Too bad you're proposing the same thing. A better idea would be to stop robbing Peter and let Peter just put the amount he's paying in into an investment fund of sorts he has control over. And if you work somewhere like I do, my employer is helping to give me a "pension" by matching my 401(k) contributions anyway (the difference is that once my employer contributes to my 401(k), the money becomes mine, whereas with a pension I'd need to worry about sticking with this dead-end job for the next 40 years and not being fired over some drama).
Really, this relying on an employer ("pension") or government ("social security") to cut you a check
because you've reached a certain age and to continue to cut you checks until you croak is silly.
When I'll be 65, it's doubtful there's going to be any kind of social security anymore,
or else it will look completely different and may not even be a very good option.
At any rate, I'm going into this fully assuming that (like everything else in my life, big surprise here),
if I want to afford heat in winter and buy food, it's going to be 100% my responsibility when I retire.
And if I intend to only pursue hobbies after a certain age,
I need to start preparing now for a way to continue to pay my bills without working.
Really, the fact that my paycheck (and my employer also) is taxed to pay for old people
who didn't save during their lifetimes really just sort of leads to resentment towards them.
I don't have any tears for when
I hear yet another story about an old person who's having trouble living off social security alone.
Although that could also be because when I used to work fast food, I made $800 per month and had to
pay rent and bills.
It seems these old folks are getting just as much, probably don't have to pay rent,
and can't figure out how to make it work despite all the wisdom they're suppose have (being older than I am after all).
Just means I suppose that I'll eat rice and beans today and drive an economy car while everyone else drives gas-guzzling SUVs
and eats banquets every night, so that one day in 40 years when they're starving and hoping for a job as a WalMart greeter
to make ends meet, I'll still be eating rice and beans, and quite used to it and content with my retirement also I might add.
But how would people survive up to age 65 if they didn't already work.
You would be surprised.
My parents decided to cut me off one day (doctor said one thing, bible said another, so I lost)
when I was in the middle of college, so I had to drop out and get a full time job
since my expected family contribution was high enough that FAFSA wouldn't help me.
If you want to do something, it's 100% your responsibility to plan ahead and have legal control of the resources you need, and that includes retirement.
Sorry, that's just how life is.
I'm not going to repeat the same mistake with retirement,
and I think that those who do make a mistake like that with their retirement can very well pay the price.
I know people who haven't worked (except maybe an odd job once when they were teenagers) in their whole life,
and I know what those people are like.
These aren't people born into wealth, these are just people, who for whatever reason,
have managed to get their parents to continue to house them and feed them and clothe them.
I'm sure you're familiar with the typical aspie basement-dweller who doesn't have a job?
They do exist, and I certainly don't want them receiving my tax dollar.
If their parents are so over-attached to their kids that they'll pay for their kids to live well into adult life,
that's their private matter.
It becomes my matter when my tax dollars start going to them,
and at least the current system with its flaws does at least prevent my tax dollar from going to them
(at least in the form of social security, but that's what we were talking about).
and of course this attitude is pushed very hard by people who are hawking quack cures of one sort or another
While that may be true, it doesn't preclude the gp from also being correct.
The real reason why cures are rare is that curing disease is hard. Biology is complicated, and even where the cause is well understood, a cure can be hard to implement.
Then why hasn't anyone done anything about transsexualism? We know there are measurable differences in male and female brains. We know how to prevent a girl with the misfortune of male genitals from undergoing male puberty (and thus having no chance at ever being a woman again). Transsexualism has a 50% mortality rate, and it's disingenuous to discard that because it happens to be by suicide.
If big pharma and big health care aren't hypocrites,
then why has nothing been done about transsexualism despite the diagnosis being a simple brain scan and the cure being some pills that cost $10 per month.
Yes, yes, I know there are people dying from cancer. But this is a gimmie.
But hey, anti-depressants cost the transsexual patient more, AND, you can have a patient who's attempting gender transition buying both the HRT and the anti-depressant if you make it impossible to treat transsexualism before it's too late and the patient's body begins masculinization as a teenager.
