The problem is that the US population is rather polarized as well. This polarization is rather encouraged because people fear voting for a third party will mean wasting their vote.
If you ever want a chance of a third party or independent (small 'i') candidate winning then we need a different election system. My personal favorite is the instant run-off system, where each voter ranks their choices. If their first choice fails to get a majority, then their vote falls to the next choice, and so-on, until one of the candidates gets a majority of votes.
with this system, the voter can give their first choice to a third-party candidate without fear of "wasting" their vote.
Our infrastructure really is in bad shape... i should know, I drove over the 35w bridge in Minneapolis the morning before it collapsed (I might have actually been on it when it collapsed but i drove home a different way than normal that afternoon). Anyway, I'm sure the money could be put to good use, so long as it really was put toward fixing our infrastructure, and not put toward something else, or someone's pet projects.
Even if Canada is our friend, we are still essentially shipping wealth out of the country. With all due respect to Canadians, I'd rather it stayed here.
The tire idea is interesting, but I see a big problem with it. Add up all of the tax you pay for fuel in a couple of years. That is probably going to be a number in the hundreds. Tires can already be rather pricey, particularly if you go for the ones that have better handling/traction characteristics. Now with the new tax, they become hundreds of dollars more expensive.
So now your average person is going to try to save money by buying the cheapest tires that they think they can get away with, and will attempt to use them as long as possible... ie probably rather bald, before replacing them. So we will have lots of cars on the road with bald tires that were never very good to begin with = lots more traffic accidents.
I don't like the GPS tracking proposal, but I think your argument is wrong. The more info that is collected, the more accurate the analysis should be. Obviously innocent people are going to be near any crime scene. Now, if you were there, AND you had a motive...
Just another example of the "if you have done nothing then you have nothing to fear" mentality. Give me a break. If they want to they could pretty easily manufacture a motive that would be hard to disprove.
On the other hand, a shorter DNA strand has less room for errors that might be non-life threatening.
Meaning duplication errors are magnified.
No, the odds of any given base pair being transcribed incorrectly is the same regardless of how long the chain of DNA is. Thus you will have exactly the same numbers of errors in vital genes as you would if mobile DNA is thrown in around those genes.
* Tue, 30 Jun 2009 04:00:00 UT to Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:00:00 UT:
We will be performing maintenance on the LAADS' system on Tuesday, June 30 between 11am and 1pm. There will be intermittent connectivity problems during this time.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Oh I know - it's like when Copernicus and Galileo said "The Earth goes around the Sun" and the Church pointed to what was written on an old piece of paper and said "pass".
I think you meant "fail". Could be wrong, but Wikipedia states that
"he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest."
You really think that someone that would be in their target demographic would even so much as give a passing glance at the Yaris??
The Yaris is far from being a luxury car and cannot compare in terms of performance to the model S. If you want to make a legitimate comparison, you would need to compare the model S to an equivalent luxury car (equivilant in terms of features and performance) If you do that, I bet you will see a much different result.
You could compare a cheap 12ft aluminum fishing boat to an expensive 50ft luxury yacht too, after all, they both get you to the other side of the lake, but there is a huge difference in the experience. That experience is worth a lot.
Safe to use? You mean not 8ft wide and 2+ tons I presume. Well, the current US domestic market ford focus would would be fine in the UK. Not as good as the European Focus, but it would suffice, and would certainly be safe. Also, the fusion/milan would be fine ( after all, they are essentially the same car as the mazda 6 which is quite capable, and sold world-wide. I'm sounding like a ford advocate here, but I'm sure that smaller cars like the cobalt and caliber would be safe, if not exciting.
If you have really expensive electricity, and really cheap fuel, then of course it could be more expensive. But it would contribute less to smog (even dirty coal power plants are a LOT cleaner than internal combustion engines), if you care about that sort of thing.
No, it's an E-REV. Extended-Range Electric Vehicle. It has 40-60 miles of all-electric range. It just happens to *also* have an onboard generator.
Perhaps you never heard, but what you are describing is called a "Series hybrid". Look it up.
Also, US crash standards do tend to be a large barrier to the introduction of foreign produced models to the US. While those cars might be available in other markets, it is not possible to blindly say that those models can be economically converted to meet US standards. It might be possible possible, but it may not make economic sense.
