left rally cry. They hate private business, they hate competition. No one should make money
Stop mischaracterizing socialism and go back to fondling your copy of Atlas Shrugged. Socialism is founded on the principle that people should be able to make money; people should be compensated for good work with decent pay. Did you ever notice an abundance of leftist political parties throughout the western world with names like "Party for the Unemployed" or "The Union of Shirkers"? No, most of them have names like "The Labour Party", or "The Worker's Party", because they are founded by and seek to look after the people who do most of the work.
Actually what you see here is very well understood. You are seeing an inelastic market; that is if a drug or procedure will save you life, it does not matter of it costs $5 or $5000, you will find the money to pay for it. The reason why socialized healthcare drives costs down is because the government / the insurance company will bargain on your behalf. Since they are not the one who is going to die, they can not be extorted and can pit different drug makers against each other. Health care is one of the few areas where "the free market" does not work as naively expected.
Why then does the government not step in? A similar industry, in terms of how important its end product is, is farming. Agriculture in the USA gets huge subsidies to provide cheap food for the masses lest they starve. Ironically perhaps, the poor nutritional quality of many industrially manufactured foods products that result from an abundance of cheap raw materials (many of which are perfectly fine foods in moderation, but not as an entire diet), packed with starches and corn syrup with flavourings and fats added to trick people into liking them, is probably the leading cause of the need for drugs.
From what I read, the main driver for the filming happening during the birds' breeding season was filming being re-scheduled around Harrison Ford's broken leg. It was originally supposed to happen later in the year. I don't think there were any excessively greased palms, more a culture of accommodation to corporate demands framed in a seemingly reasonable way. I'm not saying I agree with it, but the best laid plans are subject to change, and politicians and bureaucrats are nearly always going to think with economic benefit at the top of the agenda, no matter how good their intentions.
Nature is not so fragile that a film crew will destroy an ecosystem just by walking around and filming a few scenes. They're under restrictions on what they can do (i.e. they're not going to be blowing up the island)
[citation needed] or I call BS. There's no legal right in a civilized country to see X by going into someone's property, regardless of X.
Actually, yes there is. From times when road systems were not as good as they are today, and it was literally impossible to leave your own land without traversing someone else's, there developed laws of "rights of way". These are mostly an anachronism today, but do sometimes have to be respected. When I was a young lad, there was an old woman living at the back end of our farm, in a 3 room cottage with an open hearth, no electricity and no running water, half a mile in off the road. She had the legal right to cross our land to get to to the road, and also an old well on our land. As well as the obvious reaction of not really caring if some old woman walks across a field, there were other implications to her right of access. We used to keep sheep as well as cattle; as anyone who ever worked with sheep will know, rams will charge anyone who is not looking at them, and then stand there pretending it wasn't them when you pick yourself up off the ground. Happened me loads, no big deal, but for a fragile 80 year old woman there could be all sorts of legal implications.
Anyway, like I said, it's mostly anachronistic, and dwindles in importance as land consolidation continues. My father now owns all the land that could be used as any reasonable excuse to demand a right of way across that big field.
There are 13 tour companies one can take to visit the island. The tours run each day during the summer but only once per day. So there are 13 boats of visitors per day for 5 months out of the year, not 13 visits per year total.
In a really good year here, we get about 10 days of summer.
The Giza pyramids are solid structures with a few tunnels and rooms. The power generation pyramid idea would use a hollow pyramid, so you could be talking about something that weighs the same or less, even though it is so much larger.
Rainwater can be collected and recycled fairly easily. Crops of hydroponic vegetable gardens can be grown using robots. One level could be set aside for chicken and cows. Wind power can be generated on the top levels. A few levels can be set aside for humans. I would think that making the base with steel and upper levels with aluminum beams would be the most practical. It would have the best balconies ever! I can't wait to move in!!
If you started of with the center of many modern large cities with skyscrapers, you already have the support structure for a massive hollow pyramid in place. Of course, few of those cities happen to be in hot deserts.
No, your reading comprehension sucks and the summary is correct. From the end of the fourth paragraph in the fucking article (emphasis mine):
The rodents showed significantly fewer signs of pain (an average of a 36% lower score on the grimace scale) when a male researcher was in the room than when a female researcher—or no researcher at all—was there.
To avoid double taxation - just require them to pay to USA the difference in US vs Irish tax. If Ireland taxes them more than the USA then they don't have to pay anything. If Ireland taxes zero, then they pay the full to the USA. If they don't like that then they should behave more like separate companies. e.g. the Irish Microsoft CEO can ignore the US CEO on what to do with the billions of US dollars;).
