But now that you've admitted this, it negates your original argument. The argument was that while someone may claim to be able to pay for his own medical care, he can't pay for emergencies and expensive illnesses.
Well, you conceded that he can. He can do it by buying catastrophic insurance that is still cheaper than Obamacare, and paying for non-catastrophic expenses out of pocket.
Pointing out that it's okay because Obamacare is meant to prevent catastrophes as well as pay for them is irrelevant--the guy can afford to pay for prevention himself. He can legitimately say "I can pay my way and will be no burden on other people", removing the justification for Obamacare.
You'd never say that in other contexts. Imagine someone arguing "I support the right to vote, but only for people who vote for things beneficial to society".
We'd all immediately realize that's nonsense. Either you support it (and therefore support it being used both by people on your side and people not on your side), or you don't.
Actually I just tried Googling up+"C programming". It goes to 62 pages--far more than the first 100 results--and there are virtually no false positives. Very few of them were Objective-C. So this part of the survey seems to be okay, strange as it may seem.
the individual mandate is about preventing situations where people are unable to pay for emergency care. or unable to pay for it without defaulting on other debts or obligations.
Since I am trying to compare C, C++, C#, and Objective-C, the fact that a single search returns them all just makes the search more convenient. If they had called it ECPL I would have had to search for ECPL or C++ or C# or Objective-C and I would have gotten the same results (except for the false hits).
I don't get it. If you try searching for jobs programming in C, you'll find that almost everything that matches the search is Objective C, C++, or C# (or, on some poorly run job sites,a C++ or C# job where the punctuation got lost and it's displayed as C). Sometimes a job will say C/C++. C is rare as hen's teeth except for embedded development and there aren't *that* many jobs in embedded development.
I just went to monster.com and searched for C. What I found starting at the top was:
-- C++ job that lost the punctuation -- Objective-C -- C# job that lost the punctuation -- C/C++ -- Objective-C -- C/C++, C# -- C/C++ -- Objective-C
etc. The first C job was item 14 (and is embedded). The next C job, ignoring the false hits on such things as A B C, was item 24 (also embedded), and C wasn't the main skill required. So how in the world can C be number one?
Whether the "pro gay rights" campaign includes Middle Eastern countries is the test of whether it's a gay rights campaign or a left-wing politics campaign. Afghanistan and Iran not only are dominated by religious extremists, they also are third world countries with an anti-Western religion and culture, and in the eyes of the left, third world countries are poor oppressed victims of the West. Third world countries committing oppression is a violation of the narrative.
Obviously, nobody expects them to lobby the government of Afghanistan, but there are certainly things they could do, even if just making more people aware of the problem, or trying to get the US to exert diplomatic pressure on those countries.
1) It's a bad idea to train users that they should actually believe a web page that tells them they have a virus and how to remove it. This is typically used to spread malware, not remove it. 2) The FBI wanted this to go on as long as possible, because it allows them to spy on the traffic sent to the now FBI-controlled servers.
You don't want to redirect them to a page which tells them how to get rid of a virus. Believing pages that tell them that their system has malware and they need to follow the instructions on the page to get rid of it, is one of the common means of *spreading* malware.
Also, he assumes that the problem is that someone wants to start a war with a nuclear-armed state, rather than the nuclear-armed state starting a war with someone else.If Iran nukes Israel, it won't be because Israel started it.
We don't want to teach users that if they open a webpage which claims the computer is compromised and tells them what to do, that they should obey. That's how a lot of malware gets installed in the first place.
Managers, executives, marketers, and other people in high positions in companies like to measure things. Spying on customers produces a series of numbers that they can numerically compare and produce "objective results"; that's enough for it to appeal to them. Whether the numbers are actually useful only has a minimal effect on their decision to use them unless the cost is very high (which may apply to an entire advertising campaign, but certainly doesn't apply to this).
It should be quite clear that they are not really opposing critical thinking. In context, they are talking about specific "critical thinking" programs. Spinning this as "Republicans hate critical thinking" is like claiming someone who opposes the Patriot Act is unpatriotic.
While it may be inconvenient to make a switch to shut off one side of your toaster, that inconvenience is a natural fallout of the way toasters are built. They didn't deliberately design the toaster to be harder to modify than it would otherwise be, specifically to keep you from adding the switch. Moreover, they didn't buy laws that would make it easy to arrest you for installing a switch in your toaster.
