Your post shows a fundamental lack of understanding of money. The sovereign does not have any need to tax to raise revenue. They can create as much money as they wish. Taxation is about social control. Further, the sovereign power must always run fiscal deficits. 97% of all money is created by banks as loans, all of which has interest attached. Only the sovereign can create money without future interest. Without deficits, interest will consume all money in time.
It should be be noted that even doses 5x to 10x the recommended USRDA can be toxic.
It is far safer to go to a tanning salon for 5 minutes than to go crazy with Vitamin D pills. Your body naturally will produce the sufficient amount of this hormone.
Assuming past performance is indicative of future performance is a classic FAIL of analysts of all types.
You have no idea what the future will hold. With the rising costs of metal, disk technology may one day become as expensive and obsolete as 4,000 pound solid steel cars are today.
Economics can and do change every day. Keep an open mind.
And you went to a "major university"? Do they give refunds?
I really don't see how that is relevant to my general opinion that liberals don't defend their viewpoints. Obviously, what little attempt is made is in the academic sphere.
Well, it's a good thing that conservatives never do crazy stuff like that.
While my company blocks that site, the url indicates it's about an abortion protest. They do exist, but the scope and scale of the 2004 national convention protests far exceeds anything that ever has happened with an anti-abortion protest. Firstly, you have the entire issue of protesting the political convention of a party. This strikes at the very heart of our political system, and reaks of riots between political factions in the late Roman Republic. It is one thing to protest specific political issues, it is quite another to protest an entire political party engaging in what should be a sacred exercise of our party system. Secondly, the civil disobedience was ridiculous. I lived in Brooklyn at the time and had to go to work that Saturday. It was the summer and it was a beautiful day, so I decided to bike in. I had to walk my bike across the Brooklyn Bridge. Why? The protestors were blocking the pedestrian walkway on the bridge! Why? It served no purpose but to inconvenience cyclists like myself and tourists. That said, the number of protests for liberal causes vastly exceeds the number of anti-abortion protests that occur in some communities in this country. So, to summarize, I'm not saying conservatives never protest. I said that liberals think conservatives are evil, and the same is not true for conservatives. Some conservatives think abortion is wrong, and attack THAT ONE ISSUE. Some may even attack, literally, those who are performing abortions. What they don't do is go up to every person with an Obama button and say "You're an evil baby killer!". Do you see the difference? You've actually supported my argument.
I applaud your even-handed assault on divisive political propaganda.
I'm not a Rush fan, but the guy has an AM radio program. He had a television show that aired at 2 in the morning for a few years in the 1990s. He is hardly a significant figure. I'm talking about the hollywood stars, the endless movies with political themes, not to mention the major media outlets (with the exception of fox news of course). Lets not forget the great stalwarts of liberal media like the New York Times and kin, which fortunately are failing at a record pace. Liberal politics infect the entirety of entertainment. I have to listen to rock starts saying "fuck Bush", hollywood stars pushing the next greatest political indoctrination film (ie Children of Men), the regular news pushing the latest destined to fail social program of the month, the list is seriously endless. Yeah, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage (nominally conservative, btw), and Billy O'Reilly. That's all you got though. Who the hell else is there? How do those four people compare to the hordes of actors, musicians, and other entertainers desperate to save us from the evil conservatives? What's worse about this discussion though, is you still have missed my point. While you are parroting typical liberal nonsense about that quartet of evil, you'll be hard pressed to find anything from those people who claim that liberals are evil.
I'm going to guess that you majored in something technical and didn't spend much time in classes that discuss public policy. Getting the flavor of academic political analysis based on fliers and student club activities doesn't count.
I studied economics at Columbia. You are quite mistaken.
I can't imagine conservatives being so crass.
Never seen anyone on the street with stuff like that, and I live in a city of 8 million people. While it exists on the internet, I don't think it's popular.
Why don't you tell me all about my ironic post. I'd love to hear it. I say this honestly, when I could have easily trolled you into divulging your true feelings.
