Wrong, there are restrictions on water for use as well. In certain areas, in times of drought, non-essential activities like washing your car or watering your lawn can be restricted.
I second this. If in-ear-monitors don't bother you, then the Etymotic ER4Ps are about the best headphones you can get. I've had my pair for going on 7 years and have had no problems what so ever.
I would argue GDP per capita isn't all its cracked up to be in terms of a societal indicator. Yes, the GDP per capita in the US is higher than in Germany, but I would argue that quality of life is much higher in Germany than in the US. Consumers in the US spend a huge amount of money on frivolous things, and waste quite a bit on things like overpaying for healthcare. This article from a few years back gives a good overview of why GDP per capita is quite flawed: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/magazine/16GDP-t.html?pagewanted=all
Yes, the US influences the world, but not THAT much. There are many things that the US does that other places have no intention of implementing in the near future.
I find that many countries in Europe enjoy more freedom than the US. Just look at comparative prison populations between Europe and the US - do you really believe that people in the US are so much more criminal than Europe, or are the levels of oppression just higher?
Its not just the 4S having these problems. I have a 4 and upgraded to iOS5 - since that time I've noticed a substantial reduction in battery life. Usually by the time I get home from work I'm around 20% battery, whereas before the upgrade, I'd have to be using the phone pretty heavily all day to drain the battery that much.
This sounds like the perfect argument for why government should provide a basic level of healthcare for all Americans. As you say, you're not required to purchase them for your personal use.... The government purchases those things to... serve you and the rest of the country. etc
To summarize: When you enter the voting center, you get an envelope, and papers with the names of candidates on them. You go in the private voting booth, and for each race, you put the paper corresponding to the candidate you want in the envelope. You then seal the envelope, exit the voting booth and drop the envelope in a clear plastic box. Thats it. Then the votes are tallied by counting the number of papers for each candidate. Its low-tech, sure, but I would think it would be difficult to hack.
But at the risk of keeping things going, I just want to point out that something of value is moved within the economy when the used car salesman sells somebody a car. Someone who didn't have a car before now has a car. Same with financing - banks lending money to businesses/entrepreneurs/homeowners/etc allows them to expand their business or buy a house, thereby enriching the local economy.
And yes, as you point out, people gamble as a form of entertainment. And no doubt there are some traders on the stock market who trade for entertainment as well. But if I follow your point correctly, I'd say that claiming that HFT is a form of entertainment is a bit of a stretch.
It comes down to this: what value is created by a trader holding a stock for a few seconds and then selling it?
Hmm, still not sure that analogy holds. The used car salesman provides both a good (the used car) and a service (advertising/buying/selling of cars). The used car salesman analogy would apply I think if you were talking about the services provided by the traders themselves to clients. But within the actual trades themselves, theres nothing there.
I think a better analogy for HFT is this: lets say that using an ultra-sensitive, high-speed camera system, you could calculate with a high degree of accuracy the movement of the ball on a roulette wheel. And for whatever reason, this roulette system allowed betting during movement of the roulette wheel. Then I'd say you could make a fair amount of money using this setup if you had an automatic betting system. But I wouldn't say any value is being created here.
In response to your point 1), I think your analogy is flawed. Yes, both cab drivers and waiters don't 'create' anything, but they both provide a service for the money they earn. On the other hand, what useful product/service/etc does HFT provide? What value is created by HFT (other than the $$$ coming out)? Its just shuffling money around and taking advantage of fractional differences in markets. Nothing more than a shell game.
I'm not sure I agree with you. As you say, roads and bridges aren't given to a single person, they're provided for all to use. And police and fire provide a public service as well. But at the same time, all of these, while benefitting society, are also provided to individuals, which you seem to be against. Take for example the fire department - if my house is on fire, the fire department comes to put out the fire. Is this aiding an individual? I'd say arguably yes, while at the same time as aiding society. Sometimes the two go hand in hand. Roads and bridges are the same way... they're a public infrastructure, but used by individuals, for their individual needs (and at different rates of usage, I should add).
So along these same lines, healthcare is arguably a public service. I'm not saying people shouldn't have to pay for it... but like many of the other public services the government provides which most people will likely need and use at one point or another in their lives (roads, bridges, fire, police), the government has the responsibility to provide healthcare as well.
