The article says that the ones that do in fact just sell to a monopoly public utility are going ahead, since they have guaranteed revenue and hence didn't even bother getting a guarantee on their loan. Which would appear to be the opposite of your statement.
And yes there's political risk, that's not a reason for a governmetn guarantee though, that's a reason to jack the rates up and not build the thing.
Everyone else manages to take a loan and roll it over. Sure there's a risk interest rates go up, but if you think that's the case then those bank rates aren't "crippling" they are just factoring that in.
If you need a government guarantee on your loan in order to afford it then whatever you are doing isn't viable. Whether it's building a nuclear reactor, buying a house, or going to college.
Depends. The simplest option would be to let Israel take the heat. But there a are good reasons I'm not in the military/espionage business.
The best option would have been to not have blown the load on Iraq when it was obviously the wrong place and hence be able to take more risks this time, but I also don't have a time machine.
Is water a raw material? If so then by your argument they are being smart importing it, which is the opposite of the conclusion in the post I replied to.
If it isn't a raw material, then your argument is irrelevant since it says nothing about the importing of non-raw materials.
It's a nickname, it means whatever people agree it means. And most people understand the the tower meaning just fine. The fact people had to post pointing out it is the nickname of the bell indicates even they knew what was meant (or else they wouldn't have had to point it out). So it communicated the intended meaning just fine.
"Nobody would have been better off, if anything, it would have lasted longer."
That's a direct claim by you that slaves would not have been freed a day earlier (since that would have made them better off).
I have no problem with the point that who knows what would have happened if history had been different, and maybe the British would have kept slaves around longer if they had kept the colonies. That's not the point I'm arguing with - I have no problem with being wrong myself. Though it did seem pretty obvious that I was taking an "assuming the rest of history went exactly the same way" since otherwise there's nothing to have a discussion about.
I don't think so. You can endorse someone while not agreeing with everything they stand for or are.
You are just endorsing them for whatever office they are running for. Maybe being a thief isn't such a bad thing in that domain.
And while their endorsement does mention some pluses on the candidate's side it finished with:
The direction of this nation is at stake. This election offers a clear choice.
Harry Reid has an inspiring life story. But the boy who came from modest means in little Searchlight is no more. Instead, he's become Harry Reid, champion of liberal special interests inside the beltway.
That's why Nevadans should support Sharron Angle in this pivotal election.
Which seems very much along the lines of "we don't like that guy, vote for the other one".
The mechanism is independent, but yes whatever mechanism you choose will have some sort of "gaming" ability from the teacher.
Of course if it's a test you don't test with that teacher, you test when they enter the next "phase". And compare their performance with the test they took when entering that teachers phase. So the incentive for the teacher would be to harm their performance if they want to cheat the system.
Non-mandatory school attendance harms the poor though. Since the kids are more likely to be put to work instead of attending school. Which is economically better in the short term but bad in the long term working as a poverty trap. Of course that mightn't be true anymore given legalities of kids working in the first place.
The topic is 5th grade though, non-compulsory school might be OK, but I suspect a couple of years older than that.
Ban pens and paper too, damn students distracted by writing notes to each other.
But seriously no technology (well short of the "I know Kung fu" knowledge uploader in the Matrix) is going be a silver bullet to learning.
My fix is simple, doesn't use technology, but will never be implemented given the special interests involved.
1. Pay teachers more. 2. Make teachers pay and pay rises and promotions performance based (and yes it's perfectly possible, and in fact not difficult at all, to adjust for the students - you are judging "how did these students do relative to what we would expect them to do given their performance history". 3. Reduce the summer break to a more reasonable length of time - increase the length of the other breaks if you don't want to increase the number of hours spent in school. 4. Disruptive kids get booted to schools/classes that will be full of other disruptive kids. Where hopefully the teachers are better able to control them and the teaching is better suited to them. With a mechanism for them to return if they start behaving. 5. Reward students based on results, both raw and for improvements. Whether that is just prestige or actually stuff/cash depends on the detailed results of that "paying kids to learn" study that was in Time and here a while ago and hopefully some longer terms studies.
There is one item in that list that every involved group hates. So it'll never happen.
Unless of course the economy needed to purge out the bad resource allocations and reset itself. You know by a recession causing lots of bankruptcies moving capital from those who clearly aren't good at using it to produce to those that are.
Yes stimulus can do good things, textbook Keynesian intervention can smooth out the bumps in the economy - which is a good thing from many perspectives.
Of course Keynesian economics also involves the government running a surplus (and hence reducing economic growth) during the boom times. The US decided to apply stimulus throughout the boom years, which has essentially rendered stimulus useless in the bust times since the debt levels are too high.
Slashdot Mirror
So you are claiming that face book somehow pays the people who were in early with the personal data of those who got in later?
Or you are ignorant of what a pyramid scheme, and too retarded to know that responding to a correction on a topic you are ignorant about is foolish.
Try rereading, you missed the actual bit to be worried about...
pointless comment text
The article says that the ones that do in fact just sell to a monopoly public utility are going ahead, since they have guaranteed revenue and hence didn't even bother getting a guarantee on their loan. Which would appear to be the opposite of your statement.