Frankly, the narrative of "We legitimately think they're wrong and they just think that we're evil" falls into its own trap of painting a complex set of positions and a wide variety of people as a black and white melodrama. If you honestly haven't heard anybody defend a liberal political position with legitimate arguments instead of anti-conservative rants, I think that you'd be getting ahead of yourself in applying for a job as a thoughtful and well-traveled political commentator. Don't quit your day job.
Liberals can certainly defend their positions with legitimate arguments, but generally don't.
I'm not basing this on the internet per se, although that is highly relevant in this day and age. My opinions are based on the 2004 Republican National Convention protests. The nuts handing out political fliers all over the city. Propaganda produced by the likes of Michael Moore. My own education in a major university. The endless parade of media personalities. Lets not forget the hordes of hipsters with their "I hate Republicans" signs, clothing, and tattoos. We even have anti-conservative graffiti here in NYC.
Last but not lease - I've personally had to deal with liberals accuse me of a wide variety of bad things. I've been told I hate the poor despite the fact I'm not particularly wealthy. I've been told I hate minorities, despite the fact I'm hispanic. I've been told I hate gays, despite the fact I'm friends with a few prominent gay men.
I've never in my life heard a conservative in real life say anything like that to a liberal. I've never met a conservative teacher, nor seen conservatives take to the streets as a show of force, nor seen any graffiti espousing conservative political beliefs.
The list goes on.
My point is just this - these kinds of things signal a breakdown in civil society. The political antipathy today is far greater than it was in say 1860, and probably even the 1960s - especially since the segregationists in those days were democrats.
If you are truly interested in peace, then I suggest you personally work to ameliorate this hostility as I try to do when it is shoved in my face. If I'm wrong, what do you have to lose? Nothing. There just isn't any reason for it.
It's an over the counter drug in most of the world.
In any event, your post is bullshit for that reason alone. You have no proof regarding underage prostitutes - using viagra and hiring prostitutes is legal in much, if not most of the world. What does that mean? You have no documentation and thus everything else you wrote is highly suspect.
This is ultimately why liberals fail and will bring this country to civil war.
Conservatives tend to believe liberals are wrong about human nature and the proper function of the state. Liberals believe conservatives are evil.
Think about this long and hard. How long do you really think civilized society can continue when we have people like you shouting their mouths off how evil conservatives are?
The answer is quite simple - it can't last. What is most comical about this is that I have never met a liberal who has any real capacity to fight a civil war. Not only that, your favorite oppressed minority of the day is not only a tiny part of the population but doesn't even reproduce!
Anyway, for your own sake, I'd stick to slightly less inflammatory rhetoric. And, I live in New York City and know quite a few gay professionals. You know what? They are all Republicans. They could care less about gay marriage, but they sure as hell care about the hordes of morons on welfare and high taxes used to ensure those hordes vote for the whining Democratic candidate of the year.
I don't know why this matters. A lot of us with blu-ray players rent blu-ray movies when they are available!
Having a blu-ray player, I can say one thing with absolute certainty however - I only buy blu-ray discs now. I haven't bought a DVD in over 2 years. I imagine in a decade, I'll have a 100" TV in my living room. DVD discs might like fine on a 32" LCD, but by buying blu-ray discs today, I know my movies will look great pretty much forever. I don't think I can fit anything larger than a 100" television in my living room. 1080p content is all you need for such a display.
You're penny wise and pound foolish. 720p is sufficient for any screen up to 50" - 60" in a normal sized living room. 1080p is ideal for screens 60" to 100".
Why would you waste all the money on 2 HDTV screens, and not make use of its maximum resolution?
It's like getting a Quad-Core processor to use Word.
Nothing "leeches" calcium from your bones. Calcium really has just two big functions in your body
1) Your heart,and some other muscles, contract by deporting calcium from cells. If there is too much calcium in your blood, you end up with elevated blood levels of calcium. This is unlikely to happen because
2) Osteoblast cells in your bones create and maintain the bone structure. When you are youngish, your body removes excess calcium by strengthening your bones. People who consume too much calcium build too much bone mass early in life. Like all cells, osteoblast cells have a fixed life. After a certain number of cell divisions, that's it. You're done. For people who consume diets with milk products, this happens at a much earlier point in life. Thus, osteoporosis is very common in places like Scandanavia, but virtually unknown amongst the poor in places like China. The same is true for disorders like kidney stones. Older people who have consumed dairy products throughout their lives no longer have osteoblast cells in abundance, and the kidneys are the main way excess calcium is removed (thus keeping your heart beating).