I wouldn't say they are doing well. They are still losing money, and still might end up going bankrupt in the next year or two. They WILL be at a competitive disadvantage to the other two. GM and Chrysler, being in bankruptcy, can make cost cuts that would be illegal / in breach of contract in normal circumstances. Thus even though Ford is currently ahead, they may end up fighting a loosing battle.
Do the The Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police buy a million rangers per year? No, they don't. In fact, ford has been planning for quite a while to close down their ford ranger plant. In addition to the ford ranger not selling all that well, that plant is also one of fords least automated assembly lines.
They aren't profitable right now they just had a bigger cushion of cash that the other two, and that is mostly due to their decision to renegotiate their loans prior to the economic crash.
You are presuming that the drive train of a miata costs the same as an equivalent electric drive train + batteries. The problem is, enough batteries to drive 200 miles equates to about 8-10k in cost right now. That doesn't even include the electric motor and electronics to power the motor properly. Your miata would likely end up being $40k instead of $25k. How many people would buy a $40k miata?
China has plenty of its own "withering nuclear fire" to tap into. Do you think they would just sit there as ICBMs fly into their airspace? If Japan ever decided to use atomic/hydrogen bombs on China, you can be assured that it would be the end of civilization as we know it. Even if the rest of the world stayed out of it, the radioactive fall-out resulting from nuclear war between Japan and China would kill most of the people and animals on the planet.
It isn't necessarily that simple. Researchers have found instances where having one copy of a gene that can cause a genetic disease along with a normal gene is actually more beneficial than having two copies of the normal gene. Thus the population would tend to maintain the diseased gene in the gene pool, even though a significant number of people end up with two copies of the diseased gene, and die off early in life.
Actually many of the early pioneers DID marry and have children with the locals. One of my ancestors was a fur trader who married a woman from a local tribe in Ontario. Actually, native women were pretty much the only reasonable option for fur traders. It isn't as though there were lots of European women running around the woods at that time.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that the US population is rather polarized as well. This polarization is rather encouraged because people fear voting for a third party will mean wasting their vote.
If you ever want a chance of a third party or independent (small 'i') candidate winning then we need a different election system. My personal favorite is the instant run-off system, where each voter ranks their choices. If their first choice fails to get a majority, then their vote falls to the next choice, and so-on, until one of the candidates gets a majority of votes.
with this system, the voter can give their first choice to a third-party candidate without fear of "wasting" their vote.
You have always had the freedom to break the law, you just have to expect that there will be consequences if you get caught.
Playing devils advocate for a moment...
Our infrastructure really is in bad shape... i should know, I drove over the 35w bridge in Minneapolis the morning before it collapsed (I might have actually been on it when it collapsed but i drove home a different way than normal that afternoon). Anyway, I'm sure the money could be put to good use, so long as it really was put toward fixing our infrastructure, and not put toward something else, or someone's pet projects.
Even if Canada is our friend, we are still essentially shipping wealth out of the country. With all due respect to Canadians, I'd rather it stayed here.
The tire idea is interesting, but I see a big problem with it. Add up all of the tax you pay for fuel in a couple of years. That is probably going to be a number in the hundreds. Tires can already be rather pricey, particularly if you go for the ones that have better handling/traction characteristics. Now with the new tax, they become hundreds of dollars more expensive.
So now your average person is going to try to save money by buying the cheapest tires that they think they can get away with, and will attempt to use them as long as possible... ie probably rather bald, before replacing them. So we will have lots of cars on the road with bald tires that were never very good to begin with = lots more traffic accidents.
5m is not enough to determine what lane you are in, or if you are on one side of a barrier or the other.
I don't like the GPS tracking proposal, but I think your argument is wrong. The more info that is collected, the more accurate the analysis should be. Obviously innocent people are going to be near any crime scene. Now, if you were there, AND you had a motive...
Just another example of the "if you have done nothing then you have nothing to fear" mentality. Give me a break. If they want to they could pretty easily manufacture a motive that would be hard to disprove.
On the other hand, a shorter DNA strand has less room for errors that might be non-life threatening.
Meaning duplication errors are magnified.
No, the odds of any given base pair being transcribed incorrectly is the same regardless of how long the chain of DNA is. Thus you will have exactly the same numbers of errors in vital genes as you would if mobile DNA is thrown in around those genes.
* Tue, 30 Jun 2009 04:00:00 UT to Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:00:00 UT:
We will be performing maintenance on the LAADS' system on Tuesday, June 30 between 11am and 1pm. There will be intermittent connectivity problems during this time.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Oh I know - it's like when Copernicus and Galileo said "The Earth goes around the Sun" and the Church pointed to what was written on an old piece of paper and said "pass".