And hey, we can keep marginalizing that 7 year old boy who wants to kill himself because he's not a girl. Fun and profit all around.
There are several 24/7 stores where I live.
Somehow these stores manage to operate without sleep-depriving their employees.
Just sayin'
But hey, go ahead and flame me for not having respect for medical traditions
when those traditions are counterproductive.
That's just how it is.
It doesn't have to be.
Although the solution I'm implying by comparing a hospital to a 24-hour store
would probably bring down doctors' wages,
so I'm fully expecting that it'll never happen.
Mod parent up. I've listened to some doctors who would put Gny. Sgt. Hartman to shame.
It's disgusting, childish, and completely unprofessional.
Sure, we all think it's cute when Dr. House says something surly,
but the reality of the situation is that the culture in medicine needs to change.
4) decrease doctors' salaries
You're playing with fire, sir, to suggest such a thing,
but I wholeheartedly agree.
The inflated wages of the US doctor are a sign our system is broken,
not a sign that our doctors are somehow better than other doctors.
Most people want to believe that doctors are all-knowing, all-caring
investigative scientists and researchers with the patient's well-being in their heart.
The truth is that most doctors are little better than overpaid car mechanics.
(Yes, that's hyperbole, but doctors really are not better people than the rest of us,
and a lot more people need to realize that before change will ever happen.)
Pilots, who are at least as studly and narcissistic as physicians
I don't think you understand the size of most doctors' egos.
It took me a while to understand that they literally think they're gods.
They also know, even with training, that no one can remember every detail of every complex task they have to perform.
Doctors haven't figured that out yet.
I don't think they ever will because they believe themselves to be infallible
and also because most people believe doctors to be infallible.
It's fun when I have to research a call or two (I work at an answering service) because a doctor is throwing a temper tantrum
and I catch her in a lie (or two or three).
But, for some reason, that never reflects poorly on the doctor,
it just keeps the phone agent from being fired.
The other odd thing is they don't ask me to research these things anymore.
If we point out to a doctor client's management that one of their doctors lied, they'll call us liars and go off service (despite the recording of the call).
So, it's just good business to stroke the doctor's ego and admit fault.
They love being right, and they love it when they can cuss someone out.
No, the problem of sleepy doctors, or wrong meds administered, or anything else
that goes wrong at hospitals stems from the fact that most doctors are
just simply rotten human beings with over-inflated egos
who know a bit of biology.
we've got to get enough doctors to treat every patient without doctors having to stand crazy shifts.
You know why the AMA won't ever do that, right? It would drive wages down for doctors,
and we can't have that.
We sure don't want to dumb-down med school so that more people can pass and get their MD.
That's not what the problem is. No one's flunking out of med school. The AMA won't let med schools take in more students.
Most people assume that doctors are thoroughly educated, dedicated, and intelligent individuals. Go work at an answering service for a year or two and you'll find out something else.
It can't be misogynist. It was written/said by a woman. Never mind how stupid, unobservant, and uncritical it implies women are. Never mind the (wo)man behind the curtain!
Frankly, I think we should have compulsory military service too.
I'd be all for it as long as this ideal society either includes compulsory female military service as well or revokes female suffrage. Service guarantees citizenship, after all. None of this "all people are created equal but some are more equal than others" crap I'm getting sick of in modern society.
I'd mod you up but there's no +1, Facepalm. The saddest part of that anecdote is that it's completely believable.
The degrees we're supposed to respect the people in power for having are meaningless.
Can you point out the specific part of TOS which makes it so?
If they decide it's against the TOS, it really doesn't matter. Unless you can afford a lawyer and a drawn-out legal battle, if they decide you can't access your games anymore, the decision is final. They have your money, but you're no longer a customer. That's been my experience with DRM.
Don't remember stuff you don't need to. Most of my technical memory is in books and websites I have bookmarked. Can't remember some obscure API in the javax namespace? Who cares? I have a book for that. Can't remember that particular syntax in PHP? Who cares? Google it.