Coffee has nothing to do with this process. You want strong bones throughout your life? Don't consume dairy products or take calcium supplements. It's that simple.
Ridiculous. I've been to Charleston, Hilton Head Island, and Aiken. You know what? They all have broadband available. This means you live someplace rural.
People in rural China don't have access to many basics of urban civilization known since Roman times, ie paved streets and running water. Regular electricity service is not available in large sections of the countryside.
Nope, I've seen the studies. (Actually read a some of 'em even.) Unless you can site a peer-reviewed study to back up your claims (and you haven't even tried yet), I'm going to continue to suspect that you haven't even checked, relying rather on your assumptions.
Sheesh, read the Wikipedia article on the subject. When you remove Psychology from the "sciences" something like 20% to 30% of women pursue scientific disciplines. This is basic logic here. The vast majority of teachers are women. It is not uncommon for men to almost never have a male teacher until they are uncommon. We have loads of people like yourself constantly telling girls love science, yet they don't enroll in such programs in college. We have virtually BANNED men's colleges, while many prominent women's colleges flourish. What more can we possibly do?
peer reviewed studies. What nonsense. Who are the peers? The angry crew in the women's studies departments? You need to get out into the real world!
Gosh, then all the cases of sexism I've witnessed first-hand (like your posts so far) are just my imagination!? Not to mention the peer-reviewed research on the topic?
If you think what I am saying is sexist, then you are simply delusional and paranoid. Of course you are going to see sexism everywhere. Honestly, I thought this kind of politically correct censorship ended a long time ago. How can speaking the truth be labeled with any kind of perjorative? Maybe you need medication? Most normal people dispute facts - they attach any "isms" to those presenting the facts.
As you seem obsessed with peer reviewed academic journals, I'm very curious - this is not a scientific study that is debatable. This is nothing more than a survey. What is the issue here? The fact that women freely choose not to pursue scientific disciplines? Why don't you find a "peer reviewed research" study on this topic for me. I'm really mystified as to how anyone could doubt the truth of what I say.
Defensive maybe, but you started the perjoratives and the insults so you're in a poor position to whine about feeling hurt.
Ahh, the paranoia again. I'd love for you to quite precisely what I said that was either a perjorative or an insult.
Epic fail, I'm definitely a man. You're simply a misogynist.
Surprising. This seems to be a touchy subject for you. Why is this?
Also, once again, I'm confused. How you can possibly call me a misogynist. What have I said that would make you think I hate women? Or anyone?
Execute every manager and owner of a company found to engage in such corruption.
Such corruption strikes at the very heart of civilized society, and it should be punished with ferocious justice. It is time people in positions of authority answer for their incompetence with their lives.
Wow, sexism *and* illogical assumptions all in one post. Well done.
I have merely reported the truth. There are significantly more women in undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate educational programs in the US than men. Even if 20% of all students studying scientific disciplines were women, the only logical conclusion is that today, women do not choose to studying scientific disciplines. There is nothing holding them back. They simply don't do it.
This is also untrue. Girls are lower levels of education are quite interested in studying science. It's only when sexist jerks start telling them that they it's un-feminine to be a scientist and that they can't do it (overtly or subtly) that they back off. This was the crux of the issue around Larry Summer's comments a few years ago. He, like you, was pretending like data doesn't exist on this matter, preferring his own assumptions instead.
My god, where did you go? Wellesley College?
You are repeating feminist nonsense from decades ago. Men have no problems with women studying sciences. In my electrical engineering program, almost everyone I knew would have loved to have girls in our classes.
20-25% of the total fraction of physicists seems as if it's pushing the meaning of "few", doesn't it?
Not really, when 60% of college students are women. The number of women studying scientific disciplines is quite small. I'd say probably fewer than 10% of female college graduates studied scientific disciplines, outside of life sciences.