All people cannot become leaders. It's like demanding that everyone be above average; the number of leaders is always going to be much less than the number of followers.
We certainly wouldn't accept an article which complains that not everyone is a manager, or not everyone is the President. How does it even mean anything to say that everyone can be a "leader"?
The problem is that you're the person saying "they should face the fine", but they're the people who would actually have to pay it. I'm sure that if you had offered to indemnify Apple for the cost of the fine (or the employee for the cost of losing a job) they'd have sold it.
That isn't going to be helpful, because there are measures you can take that will completely prevent him from getting access up to and including having everything go through a router located in a place he doesn't have physical access to. You are relying on doing your job as a parent improperly.
Modern airings of those old cartoons are edited for exactly that reason. You can bet that Elmer Fudd shooting Donald Duck's face is one of the first things taken out.
The argument "we only care about sex, why do we allow violence" doesn't hold water when talking about media for young children. We don't allow violence in that.
Whether the acts can affect the child's attitude and behavior in real life is also a big factor. The child will later in life interact with real people who have real boobies. The child might get ahold of a real gun. But the child probably won't be getting a laser, which is why kids' shows use lots of lasers.
Um, because Microsoft can change their own policy whenever they want?
Also, at some point there's going to be a secure boot chain all the way up to the browser, and you won't be able to use important websites or run important software unless you booted as secure boot.
Heinlein's works have made it to the big screen, but they haven't been good when they've done so. (Except Destination Moon, and that's for obvious reasons something few kids would be interested in).
And classic science fiction tends to contain a lot of outmoded technology, outmoded social attitudes, and generally outmoded references to everyday life (does your kid really understand why Have Spacesuit Will Travel has a TV show with a single sponsor, and how he can get real drugs for his emergency spacesuit supplies?). Also, Starship Troopers is a juvenile in name only, and I wouldn't push that on any kid who wasn't educated enough to know how voting restrictions often played out in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
But now that you've admitted this, it negates your original argument. The argument was that while someone may claim to be able to pay for his own medical care, he can't pay for emergencies and expensive illnesses.
Well, you conceded that he can. He can do it by buying catastrophic insurance that is still cheaper than Obamacare, and paying for non-catastrophic expenses out of pocket.
Pointing out that it's okay because Obamacare is meant to prevent catastrophes as well as pay for them is irrelevant--the guy can afford to pay for prevention himself. He can legitimately say "I can pay my way and will be no burden on other people", removing the justification for Obamacare.
You'd never say that in other contexts. Imagine someone arguing "I support the right to vote, but only for people who vote for things beneficial to society".
We'd all immediately realize that's nonsense. Either you support it (and therefore support it being used both by people on your side and people not on your side), or you don't.
Actually I just tried Googling up+"C programming". It goes to 62 pages--far more than the first 100 results--and there are virtually no false positives. Very few of them were Objective-C. So this part of the survey seems to be okay, strange as it may seem.
This is untrue. http://www.volokh.com/2012/03/29/justice-kennedy-actuarial-risk-and-the-individual-mandates-unconstitutionality/
The requirement is not limited to catastrophic coverage that covers emergency care and expensive care.
I just googled FizzBuzz, to which I have to ask, "Seriously?"
Is your job posted anywhere on a job site I can get to?
Since I am trying to compare C, C++, C#, and Objective-C, the fact that a single search returns them all just makes the search more convenient. If they had called it ECPL I would have had to search for ECPL or C++ or C# or Objective-C and I would have gotten the same results (except for the false hits).
I'm a moron because I know how to count to 14?
I don't get it. If you try searching for jobs programming in C, you'll find that almost everything that matches the search is Objective C, C++, or C# (or, on some poorly run job sites,a C++ or C# job where the punctuation got lost and it's displayed as C). Sometimes a job will say C/C++. C is rare as hen's teeth except for embedded development and there aren't *that* many jobs in embedded development.
I just went to monster.com and searched for C. What I found starting at the top was:
-- C++ job that lost the punctuation
-- Objective-C
-- C# job that lost the punctuation
-- C/C++
-- Objective-C
-- C/C++, C#
-- C/C++
-- Objective-C
etc. The first C job was item 14 (and is embedded). The next C job, ignoring the false hits on such things as A B C, was item 24 (also embedded), and C wasn't the main skill required. So how in the world can C be number one?
Remember when people said the younger generation was growing up with marijuana and it would be legal in 20 years?
Heck, remember that people in the 1960's said that things would be different once they grew up and had control of the establishment?