I think you meant "fail". Could be wrong, but Wikipedia states that
"he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest."
Certainly sounds like a fail to me.
You really think that someone that would be in their target demographic would even so much as give a passing glance at the Yaris??
The Yaris is far from being a luxury car and cannot compare in terms of performance to the model S. If you want to make a legitimate comparison, you would need to compare the model S to an equivalent luxury car (equivilant in terms of features and performance) If you do that, I bet you will see a much different result.
You could compare a cheap 12ft aluminum fishing boat to an expensive 50ft luxury yacht too, after all, they both get you to the other side of the lake, but there is a huge difference in the experience. That experience is worth a lot.
Safe to use? You mean not 8ft wide and 2+ tons I presume. Well, the current US domestic market ford focus would would be fine in the UK. Not as good as the European Focus, but it would suffice, and would certainly be safe. Also, the fusion/milan would be fine ( after all, they are essentially the same car as the mazda 6 which is quite capable, and sold world-wide. I'm sounding like a ford advocate here, but I'm sure that smaller cars like the cobalt and caliber would be safe, if not exciting.
Yes, but being a series hybrid makes it practical to use for anyone, not just those that never need to drive more than 100 miles.
If you have really expensive electricity, and really cheap fuel, then of course it could be more expensive. But it would contribute less to smog (even dirty coal power plants are a LOT cleaner than internal combustion engines), if you care about that sort of thing.
BYD F3DM is a hybrid,
No, it's an E-REV. Extended-Range Electric Vehicle. It has 40-60 miles of all-electric range. It just happens to *also* have an onboard generator.
Perhaps you never heard, but what you are describing is called a "Series hybrid". Look it up.
Also, US crash standards do tend to be a large barrier to the introduction of foreign produced models to the US. While those cars might be available in other markets, it is not possible to blindly say that those models can be economically converted to meet US standards. It might be possible possible, but it may not make economic sense.
I wouldn't say they are doing well. They are still losing money, and still might end up going bankrupt in the next year or two. They WILL be at a competitive disadvantage to the other two. GM and Chrysler, being in bankruptcy, can make cost cuts that would be illegal / in breach of contract in normal circumstances. Thus even though Ford is currently ahead, they may end up fighting a loosing battle.
Even the poorest among us is not starving due to lack of food or money.
Get a clue. People in the US, US citizens, die from starvation every day! I don't think you have any idea what being truly poor means.
Do the The Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police buy a million rangers per year? No, they don't. In fact, ford has been planning for quite a while to close down their ford ranger plant. In addition to the ford ranger not selling all that well, that plant is also one of fords least automated assembly lines.
They aren't profitable right now they just had a bigger cushion of cash that the other two, and that is mostly due to their decision to renegotiate their loans prior to the economic crash.
Average cost for a NEW vehicle.
You are completely ignoring the fact that MOST of the population cannot afford ANY new vehicle at all.
You are presuming that the drive train of a miata costs the same as an equivalent electric drive train + batteries. The problem is, enough batteries to drive 200 miles equates to about 8-10k in cost right now. That doesn't even include the electric motor and electronics to power the motor properly. Your miata would likely end up being $40k instead of $25k. How many people would buy a $40k miata?
China has plenty of its own "withering nuclear fire" to tap into. Do you think they would just sit there as ICBMs fly into their airspace? If Japan ever decided to use atomic/hydrogen bombs on China, you can be assured that it would be the end of civilization as we know it. Even if the rest of the world stayed out of it, the radioactive fall-out resulting from nuclear war between Japan and China would kill most of the people and animals on the planet.
You are really looking forward to that?
It isn't necessarily that simple. Researchers have found instances where having one copy of a gene that can cause a genetic disease along with a normal gene is actually more beneficial than having two copies of the normal gene. Thus the population would tend to maintain the diseased gene in the gene pool, even though a significant number of people end up with two copies of the diseased gene, and die off early in life.
I suppose I'm not the target demographic for your post, but all of the acronyms cause it to be totally unintelligible to me.
Actually many of the early pioneers DID marry and have children with the locals. One of my ancestors was a fur trader who married a woman from a local tribe in Ontario. Actually, native women were pretty much the only reasonable option for fur traders. It isn't as though there were lots of European women running around the woods at that time.