And you clearly need to get out more and stop hanging out with the same guys who share your sexist views. I actually *did* receive a liberal arts education. My alma mater has shown that women both want to be physics majors and are capable of it by sustaining the highest number graduated in the country (apart from Bryn Mawr). Perhaps *you* attended the wrong school?
Ah ha, yeah, you are a Wellesley grad.
You're a bit too defensive, and your willingness to throw around perjoratives without much provocation demonstrates that you are in fact a militant, hypocritical feminist with little concern for the facts. I'm actually married to a girl who is currently in medical school. I have an electrical engineering degree from a major university (UIUC to be exact). I've been there in class where there are ZERO women. It took me 9 years to finally find a girl who was both scientifically inclined and attractive. Trust me, you need to separate your desires for the world from the reality of life. My experiences are not unique - and whether I was in school in the cornfields or back in NYC, women were the same. For every girl I've met who knows what Linux is, I've met 50 who can't talk about anything other than Cosmo, American Idol, or what depravity in which the Star of the Week is engaged.
Also, a bit of dating advice, lose the chip on your shoulder. Seriously. You're probably a smart girl, but the vast majority of men - particularly as they get older - just don't want to deal with that feminist bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
Your post shows a fundamental lack of understanding of money. The sovereign does not have any need to tax to raise revenue. They can create as much money as they wish. Taxation is about social control. Further, the sovereign power must always run fiscal deficits. 97% of all money is created by banks as loans, all of which has interest attached. Only the sovereign can create money without future interest. Without deficits, interest will consume all money in time.
It cannot be anything but a conspiracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...
It should be be noted that even doses 5x to 10x the recommended USRDA can be toxic.
It is far safer to go to a tanning salon for 5 minutes than to go crazy with Vitamin D pills. Your body naturally will produce the sufficient amount of this hormone.
Assuming past performance is indicative of future performance is a classic FAIL of analysts of all types.
You have no idea what the future will hold. With the rising costs of metal, disk technology may one day become as expensive and obsolete as 4,000 pound solid steel cars are today.
Economics can and do change every day. Keep an open mind.
And you went to a "major university"? Do they give refunds?
I really don't see how that is relevant to my general opinion that liberals don't defend their viewpoints. Obviously, what little attempt is made is in the academic sphere.
Well, it's a good thing that conservatives never do crazy stuff like that.
While my company blocks that site, the url indicates it's about an abortion protest. They do exist, but the scope and scale of the 2004 national convention protests far exceeds anything that ever has happened with an anti-abortion protest. Firstly, you have the entire issue of protesting the political convention of a party. This strikes at the very heart of our political system, and reaks of riots between political factions in the late Roman Republic. It is one thing to protest specific political issues, it is quite another to protest an entire political party engaging in what should be a sacred exercise of our party system. Secondly, the civil disobedience was ridiculous. I lived in Brooklyn at the time and had to go to work that Saturday. It was the summer and it was a beautiful day, so I decided to bike in. I had to walk my bike across the Brooklyn Bridge. Why? The protestors were blocking the pedestrian walkway on the bridge! Why? It served no purpose but to inconvenience cyclists like myself and tourists. That said, the number of protests for liberal causes vastly exceeds the number of anti-abortion protests that occur in some communities in this country. So, to summarize, I'm not saying conservatives never protest. I said that liberals think conservatives are evil, and the same is not true for conservatives. Some conservatives think abortion is wrong, and attack THAT ONE ISSUE. Some may even attack, literally, those who are performing abortions. What they don't do is go up to every person with an Obama button and say "You're an evil baby killer!". Do you see the difference? You've actually supported my argument.
I applaud your even-handed assault on divisive political propaganda.