And yes there's political risk, that's not a reason for a governmetn guarantee though, that's a reason to jack the rates up and not build the thing.
Everyone else manages to take a loan and roll it over. Sure there's a risk interest rates go up, but if you think that's the case then those bank rates aren't "crippling" they are just factoring that in.
If you need a government guarantee on your loan in order to afford it then whatever you are doing isn't viable. Whether it's building a nuclear reactor, buying a house, or going to college.
Don't put your data centers in caves, mines, hurricane proof water tanks, etc.
When the time comes that we need to unplug skynet, you are just making things hard.
Depends. The simplest option would be to let Israel take the heat. But there a are good reasons I'm not in the military/espionage business.
The best option would have been to not have blown the load on Iraq when it was obviously the wrong place and hence be able to take more risks this time, but I also don't have a time machine.
It's a blatantly false statement. Not checked by any journalist reporting on this of course.
You still try.
Because after Iraq the US would probably prefer to have a little more evidence than "we think" and "it's obvious".
More likely the US cares if they are doing things which have more of a weapons angle than a power angle.
Is water a raw material? If so then by your argument they are being smart importing it, which is the opposite of the conclusion in the post I replied to.
If it isn't a raw material, then your argument is irrelevant since it says nothing about the importing of non-raw materials.
It's a nickname, it means whatever people agree it means. And most people understand the the tower meaning just fine. The fact people had to post pointing out it is the nickname of the bell indicates even they knew what was meant (or else they wouldn't have had to point it out). So it communicated the intended meaning just fine.
So trade is bad?
"Nobody would have been better off, if anything, it would have lasted longer."
That's a direct claim by you that slaves would not have been freed a day earlier (since that would have made them better off).
I have no problem with the point that who knows what would have happened if history had been different, and maybe the British would have kept slaves around longer if they had kept the colonies. That's not the point I'm arguing with - I have no problem with being wrong myself. Though it did seem pretty obvious that I was taking an "assuming the rest of history went exactly the same way" since otherwise there's nothing to have a discussion about.
I don't think so. You can endorse someone while not agreeing with everything they stand for or are.
You are just endorsing them for whatever office they are running for. Maybe being a thief isn't such a bad thing in that domain.
And while their endorsement does mention some pluses on the candidate's side it finished with:
Which seems very much along the lines of "we don't like that guy, vote for the other one".
That's interesting and very cool.
Not sure it applied to a 5th grade classroom as such.
The mechanism is independent, but yes whatever mechanism you choose will have some sort of "gaming" ability from the teacher.
Of course if it's a test you don't test with that teacher, you test when they enter the next "phase". And compare their performance with the test they took when entering that teachers phase. So the incentive for the teacher would be to harm their performance if they want to cheat the system.
Non-mandatory school attendance harms the poor though. Since the kids are more likely to be put to work instead of attending school. Which is economically better in the short term but bad in the long term working as a poverty trap. Of course that mightn't be true anymore given legalities of kids working in the first place.
The topic is 5th grade though, non-compulsory school might be OK, but I suspect a couple of years older than that.
It's a nickname, there is no "technically".
It is commonly used to refer to the bell, or to the clock, or to the clock tower.
Except this has nothing to do with power supplied, but with inverters. You know NOT-gates.
Ban pens and paper too, damn students distracted by writing notes to each other.
But seriously no technology (well short of the "I know Kung fu" knowledge uploader in the Matrix) is going be a silver bullet to learning.
My fix is simple, doesn't use technology, but will never be implemented given the special interests involved.
1. Pay teachers more.
2. Make teachers pay and pay rises and promotions performance based (and yes it's perfectly possible, and in fact not difficult at all, to adjust for the students - you are judging "how did these students do relative to what we would expect them to do given their performance history".
3. Reduce the summer break to a more reasonable length of time - increase the length of the other breaks if you don't want to increase the number of hours spent in school.
4. Disruptive kids get booted to schools/classes that will be full of other disruptive kids. Where hopefully the teachers are better able to control them and the teaching is better suited to them. With a mechanism for them to return if they start behaving.
5. Reward students based on results, both raw and for improvements. Whether that is just prestige or actually stuff/cash depends on the detailed results of that "paying kids to learn" study that was in Time and here a while ago and hopefully some longer terms studies.
There is one item in that list that every involved group hates. So it'll never happen.
Fungus is easy to kill. Of course if you want to keep the host alive, it's a different story :)
Investigating and misuse of government grant money is perfectly within his mandate.
Of course doing so when there is no indication of such misuse and a previous investigation yielded nothing is stepping out of the bounds.
Unless of course the economy needed to purge out the bad resource allocations and reset itself. You know by a recession causing lots of bankruptcies moving capital from those who clearly aren't good at using it to produce to those that are.
Yes stimulus can do good things, textbook Keynesian intervention can smooth out the bumps in the economy - which is a good thing from many perspectives.
Of course Keynesian economics also involves the government running a surplus (and hence reducing economic growth) during the boom times. The US decided to apply stimulus throughout the boom years, which has essentially rendered stimulus useless in the bust times since the debt levels are too high.