But the stuff I can't look up online, like what's going on with my friends, who's dating who, etc. That info is the important info in my life, and it's the info I commit to wetware.
Packing everyone into 8x10 cells, isn't an acceptable solution to me. Any solution that doesn't allow for wide open space of undeveloped land, wilderness, forests, jungles, deserts, is suboptimal.
Plug everyone into some kind of Second Life (or Matrix or 13th Floor or whatever) and you could do both.
I tried riding a bike to work. I lost a few lbs and felt great. What didn't feel so great however was huffing and puffing up a hill in low gear while giant SUVs sped past me at 10 over the speed limit (~45 mph) about a foot away. Where there are no bike paths, bike is a problem.
All things considered, I'd rather not send my kids to a site pre-populated with people who spend a lot of time chatting about porn.
Hi,
I'm 27 and all things considered I may never have children, but sometimes I hope. I was wondering why not? I remember that kids on my bus around 4th or 5th grade knew what a pussy was when I did not, and I was ashamed of that. They went on to be much more socially successful than I was, and they probably reproduced, when I did not. If I do have children, could you please outline why I shouldn't? I can see some potential counterarguments, but I'm interested in what a real parent would say.
I'm still waiting for the Jews to declare martial law in the aftermath of Y2K.
I do not even consider Obama a president. He is more like a King or an Emporer.
He may as well be with that fatalist attitude. Please tell me you vote, and that you vote for some candidate that isn't running under the major party (er, parties, I forget they have two brand names).
Once I stop hearing crap that re-enforces the "two-party" system (e.g. wasted vote argument, Libertarians are delusional anarchists argument, etc) and then nothing changes, then maybe we can conclude that the system is broken. From what I can tell the only thing broken about the system is people who are too afraid to use the ballot box.
after the depression fully slams the world in 2012
I'll hold you to that prediction. Something tells me I'll be waiting yet again. I just got a raise, bought a 24" LCD monitor, and I might be looking at a new mobo and proc soon. My roommate is in college and interning at a major corporation. Things seem to be looking up.
At the current trend, right now 1 in 4 children live on food stamps. If the current trend continues 2 of 4 children will be food stamps by the end of 2012.
And do you know why that is? It's because straight people have destroyed marriage and are too busy fucking like rabbits. Maybe once they stop blaming their own problems on gays (or in your case, these mysterious puppetmasters), they'll get somewhere.
Thank you. That makes sense. In that case, it would be the natural state of the USTPO to be a disaster, so there's nothing that needs to be done to fix the USTPO.
Though their current admission strikes me similar to a guy coming out as gay to his parents years after his mother started introducing him to nice boys.
I'm trying to understand your analogy and failing. Is there something wrong with being gay, and/or can one be made gay?
I think a better analogy would be someone who has a house with a leaky roof. Initially, he figures the dripping water in the kitchen when it rains is just a minor inconvenience and nothing more. Then one day it hits him that it's also causing structural damage.
So tell me, oh wise one, which is the "correct" choice here?
I usually see 5 or so political parties represented on my ballot. I'd say the correct choice is one that isn't Republican or Democrat based on your complaints. That leaves 3 other choices. Maybe you don't have as many where you live, but from what I understand the Libertarian party is pretty good at getting ballot access. Personally, the only party I wouldn't vote for if it were the only alternative is the Natural Law Party, but I've always had a Libertarian candidate to vote for in any race that also had a Natural Law Party candidate. In fact, it's very few races on ballots I've filled out where Libertarian isn't a choice.
The "two party system" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Slashdot Mirror
Enough of this robbing peter to pay Paul crap.
Too bad you're proposing the same thing. A better idea would be to stop robbing Peter and let Peter just put the amount he's paying in into an investment fund of sorts he has control over. And if you work somewhere like I do, my employer is helping to give me a "pension" by matching my 401(k) contributions anyway (the difference is that once my employer contributes to my 401(k), the money becomes mine, whereas with a pension I'd need to worry about sticking with this dead-end job for the next 40 years and not being fired over some drama).