I'm not a Rush fan, but the guy has an AM radio program. He had a television show that aired at 2 in the morning for a few years in the 1990s. He is hardly a significant figure. I'm talking about the hollywood stars, the endless movies with political themes, not to mention the major media outlets (with the exception of fox news of course). Lets not forget the great stalwarts of liberal media like the New York Times and kin, which fortunately are failing at a record pace. Liberal politics infect the entirety of entertainment. I have to listen to rock starts saying "fuck Bush", hollywood stars pushing the next greatest political indoctrination film (ie Children of Men), the regular news pushing the latest destined to fail social program of the month, the list is seriously endless. Yeah, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage (nominally conservative, btw), and Billy O'Reilly. That's all you got though. Who the hell else is there? How do those four people compare to the hordes of actors, musicians, and other entertainers desperate to save us from the evil conservatives? What's worse about this discussion though, is you still have missed my point. While you are parroting typical liberal nonsense about that quartet of evil, you'll be hard pressed to find anything from those people who claim that liberals are evil.
I'm going to guess that you majored in something technical and didn't spend much time in classes that discuss public policy. Getting the flavor of academic political analysis based on fliers and student club activities doesn't count.
I studied economics at Columbia. You are quite mistaken.
I can't imagine conservatives being so crass.
Never seen anyone on the street with stuff like that, and I live in a city of 8 million people. While it exists on the internet, I don't think it's popular.
Ah, yes, vandalism. A tactic completely is
You obviously don't know what irony is.
Why don't you tell me all about my ironic post. I'd love to hear it. I say this honestly, when I could have easily trolled you into divulging your true feelings.
Frankly, the narrative of "We legitimately think they're wrong and they just think that we're evil" falls into its own trap of painting a complex set of positions and a wide variety of people as a black and white melodrama. If you honestly haven't heard anybody defend a liberal political position with legitimate arguments instead of anti-conservative rants, I think that you'd be getting ahead of yourself in applying for a job as a thoughtful and well-traveled political commentator. Don't quit your day job.
Liberals can certainly defend their positions with legitimate arguments, but generally don't.
I'm not basing this on the internet per se, although that is highly relevant in this day and age. My opinions are based on the 2004 Republican National Convention protests. The nuts handing out political fliers all over the city. Propaganda produced by the likes of Michael Moore. My own education in a major university. The endless parade of media personalities. Lets not forget the hordes of hipsters with their "I hate Republicans" signs, clothing, and tattoos. We even have anti-conservative graffiti here in NYC.
Last but not lease - I've personally had to deal with liberals accuse me of a wide variety of bad things. I've been told I hate the poor despite the fact I'm not particularly wealthy. I've been told I hate minorities, despite the fact I'm hispanic. I've been told I hate gays, despite the fact I'm friends with a few prominent gay men.
I've never in my life heard a conservative in real life say anything like that to a liberal. I've never met a conservative teacher, nor seen conservatives take to the streets as a show of force, nor seen any graffiti espousing conservative political beliefs.
The list goes on.
My point is just this - these kinds of things signal a breakdown in civil society. The political antipathy today is far greater than it was in say 1860, and probably even the 1960s - especially since the segregationists in those days were democrats.
If you are truly interested in peace, then I suggest you personally work to ameliorate this hostility as I try to do when it is shoved in my face. If I'm wrong, what do you have to lose? Nothing. There just isn't any reason for it.
Thanks for thinking.
You're wrong.
As I said, I live in NYC and grew up in a very liberal neighborhood (Park Slope).
I've heard it all.
I really don't see how you can "smuggle" Viagra.
It's an over the counter drug in most of the world.
In any event, your post is bullshit for that reason alone. You have no proof regarding underage prostitutes - using viagra and hiring prostitutes is legal in much, if not most of the world. What does that mean? You have no documentation and thus everything else you wrote is highly suspect.
This is ultimately why liberals fail and will bring this country to civil war.
Conservatives tend to believe liberals are wrong about human nature and the proper function of the state. Liberals believe conservatives are evil.
Think about this long and hard. How long do you really think civilized society can continue when we have people like you shouting their mouths off how evil conservatives are?
The answer is quite simple - it can't last. What is most comical about this is that I have never met a liberal who has any real capacity to fight a civil war. Not only that, your favorite oppressed minority of the day is not only a tiny part of the population but doesn't even reproduce!