So whats a 'basic level of healthcare'? I'll use France as an example (I live there so I have experience in the system). In France, everybody is automatically covered under 'Security Social' or 'Secu' for short. Essentially, Secu is a system of reimbursement (like insurance) for health care needs. For most things, Secu covers about 60% of the cost, but can cover up to 100% depending on the procedure. However, Secu doesn't cover dental visits, corrective eyewear, or most prescriptions. If you want more coverage on medical procedures, plus dental, presription and eyewear coverage, then you have the option of getting a 'top-up' private insurance (mine for example costs 30€/month).
So as an example, when I go see a general practitioner, I pay 23€ (the cost of a visit at any public general practitioner). If I had just Secu, I would get reimbursed 60% of that about a week later, so the final cost to me is around 9€. With my 'top-up' insurance, I pay 0.
So by your reasoning that the government shouldn't take resources from everyone to pay for things individuals use, the government also shouldn't provide: -roads -bridges -fire/police/EMT services -water utilities etc...
I would argue, that healthcare, like many of the other services the government offers, is precisely the type of thing a government should offer for these reasons - A) It is a common, public service. Everyone at some point in their life will need healthcare. EVERYONE. So it stands to reason that if everyone is paying in to a healthcare system, they'll eventually benefit from it. B) The government exists to 'provide for the common Welfare'. It stands to reason that a healthy population, like a robust transport network and public safety, are in the best interests of the government. A healthy population means more productivity, higher GDP growth, less uncertainty among the populace and better overall satisfaction.
Its hard to see any reason why the government should NOT provide a basic level of healthcare as a public service.
Its so darn expensive because hospitals have to subsidize those who come in without insurance with payments from those who do have insurance. So in effect, those with insurance are already paying for everyone else.
If there was a base level of insurance for everybody, a hospital could count on recouping some of their costs for caring for the indigent, and wouldn't have to charge such outrageous fees.
Slashdot Mirror
Or even better, one from 2011 which can fly and roll on the ground http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF0uLnMoQZA
Actually, it sounds like its more of a passenger door attack...
I thought it was because the ICE would melt on the hot tracks...
I see your anecdote and raise it this one: "Gun-toting soccer mom found shot dead" http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33220258/
Wrong, there are restrictions on water for use as well. In certain areas, in times of drought, non-essential activities like washing your car or watering your lawn can be restricted.
I second this. If in-ear-monitors don't bother you, then the Etymotic ER4Ps are about the best headphones you can get. I've had my pair for going on 7 years and have had no problems what so ever.
https://spideroak.com/
I'd say there are lots of bear arms in Canada... at least one pair for every pair of bear legs.
I would argue GDP per capita isn't all its cracked up to be in terms of a societal indicator. Yes, the GDP per capita in the US is higher than in Germany, but I would argue that quality of life is much higher in Germany than in the US. Consumers in the US spend a huge amount of money on frivolous things, and waste quite a bit on things like overpaying for healthcare. This article from a few years back gives a good overview of why GDP per capita is quite flawed: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/16/magazine/16GDP-t.html?pagewanted=all
So if citizens are depicted in light colors, what colors are non-citizens depicted in?
And so do the wolves.
So which is your statement? 100% imagination or 100% inaccurate?
You'd be surprised, but there are some dwarves out there who have entire outfits made of spider silk.
Yes, the US influences the world, but not THAT much. There are many things that the US does that other places have no intention of implementing in the near future.
I find that many countries in Europe enjoy more freedom than the US. Just look at comparative prison populations between Europe and the US - do you really believe that people in the US are so much more criminal than Europe, or are the levels of oppression just higher?
That reminds me of this site: http://dozierinternetlaw.cybertriallawyer.com/
In their "Unauthorized Access" section, they say its unauthorized to view the HTML code on the site. Too funny!
Its not just the 4S having these problems. I have a 4 and upgraded to iOS5 - since that time I've noticed a substantial reduction in battery life. Usually by the time I get home from work I'm around 20% battery, whereas before the upgrade, I'd have to be using the phone pretty heavily all day to drain the battery that much.
This sounds like the perfect argument for why government should provide a basic level of healthcare for all Americans. As you say, you're not required to purchase them for your personal use. ... The government purchases those things to ... serve you and the rest of the country. etc
I don't understand why voting has to be so difficult. The French system seems to be pretty secure: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_France#Voting_procedures
To summarize: When you enter the voting center, you get an envelope, and papers with the names of candidates on them. You go in the private voting booth, and for each race, you put the paper corresponding to the candidate you want in the envelope. You then seal the envelope, exit the voting booth and drop the envelope in a clear plastic box. Thats it. Then the votes are tallied by counting the number of papers for each candidate. Its low-tech, sure, but I would think it would be difficult to hack.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
But at the risk of keeping things going, I just want to point out that something of value is moved within the economy when the used car salesman sells somebody a car. Someone who didn't have a car before now has a car. Same with financing - banks lending money to businesses/entrepreneurs/homeowners/etc allows them to expand their business or buy a house, thereby enriching the local economy.