Really, this relying on an employer ("pension") or government ("social security") to cut you a check because you've reached a certain age and to continue to cut you checks until you croak is silly. When I'll be 65, it's doubtful there's going to be any kind of social security anymore, or else it will look completely different and may not even be a very good option. At any rate, I'm going into this fully assuming that (like everything else in my life, big surprise here), if I want to afford heat in winter and buy food, it's going to be 100% my responsibility when I retire. And if I intend to only pursue hobbies after a certain age, I need to start preparing now for a way to continue to pay my bills without working.
Really, the fact that my paycheck (and my employer also) is taxed to pay for old people who didn't save during their lifetimes really just sort of leads to resentment towards them. I don't have any tears for when I hear yet another story about an old person who's having trouble living off social security alone. Although that could also be because when I used to work fast food, I made $800 per month and had to pay rent and bills. It seems these old folks are getting just as much, probably don't have to pay rent, and can't figure out how to make it work despite all the wisdom they're suppose have (being older than I am after all).
Just means I suppose that I'll eat rice and beans today and drive an economy car while everyone else drives gas-guzzling SUVs and eats banquets every night, so that one day in 40 years when they're starving and hoping for a job as a WalMart greeter to make ends meet, I'll still be eating rice and beans, and quite used to it and content with my retirement also I might add.
But how would people survive up to age 65 if they didn't already work.
You would be surprised. My parents decided to cut me off one day (doctor said one thing, bible said another, so I lost) when I was in the middle of college, so I had to drop out and get a full time job since my expected family contribution was high enough that FAFSA wouldn't help me. If you want to do something, it's 100% your responsibility to plan ahead and have legal control of the resources you need, and that includes retirement. Sorry, that's just how life is.
I'm not going to repeat the same mistake with retirement, and I think that those who do make a mistake like that with their retirement can very well pay the price. I know people who haven't worked (except maybe an odd job once when they were teenagers) in their whole life, and I know what those people are like. These aren't people born into wealth, these are just people, who for whatever reason, have managed to get their parents to continue to house them and feed them and clothe them. I'm sure you're familiar with the typical aspie basement-dweller who doesn't have a job? They do exist, and I certainly don't want them receiving my tax dollar.
If their parents are so over-attached to their kids that they'll pay for their kids to live well into adult life, that's their private matter. It becomes my matter when my tax dollars start going to them, and at least the current system with its flaws does at least prevent my tax dollar from going to them (at least in the form of social security, but that's what we were talking about).
Here you go: http://sydneypadua.com/2dgoggles/lovelace-and-babbage-vs-the-organist-pt-1/
and of course this attitude is pushed very hard by people who are hawking quack cures of one sort or another
While that may be true, it doesn't preclude the gp from also being correct.
The real reason why cures are rare is that curing disease is hard. Biology is complicated, and even where the cause is well understood, a cure can be hard to implement.
Then why hasn't anyone done anything about transsexualism? We know there are measurable differences in male and female brains. We know how to prevent a girl with the misfortune of male genitals from undergoing male puberty (and thus having no chance at ever being a woman again). Transsexualism has a 50% mortality rate, and it's disingenuous to discard that because it happens to be by suicide.
If big pharma and big health care aren't hypocrites, then why has nothing been done about transsexualism despite the diagnosis being a simple brain scan and the cure being some pills that cost $10 per month.
Yes, yes, I know there are people dying from cancer. But this is a gimmie.
But hey, anti-depressants cost the transsexual patient more, AND, you can have a patient who's attempting gender transition buying both the HRT and the anti-depressant if you make it impossible to treat transsexualism before it's too late and the patient's body begins masculinization as a teenager.
And hey, we can keep marginalizing that 7 year old boy who wants to kill himself because he's not a girl. Fun and profit all around.
My point is, hospitals are open 24/7.
