During the Obamacare debate, all kinds of financial tricks were used to limit the cost to roughly $1T over ten years.
I argue, kill this divert the funding to fusion research. We would benefit more from solving our energy problem for the foreseeable future than we "benefit" from the mess that is Obamacare.
The other thing is WAAS. FAA wanted a way to compensate for GPS signal degradation, so they had WAAS put in, which broadcasts correction data... from the GPS satellite! (That's why most modern GPS receivers can pick up WAAS easily - the satellite is already transmitting the information, so picking up the WAAS information is trivial). Of course, if you degrate the main GPS signal and don't degrade WAAS, the whole exercise is pointless.
The WAAS satellites are not GPS satellites. First off the WAAS sats are commercial not military and are multi-purpose, the FAA / DOT just leases bandwidth on these birds. Second the WAAS sats are geosynchronous (but the GPS sats are not). Note: None of this invalidates your basic argument that WAAS is "free" as compared to traditional DGPS.
During the Obamacare debate, all kinds of financial tricks were used to limit the cost to roughly $1T over ten years. I argue, kill this divert the funding to fusion research. We would benefit more from solving our energy problem for the foreseeable future than we "benefit" from the mess that is Obamacare.
I'm pretty sure your pump it down to a sub / oil-rig / etc. idea to do RO is on par with a perpetual motion machine.
E*Trade does at least for account holders with sufficient assets.
Get with the times the term is VPILF. ;-)
The WAAS satellites are not GPS satellites. First off the WAAS sats are commercial not military and are multi-purpose, the FAA / DOT just leases bandwidth on these birds. Second the WAAS sats are geosynchronous (but the GPS sats are not). Note: None of this invalidates your basic argument that WAAS is "free" as compared to traditional DGPS.
Sources are many but these will do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Area_Augmentation_SystemI should point out the parties in power have such low approval ratings. Last I checked the Democrat controlled congress has a much lower approval rating (~18%) than president Bush does (~29%). http://www.gallup.com/poll/107242/Congress-Approval-Rating-Ties-Lowest-Gallup-Records.aspx
Doh! Beat me to it (I guess I should have scrolled down).