Anyway, for your own sake, I'd stick to slightly less inflammatory rhetoric. And, I live in New York City and know quite a few gay professionals. You know what? They are all Republicans. They could care less about gay marriage, but they sure as hell care about the hordes of morons on welfare and high taxes used to ensure those hordes vote for the whining Democratic candidate of the year.
I routinely order snus - Swedish tobacco product - direct from Sweden on a regular basis.
The US imposes an import duty on tobacco.
UPS and/or fedex collects the duty.
Actually, they send me a separate bill - which is quite small, so I pay it.
I don't know why this matters. A lot of us with blu-ray players rent blu-ray movies when they are available!
Having a blu-ray player, I can say one thing with absolute certainty however - I only buy blu-ray discs now. I haven't bought a DVD in over 2 years. I imagine in a decade, I'll have a 100" TV in my living room. DVD discs might like fine on a 32" LCD, but by buying blu-ray discs today, I know my movies will look great pretty much forever. I don't think I can fit anything larger than a 100" television in my living room. 1080p content is all you need for such a display.
You're penny wise and pound foolish. 720p is sufficient for any screen up to 50" - 60" in a normal sized living room. 1080p is ideal for screens 60" to 100".
Why would you waste all the money on 2 HDTV screens, and not make use of its maximum resolution?
It's like getting a Quad-Core processor to use Word.
Crazy.
They aren't good enough for anyone with an HDTV, which is everyone I know.
DVDs look like crap on a large HDTV. Why spend the money on an LCD or Plasma screen if you aren't going to take advantage of it to its fullest?
Umm, are you talking about the Articles of Confederation?
That didn't go over so well, as I recall. There is reason the constitution was ratified.
Anyway, good luck calling for a new constitutional convention!
Nothing "leeches" calcium from your bones. Calcium really has just two big functions in your body
1) Your heart,and some other muscles, contract by deporting calcium from cells. If there is too much calcium in your blood, you end up with elevated blood levels of calcium. This is unlikely to happen because
2) Osteoblast cells in your bones create and maintain the bone structure. When you are youngish, your body removes excess calcium by strengthening your bones. People who consume too much calcium build too much bone mass early in life. Like all cells, osteoblast cells have a fixed life. After a certain number of cell divisions, that's it. You're done. For people who consume diets with milk products, this happens at a much earlier point in life. Thus, osteoporosis is very common in places like Scandanavia, but virtually unknown amongst the poor in places like China. The same is true for disorders like kidney stones. Older people who have consumed dairy products throughout their lives no longer have osteoblast cells in abundance, and the kidneys are the main way excess calcium is removed (thus keeping your heart beating).
Coffee has nothing to do with this process. You want strong bones throughout your life? Don't consume dairy products or take calcium supplements. It's that simple.
Ridiculous. I've been to Charleston, Hilton Head Island, and Aiken. You know what? They all have broadband available. This means you live someplace rural.
People in rural China don't have access to many basics of urban civilization known since Roman times, ie paved streets and running water. Regular electricity service is not available in large sections of the countryside.
I listen to satellite radio in my office every day. $8 a month is a small price to pay to have a DJ choose good music for me to listen to.
Messing around with burning cds and downloading music is just not worth my time.
The textbooks point is amusing. I have no idea how colleges are these days - but I stopped using textbooks for humanities subjects in 8th grade.
In high school and college, we read original texts.
Brad Wardell specifically has stated Stardock games are written for mid- to low-end machines.
Sins of a Solar Empire is a bad example.
Securing access to oil, or any essential commodity, is a time honored tradition and the main reason we have countries instead of tribes.
Wow, you really are on a rampage.
Nope, I've seen the studies. (Actually read a some of 'em even.) Unless you can site a peer-reviewed study to back up your claims (and you haven't even tried yet), I'm going to continue to suspect that you haven't even checked, relying rather on your assumptions.
Sheesh, read the Wikipedia article on the subject. When you remove Psychology from the "sciences" something like 20% to 30% of women pursue scientific disciplines. This is basic logic here. The vast majority of teachers are women. It is not uncommon for men to almost never have a male teacher until they are uncommon. We have loads of people like yourself constantly telling girls love science, yet they don't enroll in such programs in college. We have virtually BANNED men's colleges, while many prominent women's colleges flourish. What more can we possibly do?
peer reviewed studies. What nonsense. Who are the peers? The angry crew in the women's studies departments? You need to get out into the real world!