I'm a bit hazy on this myself, but I believe the way it works is this: under Irish law, the profits are to be taxed in the US. Under US law, the profits are taxed there when they are repatriated from the subsidiary to the parent company. So, the profits are never repatriated, they are instead sitting in a dollar account in a US bank (to avoid losses due to currency fluctuations) belonging to the Irish subsidiary of the US company, until such a time as congress decides to lower tax rates so they can take it all back "home" (it is already back in the US, just untaxed) for free. Until then, banks will be more than willing to lend them whatever money they want or need in the US, because they have this massive pile of cash lying about.
Basicly the only illness you can catch today that didn't exist 200 years ago is AIDS.
I'm willing to bet it was around in some form or other. Diagnosis of it, however, would not have been, especially given that its human origins are probably African bushmeat.
"Either" goes with "or" and "neither" goes with "nor", though neither "or" nor "nor" need either "either" nor "neither" (respectively) in all cases, and neither do either "nor" nor "or" ever pair directly with "and" as you had them, though either "and either" or "and neither" can introduce an "or" or "nor" clause (respectively) into a larger "and" clause just fine.
I think that might be the best sentence I've ever tried to read out loud.
Yes, although there can be nuanced differences. Athiesm is a lack of belief. Agnosticism is the belief that something is unknowable (not specifically referring to religion). In the case of religion, saying that it is unknowable whether or not there is a god is effectively the same as saying that there is no good reason to believe that there is one.
The wikipedia article on Zebra's links to the following for a possible explanation to the origin of these stripes:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/16944753
Notice anything similar?
There was a similar story a few months back, also from the BBC, about a study with slightly different conclusions than polarisation of light.It concluded that the stripes cause optical illusions when moving. Link.
Slashdot Mirror
You're missing the scare-mongering by many nations in the EU that have regions with aspirations of self determination, eg. Italy & Spain. They do not like the idea of other countries allowing break-away regions, and threaten barring Scotland re-entry to the EU as a warning to their own dissatisfied citizens. Even China has had a few politicians pipe up, because they fear the impact Scottish independence might have on dissidents in places like Tibet. Of course, it is all rubbish. Scotland has something far more precious to the EU than it's oil and gas, which only make a difference to the other constituent parts of the Union. Scotland has vast fisheries which are shared with the EU at large, over which it would gain sovereign control.
The hatred of the drug companies or any company(corporation) is just the hard liberal/progressive left rally cry. They hate private business, they hate competition. No one should make money
Stop mischaracterizing socialism and go back to fondling your copy of Atlas Shrugged. Socialism is founded on the principle that people should be able to make money; people should be compensated for good work with decent pay. Did you ever notice an abundance of leftist political parties throughout the western world with names like "Party for the Unemployed" or "The Union of Shirkers"? No, most of them have names like "The Labour Party", or "The Worker's Party", because they are founded by and seek to look after the people who do most of the work.
Actually what you see here is very well understood. You are seeing an inelastic market; that is if a drug or procedure will save you life, it does not matter of it costs $5 or $5000, you will find the money to pay for it. The reason why socialized healthcare drives costs down is because the government / the insurance company will bargain on your behalf. Since they are not the one who is going to die, they can not be extorted and can pit different drug makers against each other. Health care is one of the few areas where "the free market" does not work as naively expected.
Why then does the government not step in? A similar industry, in terms of how important its end product is, is farming. Agriculture in the USA gets huge subsidies to provide cheap food for the masses lest they starve. Ironically perhaps, the poor nutritional quality of many industrially manufactured foods products that result from an abundance of cheap raw materials (many of which are perfectly fine foods in moderation, but not as an entire diet), packed with starches and corn syrup with flavourings and fats added to trick people into liking them, is probably the leading cause of the need for drugs.
From what I read, the main driver for the filming happening during the birds' breeding season was filming being re-scheduled around Harrison Ford's broken leg. It was originally supposed to happen later in the year. I don't think there were any excessively greased palms, more a culture of accommodation to corporate demands framed in a seemingly reasonable way. I'm not saying I agree with it, but the best laid plans are subject to change, and politicians and bureaucrats are nearly always going to think with economic benefit at the top of the agenda, no matter how good their intentions.
Nature is not so fragile that a film crew will destroy an ecosystem just by walking around and filming a few scenes. They're under restrictions on what they can do (i.e. they're not going to be blowing up the island)
No point in watching this in the cinema then.
[citation needed] or I call BS. There's no legal right in a civilized country to see X by going into someone's property, regardless of X.
Actually, yes there is. From times when road systems were not as good as they are today, and it was literally impossible to leave your own land without traversing someone else's, there developed laws of "rights of way". These are mostly an anachronism today, but do sometimes have to be respected. When I was a young lad, there was an old woman living at the back end of our farm, in a 3 room cottage with an open hearth, no electricity and no running water, half a mile in off the road. She had the legal right to cross our land to get to to the road, and also an old well on our land. As well as the obvious reaction of not really caring if some old woman walks across a field, there were other implications to her right of access. We used to keep sheep as well as cattle; as anyone who ever worked with sheep will know, rams will charge anyone who is not looking at them, and then stand there pretending it wasn't them when you pick yourself up off the ground. Happened me loads, no big deal, but for a fragile 80 year old woman there could be all sorts of legal implications. Anyway, like I said, it's mostly anachronistic, and dwindles in importance as land consolidation continues. My father now owns all the land that could be used as any reasonable excuse to demand a right of way across that big field.