There are several 24/7 stores where I live. Somehow these stores manage to operate without sleep-depriving their employees. Just sayin'
But hey, go ahead and flame me for not having respect for medical traditions when those traditions are counterproductive.
That's just how it is.
It doesn't have to be. Although the solution I'm implying by comparing a hospital to a 24-hour store would probably bring down doctors' wages, so I'm fully expecting that it'll never happen.
1) stop the hazing culture in medicine
Mod parent up. I've listened to some doctors who would put Gny. Sgt. Hartman to shame. It's disgusting, childish, and completely unprofessional. Sure, we all think it's cute when Dr. House says something surly, but the reality of the situation is that the culture in medicine needs to change.
4) decrease doctors' salaries
You're playing with fire, sir, to suggest such a thing, but I wholeheartedly agree. The inflated wages of the US doctor are a sign our system is broken, not a sign that our doctors are somehow better than other doctors.
Most people want to believe that doctors are all-knowing, all-caring investigative scientists and researchers with the patient's well-being in their heart. The truth is that most doctors are little better than overpaid car mechanics. (Yes, that's hyperbole, but doctors really are not better people than the rest of us, and a lot more people need to realize that before change will ever happen.)
Pilots, who are at least as studly and narcissistic as physicians
I don't think you understand the size of most doctors' egos. It took me a while to understand that they literally think they're gods.
They also know, even with training, that no one can remember every detail of every complex task they have to perform.
Doctors haven't figured that out yet. I don't think they ever will because they believe themselves to be infallible and also because most people believe doctors to be infallible.
It's fun when I have to research a call or two (I work at an answering service) because a doctor is throwing a temper tantrum and I catch her in a lie (or two or three). But, for some reason, that never reflects poorly on the doctor, it just keeps the phone agent from being fired.
The other odd thing is they don't ask me to research these things anymore. If we point out to a doctor client's management that one of their doctors lied, they'll call us liars and go off service (despite the recording of the call). So, it's just good business to stroke the doctor's ego and admit fault. They love being right, and they love it when they can cuss someone out.
No, the problem of sleepy doctors, or wrong meds administered, or anything else that goes wrong at hospitals stems from the fact that most doctors are just simply rotten human beings with over-inflated egos who know a bit of biology.
we've got to get enough doctors to treat every patient without doctors having to stand crazy shifts.
You know why the AMA won't ever do that, right? It would drive wages down for doctors, and we can't have that.
We sure don't want to dumb-down med school so that more people can pass and get their MD.
That's not what the problem is. No one's flunking out of med school. The AMA won't let med schools take in more students.
Most people assume that doctors are thoroughly educated, dedicated, and intelligent individuals. Go work at an answering service for a year or two and you'll find out something else.
Wow, that relly sounds misogynist to me.
It can't be misogynist. It was written/said by a woman. Never mind how stupid, unobservant, and uncritical it implies women are. Never mind the (wo)man behind the curtain!
Frankly, I think we should have compulsory military service too.
I'd be all for it as long as this ideal society either includes compulsory female military service as well or revokes female suffrage. Service guarantees citizenship, after all. None of this "all people are created equal but some are more equal than others" crap I'm getting sick of in modern society.
That's what SHE said.
Well played, sir.
My kingdom for mod points.
I'd mod you up but there's no +1, Facepalm. The saddest part of that anecdote is that it's completely believable. The degrees we're supposed to respect the people in power for having are meaningless.
Why not just buy a damn guitar, man?
I did buy a damn guitar, you insensitive clod! (Got it used for $150.)
Can you point out the specific part of TOS which makes it so?
If they decide it's against the TOS, it really doesn't matter. Unless you can afford a lawyer and a drawn-out legal battle, if they decide you can't access your games anymore, the decision is final. They have your money, but you're no longer a customer. That's been my experience with DRM.
Don't remember stuff you don't need to. Most of my technical memory is in books and websites I have bookmarked. Can't remember some obscure API in the javax namespace? Who cares? I have a book for that. Can't remember that particular syntax in PHP? Who cares? Google it.