Gosh, then all the cases of sexism I've witnessed first-hand (like your posts so far) are just my imagination!? Not to mention the peer-reviewed research on the topic?
If you think what I am saying is sexist, then you are simply delusional and paranoid. Of course you are going to see sexism everywhere. Honestly, I thought this kind of politically correct censorship ended a long time ago. How can speaking the truth be labeled with any kind of perjorative? Maybe you need medication? Most normal people dispute facts - they attach any "isms" to those presenting the facts.
As you seem obsessed with peer reviewed academic journals, I'm very curious - this is not a scientific study that is debatable. This is nothing more than a survey. What is the issue here? The fact that women freely choose not to pursue scientific disciplines? Why don't you find a "peer reviewed research" study on this topic for me. I'm really mystified as to how anyone could doubt the truth of what I say.
Defensive maybe, but you started the perjoratives and the insults so you're in a poor position to whine about feeling hurt.
Ahh, the paranoia again. I'd love for you to quite precisely what I said that was either a perjorative or an insult.
Epic fail, I'm definitely a man. You're simply a misogynist.
Surprising. This seems to be a touchy subject for you. Why is this?
Also, once again, I'm confused. How you can possibly call me a misogynist. What have I said that would make you think I hate women? Or anyone?
There is one simple time honored solution:
Execute every manager and owner of a company found to engage in such corruption.
Such corruption strikes at the very heart of civilized society, and it should be punished with ferocious justice. It is time people in positions of authority answer for their incompetence with their lives.
Wow, sexism *and* illogical assumptions all in one post. Well done.
I have merely reported the truth. There are significantly more women in undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate educational programs in the US than men. Even if 20% of all students studying scientific disciplines were women, the only logical conclusion is that today, women do not choose to studying scientific disciplines. There is nothing holding them back. They simply don't do it.
This is also untrue. Girls are lower levels of education are quite interested in studying science. It's only when sexist jerks start telling them that they it's un-feminine to be a scientist and that they can't do it (overtly or subtly) that they back off. This was the crux of the issue around Larry Summer's comments a few years ago. He, like you, was pretending like data doesn't exist on this matter, preferring his own assumptions instead.
My god, where did you go? Wellesley College?
You are repeating feminist nonsense from decades ago. Men have no problems with women studying sciences. In my electrical engineering program, almost everyone I knew would have loved to have girls in our classes.
20-25% of the total fraction of physicists seems as if it's pushing the meaning of "few", doesn't it?
Not really, when 60% of college students are women. The number of women studying scientific disciplines is quite small. I'd say probably fewer than 10% of female college graduates studied scientific disciplines, outside of life sciences.
And you clearly need to get out more and stop hanging out with the same guys who share your sexist views. I actually *did* receive a liberal arts education. My alma mater has shown that women both want to be physics majors and are capable of it by sustaining the highest number graduated in the country (apart from Bryn Mawr). Perhaps *you* attended the wrong school?
Ah ha, yeah, you are a Wellesley grad.
You're a bit too defensive, and your willingness to throw around perjoratives without much provocation demonstrates that you are in fact a militant, hypocritical feminist with little concern for the facts. I'm actually married to a girl who is currently in medical school. I have an electrical engineering degree from a major university (UIUC to be exact). I've been there in class where there are ZERO women. It took me 9 years to finally find a girl who was both scientifically inclined and attractive. Trust me, you need to separate your desires for the world from the reality of life. My experiences are not unique - and whether I was in school in the cornfields or back in NYC, women were the same. For every girl I've met who knows what Linux is, I've met 50 who can't talk about anything other than Cosmo, American Idol, or what depravity in which the Star of the Week is engaged.
Also, a bit of dating advice, lose the chip on your shoulder. Seriously. You're probably a smart girl, but the vast majority of men - particularly as they get older - just don't want to deal with that feminist bullshit.