And yes, as you point out, people gamble as a form of entertainment. And no doubt there are some traders on the stock market who trade for entertainment as well. But if I follow your point correctly, I'd say that claiming that HFT is a form of entertainment is a bit of a stretch.
It comes down to this: what value is created by a trader holding a stock for a few seconds and then selling it?
Hmm, still not sure that analogy holds. The used car salesman provides both a good (the used car) and a service (advertising/buying/selling of cars). The used car salesman analogy would apply I think if you were talking about the services provided by the traders themselves to clients. But within the actual trades themselves, theres nothing there.
I think a better analogy for HFT is this: lets say that using an ultra-sensitive, high-speed camera system, you could calculate with a high degree of accuracy the movement of the ball on a roulette wheel. And for whatever reason, this roulette system allowed betting during movement of the roulette wheel. Then I'd say you could make a fair amount of money using this setup if you had an automatic betting system. But I wouldn't say any value is being created here.
In response to your point 1), I think your analogy is flawed. Yes, both cab drivers and waiters don't 'create' anything, but they both provide a service for the money they earn. On the other hand, what useful product/service/etc does HFT provide? What value is created by HFT (other than the $$$ coming out)? Its just shuffling money around and taking advantage of fractional differences in markets. Nothing more than a shell game.
I'm not sure I agree with you. As you say, roads and bridges aren't given to a single person, they're provided for all to use. And police and fire provide a public service as well. But at the same time, all of these, while benefitting society, are also provided to individuals, which you seem to be against. Take for example the fire department - if my house is on fire, the fire department comes to put out the fire. Is this aiding an individual? I'd say arguably yes, while at the same time as aiding society. Sometimes the two go hand in hand. Roads and bridges are the same way... they're a public infrastructure, but used by individuals, for their individual needs (and at different rates of usage, I should add).
So along these same lines, healthcare is arguably a public service. I'm not saying people shouldn't have to pay for it... but like many of the other public services the government provides which most people will likely need and use at one point or another in their lives (roads, bridges, fire, police), the government has the responsibility to provide healthcare as well.
So whats a 'basic level of healthcare'? I'll use France as an example (I live there so I have experience in the system). In France, everybody is automatically covered under 'Security Social' or 'Secu' for short. Essentially, Secu is a system of reimbursement (like insurance) for health care needs. For most things, Secu covers about 60% of the cost, but can cover up to 100% depending on the procedure. However, Secu doesn't cover dental visits, corrective eyewear, or most prescriptions. If you want more coverage on medical procedures, plus dental, presription and eyewear coverage, then you have the option of getting a 'top-up' private insurance (mine for example costs 30€/month).
So as an example, when I go see a general practitioner, I pay 23€ (the cost of a visit at any public general practitioner). If I had just Secu, I would get reimbursed 60% of that about a week later, so the final cost to me is around 9€. With my 'top-up' insurance, I pay 0.
So by your reasoning that the government shouldn't take resources from everyone to pay for things individuals use, the government also shouldn't provide:
-roads
-bridges
-fire/police/EMT services
-water utilities
etc...
I would argue, that healthcare, like many of the other services the government offers, is precisely the type of thing a government should offer for these reasons - A) It is a common, public service. Everyone at some point in their life will need healthcare. EVERYONE. So it stands to reason that if everyone is paying in to a healthcare system, they'll eventually benefit from it. B) The government exists to 'provide for the common Welfare'. It stands to reason that a healthy population, like a robust transport network and public safety, are in the best interests of the government. A healthy population means more productivity, higher GDP growth, less uncertainty among the populace and better overall satisfaction.
Its hard to see any reason why the government should NOT provide a basic level of healthcare as a public service.
Its so darn expensive because hospitals have to subsidize those who come in without insurance with payments from those who do have insurance. So in effect, those with insurance are already paying for everyone else.
If there was a base level of insurance for everybody, a hospital could count on recouping some of their costs for caring for the indigent, and wouldn't have to charge such outrageous fees.
First Post!