I looked at that Gender Gap Index and I was intrigued where the ex-Soviet countries fell. They were VERY egalitarian but they rank poorly on that list. It really makes me wonder what's feeding that chart. These kinds of things often end up being highly skewed by a particular metric that may or may not be all that relevant. Examinations like this also tend to magnify the negative and ignore the positive.
The whole thing seems meant to feed someone's ego and political agenda.
In the US, it's not being taken from you to begin with. You can also live off a single income if you're engineers. If both of you work, you can just bank the 2nd income.
Your claims are absurd. They sound like old Soviet propaganda.
Then the facts don't add up. If he really "knows Java" then the GNU acronym really shouldn't be a problem. If GNU hurts his head then he probably doesn't really know as much as the media likes to claim he does.
No. It's just math and Americans have been conditioned to be afraid of math. At most, something like GNU is just silly and nothing really to get terribly excited about.
Oh, I am fairly confident that the "witness" is just making up bullshit.
On the other extreme, I know someone that's allergic to many things some to the point of being deadly. She never turned down a vaccine because everyone around her understood the math. Also, she lived in somewhat of a 3rd world country where these diseases weren't quite wiped out yet.
These precious suburban snowflakes really have no clue and no perspective. They have no respect for what these diseases can do to a person and how many people DIED in the past because of them.
It's really easy to get complacent in the US because we haven't had to worry about some of these diseases for generations.
> Because all laws are an all or nothing approach and none of them are written with limitations and context?
What planet are you from? Laws are generally written to be as broad as possible to allow the most abuse possible. They are seldom written in very targeted or limited terms. It is inevitable that they will be abused and spread far beyond the "intended victim".
That's fine as long as you are willing to accept the consequences.
We should allow your children to be shunned in order to protect others. If you insist on turning your children into pestilence reservoirs, then the rest of us should get to quarantine them. If you willingly break that quarantine, you should get prison time. You should also be on the hook for assault and manslaughter.
If you really want to turn your back on the modern world then at least have the balls to do it all the way (like the Amish do). No half measures.
Being exposed to commercials isn't good for anyone.
Your argument could pretty much be applied to any aspect of technological progress from the last 500 years. Your theocratic notion of self-flagellation is outdated already.
No. I think they are just trying to play the race card. It's also a lot easier to trigger the liberal "white man's burden" complex if you make the victim a minority.
In the context of monopolies, companies that are merely dominant, or companies too large to fail, such abuses can't be swept under the rug. The founding fathers despised big business as much as big government. There just wasn't as much of it then. Otherwise they might have directed more attention to it.
They would likely distrust Google as much as the British East India Company.
Corporate censorship isn't any better than when the government does it.
People that use these kinds of loans already have ZERO assets. Full liquidation is not going to hurt them any worse than they are already. In general there's this persistent hysterical fear of bankruptcy among proles. Meanwhile the 1% view it as just another legal tool.
Except you're forgetting that robots are a very large capital expenditure. That's even assuming that the relevant machines can even do the job. Replacing a job NOT prone to giving you carpal tunnel is much harder. That's part of why it hasn't been done already.
Some people of a particular genetic background flourish while others whine and play the victim card. At some point, you have to wonder if there is some genetic component and some people are just damaged by centuries of abuse coming from others as well as themselves.
You can count achievement in various ways to effectively remove the notion of "values" from the equation. You seem to want to re-define terms to the point where up means down and you can't really do that. There's no suitable re-definition that will work for you.
...sometime around the 60s I would think. Social welfare has been prevalent in all of the Western countries (even the US) for quite some time now. At one time it was even viewed as a military readiness issue. While it's still possible to be raised by meth heads, there's really no excuse for being hungry or malnourished in the West. Simple poverty isn't an excuse. Been there, did that.
No. The rest of the 99% are still blowing money like there's no tomorrow. They're just not blowing it on PCs any more. The PC market is mature and saturated. It's no longer got any "razzle dazzle".
H*LL, even the tablet market is starting to lose it's luster already...
Companies very much care about the operating system. This is really Microsoft's bread and butter. It always has been. Even home use flowed from the fact that Microsoft dominated business. Even if the OS isn't spying on you, it can break and there's also the usual "let other people test it" burn in period.
I recently upgraded my old box. The main reason was heat and noise. If the old box weren't a power hungry bruiser, I would simply have not had any motivation to bother.
Sure, the upgrade is cool now that I have it but I wasn't terribly motivated before. This upgrade was driven by complaints about the noise of the old machine.
> or that superdelegates were an important part of the Democrat nomination process
You're a whiney stupid bitch. Those superdelegates have SQUAT to do with what's going on in the election. Hillary is winning without them. You're just crying foul because your side is LOSING. Rather than accept that fact, you want to create some excuse. You want to "blame someone else".
It can't be your fault, or the fault of your candidate. You have to make up some nonsense and clutch at straws.
You represent a failure of basic math education in this country.
> but the government compensates insurance companies when they sell to high-risk people.
That's cool. This sounds what Obamacare should have been but wasn't. There were Republican states that had their risk-pool-of-last-resort set up like that. Nice, sensible, and now a memory.
Slashdot Mirror
I looked at that Gender Gap Index and I was intrigued where the ex-Soviet countries fell. They were VERY egalitarian but they rank poorly on that list. It really makes me wonder what's feeding that chart. These kinds of things often end up being highly skewed by a particular metric that may or may not be all that relevant. Examinations like this also tend to magnify the negative and ignore the positive.