There are 13 tour companies one can take to visit the island. The tours run each day during the summer but only once per day. So there are 13 boats of visitors per day for 5 months out of the year, not 13 visits per year total.
In a really good year here, we get about 10 days of summer.
In completely unrelated news, according to the 2010 US Census,almost 30% of American Fathers Aren't Ready For the Next Generation
Full disclosure: I'm a rabid pro-global-warming zealot.
You burn as much coal and oil as you can?
Racist By Default.
Germans, like all Europeans which are all fucking inbreds ...That privilege makes all whites racist by default and the only good racist is a dead one.
Irony... like goldy or silvery, but made of iron?
You want the air inside to be heated by the sun so it will rise. Mountains are pretty good at blocking sunlight.
The Giza pyramids are solid structures with a few tunnels and rooms. The power generation pyramid idea would use a hollow pyramid, so you could be talking about something that weighs the same or less, even though it is so much larger.
Rainwater can be collected and recycled fairly easily. Crops of hydroponic vegetable gardens can be grown using robots. One level could be set aside for chicken and cows. Wind power can be generated on the top levels. A few levels can be set aside for humans. I would think that making the base with steel and upper levels with aluminum beams would be the most practical. It would have the best balconies ever! I can't wait to move in!!
If you started of with the center of many modern large cities with skyscrapers, you already have the support structure for a massive hollow pyramid in place. Of course, few of those cities happen to be in hot deserts.
I am saying "less is more". Or do you think 2.5k pages of Affordable Care Act + 10k pages of follow-on regulatory suppository is a Good Time?
Is this homeopathic economics?
"Boise... 150 percent fewer than Bakersfield." How'd they manage that?
No one can predict the future.
Nobody can.
No, your reading comprehension sucks and the summary is correct. From the end of the fourth paragraph in the fucking article (emphasis mine):
The rodents showed significantly fewer signs of pain (an average of a 36% lower score on the grimace scale) when a male researcher was in the room than when a female researcher—or no researcher at all—was there.
Read as far as the sixth paragraph.
No more need to wear deodorant. My naturally musky smell will make everyone feel more at ease.
Unfortunately, the summary is incorrect. The article says the mice are more stressed with males around.
To avoid double taxation - just require them to pay to USA the difference in US vs Irish tax. If Ireland taxes them more than the USA then they don't have to pay anything. If Ireland taxes zero, then they pay the full to the USA. If they don't like that then they should behave more like separate companies. e.g. the Irish Microsoft CEO can ignore the US CEO on what to do with the billions of US dollars ;).
I'm a bit hazy on this myself, but I believe the way it works is this: under Irish law, the profits are to be taxed in the US. Under US law, the profits are taxed there when they are repatriated from the subsidiary to the parent company. So, the profits are never repatriated, they are instead sitting in a dollar account in a US bank (to avoid losses due to currency fluctuations) belonging to the Irish subsidiary of the US company, until such a time as congress decides to lower tax rates so they can take it all back "home" (it is already back in the US, just untaxed) for free. Until then, banks will be more than willing to lend them whatever money they want or need in the US, because they have this massive pile of cash lying about.
Basicly the only illness you can catch today that didn't exist 200 years ago is AIDS.
I'm willing to bet it was around in some form or other. Diagnosis of it, however, would not have been, especially given that its human origins are probably African bushmeat.
"Either" goes with "or" and "neither" goes with "nor", though neither "or" nor "nor" need either "either" nor "neither" (respectively) in all cases, and neither do either "nor" nor "or" ever pair directly with "and" as you had them, though either "and either" or "and neither" can introduce an "or" or "nor" clause (respectively) into a larger "and" clause just fine.
I think that might be the best sentence I've ever tried to read out loud.
Yes, although there can be nuanced differences. Athiesm is a lack of belief. Agnosticism is the belief that something is unknowable (not specifically referring to religion). In the case of religion, saying that it is unknowable whether or not there is a god is effectively the same as saying that there is no good reason to believe that there is one.
The wikipedia article on Zebra's links to the following for a possible explanation to the origin of these stripes:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/16944753
Notice anything similar?
There was a similar story a few months back, also from the BBC, about a study with slightly different conclusions than polarisation of light.It concluded that the stripes cause optical illusions when moving. Link.
You joke, but here you go.
...and a pedophile, which is why he got prosecuted in the first place.
That is untrue. The prosecution was for "gross indecency" with a 19 year old man, who was also prosecuted.