Whether the "pro gay rights" campaign includes Middle Eastern countries is the test of whether it's a gay rights campaign or a left-wing politics campaign. Afghanistan and Iran not only are dominated by religious extremists, they also are third world countries with an anti-Western religion and culture, and in the eyes of the left, third world countries are poor oppressed victims of the West. Third world countries committing oppression is a violation of the narrative.
Obviously, nobody expects them to lobby the government of Afghanistan, but there are certainly things they could do, even if just making more people aware of the problem, or trying to get the US to exert diplomatic pressure on those countries.
1) It's a bad idea to train users that they should actually believe a web page that tells them they have a virus and how to remove it. This is typically used to spread malware, not remove it.
2) The FBI wanted this to go on as long as possible, because it allows them to spy on the traffic sent to the now FBI-controlled servers.
You don't want to redirect them to a page which tells them how to get rid of a virus. Believing pages that tell them that their system has malware and they need to follow the instructions on the page to get rid of it, is one of the common means of *spreading* malware.
Also, he assumes that the problem is that someone wants to start a war with a nuclear-armed state, rather than the nuclear-armed state starting a war with someone else.If Iran nukes Israel, it won't be because Israel started it.
We don't want to teach users that if they open a webpage which claims the computer is compromised and tells them what to do, that they should obey. That's how a lot of malware gets installed in the first place.
Managers, executives, marketers, and other people in high positions in companies like to measure things. Spying on customers produces a series of numbers that they can numerically compare and produce "objective results"; that's enough for it to appeal to them. Whether the numbers are actually useful only has a minimal effect on their decision to use them unless the cost is very high (which may apply to an entire advertising campaign, but certainly doesn't apply to this).
It should be quite clear that they are not really opposing critical thinking. In context, they are talking about specific "critical thinking" programs. Spinning this as "Republicans hate critical thinking" is like claiming someone who opposes the Patriot Act is unpatriotic.
You cannot get out of the mandate by only buying catastrophic health insurance that covers situations such as getting cancer.
While it may be inconvenient to make a switch to shut off one side of your toaster, that inconvenience is a natural fallout of the way toasters are built. They didn't deliberately design the toaster to be harder to modify than it would otherwise be, specifically to keep you from adding the switch. Moreover, they didn't buy laws that would make it easy to arrest you for installing a switch in your toaster.
All people cannot become leaders. It's like demanding that everyone be above average; the number of leaders is always going to be much less than the number of followers.
We certainly wouldn't accept an article which complains that not everyone is a manager, or not everyone is the President. How does it even mean anything to say that everyone can be a "leader"?
The problem is that you're the person saying "they should face the fine", but they're the people who would actually have to pay it. I'm sure that if you had offered to indemnify Apple for the cost of the fine (or the employee for the cost of losing a job) they'd have sold it.
It's easy to tell someone else to take the risk.
That isn't going to be helpful, because there are measures you can take that will completely prevent him from getting access up to and including having everything go through a router located in a place he doesn't have physical access to. You are relying on doing your job as a parent improperly.
Modern airings of those old cartoons are edited for exactly that reason. You can bet that Elmer Fudd shooting Donald Duck's face is one of the first things taken out.
The argument "we only care about sex, why do we allow violence" doesn't hold water when talking about media for young children. We don't allow violence in that.
Whether the acts can affect the child's attitude and behavior in real life is also a big factor. The child will later in life interact with real people who have real boobies. The child might get ahold of a real gun. But the child probably won't be getting a laser, which is why kids' shows use lots of lasers.
Um, because Microsoft can change their own policy whenever they want?
Also, at some point there's going to be a secure boot chain all the way up to the browser, and you won't be able to use important websites or run important software unless you booted as secure boot.
At least in this case the submitter adds "hey do have a general interest to watch it", whichthe one with the kid didn't.
Heinlein's works have made it to the big screen, but they haven't been good when they've done so. (Except Destination Moon, and that's for obvious reasons something few kids would be interested in).
And classic science fiction tends to contain a lot of outmoded technology, outmoded social attitudes, and generally outmoded references to everyday life (does your kid really understand why Have Spacesuit Will Travel has a TV show with a single sponsor, and how he can get real drugs for his emergency spacesuit supplies?). Also, Starship Troopers is a juvenile in name only, and I wouldn't push that on any kid who wasn't educated enough to know how voting restrictions often played out in the real world.