The whole thing seems meant to feed someone's ego and political agenda.
In the US, it's not being taken from you to begin with. You can also live off a single income if you're engineers. If both of you work, you can just bank the 2nd income.
Your claims are absurd. They sound like old Soviet propaganda.
Then the facts don't add up. If he really "knows Java" then the GNU acronym really shouldn't be a problem. If GNU hurts his head then he probably doesn't really know as much as the media likes to claim he does.
No, we just mate within our own species and all remains well.
No. It's just math and Americans have been conditioned to be afraid of math. At most, something like GNU is just silly and nothing really to get terribly excited about.
> I find it hard to see how a woman can kill a child
It sounds like you had a really deprived childhood where you never had a sex education class and never went to a decent science museum.
Oh, I am fairly confident that the "witness" is just making up bullshit.
On the other extreme, I know someone that's allergic to many things some to the point of being deadly. She never turned down a vaccine because everyone around her understood the math. Also, she lived in somewhat of a 3rd world country where these diseases weren't quite wiped out yet.
These precious suburban snowflakes really have no clue and no perspective. They have no respect for what these diseases can do to a person and how many people DIED in the past because of them.
It's really easy to get complacent in the US because we haven't had to worry about some of these diseases for generations.
> Because all laws are an all or nothing approach and none of them are written with limitations and context?
What planet are you from? Laws are generally written to be as broad as possible to allow the most abuse possible. They are seldom written in very targeted or limited terms. It is inevitable that they will be abused and spread far beyond the "intended victim".
RICO is a wonderful example.
That's fine as long as you are willing to accept the consequences.
We should allow your children to be shunned in order to protect others. If you insist on turning your children into pestilence reservoirs, then the rest of us should get to quarantine them. If you willingly break that quarantine, you should get prison time. You should also be on the hook for assault and manslaughter.
If you really want to turn your back on the modern world then at least have the balls to do it all the way (like the Amish do). No half measures.
They could also liberate the whole thing and let the cat completely out of the bag. Scorch the earth behind them as they retreat.
Being exposed to commercials isn't good for anyone.
Your argument could pretty much be applied to any aspect of technological progress from the last 500 years. Your theocratic notion of self-flagellation is outdated already.
No. I think they are just trying to play the race card. It's also a lot easier to trigger the liberal "white man's burden" complex if you make the victim a minority.
In the context of monopolies, companies that are merely dominant, or companies too large to fail, such abuses can't be swept under the rug. The founding fathers despised big business as much as big government. There just wasn't as much of it then. Otherwise they might have directed more attention to it.
They would likely distrust Google as much as the British East India Company.
Corporate censorship isn't any better than when the government does it.
> I.e losing everything you ever had.
People that use these kinds of loans already have ZERO assets. Full liquidation is not going to hurt them any worse than they are already. In general there's this persistent hysterical fear of bankruptcy among proles. Meanwhile the 1% view it as just another legal tool.
Except you're forgetting that robots are a very large capital expenditure. That's even assuming that the relevant machines can even do the job. Replacing a job NOT prone to giving you carpal tunnel is much harder. That's part of why it hasn't been done already.
Some people of a particular genetic background flourish while others whine and play the victim card. At some point, you have to wonder if there is some genetic component and some people are just damaged by centuries of abuse coming from others as well as themselves.
You can count achievement in various ways to effectively remove the notion of "values" from the equation. You seem to want to re-define terms to the point where up means down and you can't really do that. There's no suitable re-definition that will work for you.
...sometime around the 60s I would think. Social welfare has been prevalent in all of the Western countries (even the US) for quite some time now. At one time it was even viewed as a military readiness issue. While it's still possible to be raised by meth heads, there's really no excuse for being hungry or malnourished in the West. Simple poverty isn't an excuse. Been there, did that.
> The damn thing should be on when I flip the switch.
That's pretty much how my new box is. Although even an old Atom/ION boots in 7 seconds with an SSD in it.
SSDs have been cheap enough to be a fast boot device for awhile now.
No. The rest of the 99% are still blowing money like there's no tomorrow. They're just not blowing it on PCs any more. The PC market is mature and saturated. It's no longer got any "razzle dazzle".
H*LL, even the tablet market is starting to lose it's luster already...
If you can't afford an SSD, then you can't really afford the banging either.
Companies very much care about the operating system. This is really Microsoft's bread and butter. It always has been. Even home use flowed from the fact that Microsoft dominated business. Even if the OS isn't spying on you, it can break and there's also the usual "let other people test it" burn in period.
I recently upgraded my old box. The main reason was heat and noise. If the old box weren't a power hungry bruiser, I would simply have not had any motivation to bother.
Sure, the upgrade is cool now that I have it but I wasn't terribly motivated before. This upgrade was driven by complaints about the noise of the old machine.
> or that superdelegates were an important part of the Democrat nomination process
You're a whiney stupid bitch. Those superdelegates have SQUAT to do with what's going on in the election. Hillary is winning without them. You're just crying foul because your side is LOSING. Rather than accept that fact, you want to create some excuse. You want to "blame someone else".
It can't be your fault, or the fault of your candidate. You have to make up some nonsense and clutch at straws.
You represent a failure of basic math education in this country.
> but the government compensates insurance companies when they sell to high-risk people.
That's cool. This sounds what Obamacare should have been but wasn't. There were Republican states that had their risk-pool-of-last-resort set up like that. Nice, sensible, and now a memory.