But the stuff I can't look up online, like what's going on with my friends, who's dating who, etc. That info is the important info in my life, and it's the info I commit to wetware.
Packing everyone into 8x10 cells, isn't an acceptable solution to me. Any solution that doesn't allow for wide open space of undeveloped land, wilderness, forests, jungles, deserts, is suboptimal.
Plug everyone into some kind of Second Life (or Matrix or 13th Floor or whatever) and you could do both.
I tried riding a bike to work. I lost a few lbs and felt great. What didn't feel so great however was huffing and puffing up a hill in low gear while giant SUVs sped past me at 10 over the speed limit (~45 mph) about a foot away. Where there are no bike paths, bike is a problem.
And I even told my grandmother, who is extreme right wing Christian. She was happy that I was happy.
Wha, huh? What qualifies "extreme right wing Christian" in your book? I don't think you've seen an "extreme right wing Christian" in action.
But just to pick nits... most geeks don't wear pants? So they walk around with their dangly bits hanging out?
I a utilikilt, you insensitive clod!
All things considered, I'd rather not send my kids to a site pre-populated with people who spend a lot of time chatting about porn.
Hi,
I'm 27 and all things considered I may never have children, but sometimes I hope. I was wondering why not? I remember that kids on my bus around 4th or 5th grade knew what a pussy was when I did not, and I was ashamed of that. They went on to be much more socially successful than I was, and they probably reproduced, when I did not. If I do have children, could you please outline why I shouldn't? I can see some potential counterarguments, but I'm interested in what a real parent would say.
Thank you.
I'm still waiting for the Jews to declare martial law in the aftermath of Y2K.
I do not even consider Obama a president. He is more like a King or an Emporer.
He may as well be with that fatalist attitude. Please tell me you vote, and that you vote for some candidate that isn't running under the major party (er, parties, I forget they have two brand names).
Once I stop hearing crap that re-enforces the "two-party" system (e.g. wasted vote argument, Libertarians are delusional anarchists argument, etc) and then nothing changes, then maybe we can conclude that the system is broken. From what I can tell the only thing broken about the system is people who are too afraid to use the ballot box.
after the depression fully slams the world in 2012
I'll hold you to that prediction. Something tells me I'll be waiting yet again. I just got a raise, bought a 24" LCD monitor, and I might be looking at a new mobo and proc soon. My roommate is in college and interning at a major corporation. Things seem to be looking up.
At the current trend, right now 1 in 4 children live on food stamps. If the current trend continues 2 of 4 children will be food stamps by the end of 2012.
And do you know why that is? It's because straight people have destroyed marriage and are too busy fucking like rabbits. Maybe once they stop blaming their own problems on gays (or in your case, these mysterious puppetmasters), they'll get somewhere.
Thank you. That makes sense. In that case, it would be the natural state of the USTPO to be a disaster, so there's nothing that needs to be done to fix the USTPO.
Though their current admission strikes me similar to a guy coming out as gay to his parents years after his mother started introducing him to nice boys.
I'm trying to understand your analogy and failing. Is there something wrong with being gay, and/or can one be made gay?
I think a better analogy would be someone who has a house with a leaky roof. Initially, he figures the dripping water in the kitchen when it rains is just a minor inconvenience and nothing more. Then one day it hits him that it's also causing structural damage.
So tell me, oh wise one, which is the "correct" choice here?
I usually see 5 or so political parties represented on my ballot. I'd say the correct choice is one that isn't Republican or Democrat based on your complaints. That leaves 3 other choices. Maybe you don't have as many where you live, but from what I understand the Libertarian party is pretty good at getting ballot access. Personally, the only party I wouldn't vote for if it were the only alternative is the Natural Law Party, but I've always had a Libertarian candidate to vote for in any race that also had a Natural Law Party candidate. In fact, it's very few races on ballots I've filled out where Libertarian isn't a choice.
The "two party system" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Its first act was to pledge each member to continue the war (the second world one) until complete victory had been achieved.
And so, the UN un-Nazi-ed the world!