Your cite does not show that government employees make 45% more than their equivalents, but simply that government workers make more than private sector workers. I have no doubt that a janitor makes less than a college-educated bureaucrat, or a fast food worker makes less than a firefighter. You all have to really read things more closely. A government lawyer makes less than a private sector lawyer, a government doctor makes less than a private sector doctor, a government programmer makes less than a private sector programmer, etc.
I have never understood the idea of taxing things people need like income.
Because that way you can pay for other things people need, like roads, hospital, military protection, police, fire, etc. There honestly isn't really anything taxable other than income that can cover these things.
If you're going to write to your representative, you might want to mention that the average government worker makes 45% more than their equivalent in the private sector (30% more if you only include salary). I don't know the precise situation in Washington, but in most states with deficits, if the workers pay was cut to the same as they would in the private sector, the deficit would be more than closed.
My representative likes me to provide cites when I make pronouncements like that.
Unless their "director of computing" can't tell the difference between ink and toner, which wouldn't surprise me overmuch.
Or, which I assumed, she was giving a simplified, technically wrong but non-misleading statement to the press. Also, I would presume that any large-scale university printing operation would use a hodgepodge of printer types, some of which may include inkjet.
I mean has anyone even looked into exactly why water covers more of the island now? Have the coast lines reflected the same gain?
No, sea level rose but only around that island. It's like a plateau of water rising out of the sea, careful if you're waterskiing, you don't want to trip over it.
In 2003-04, the Census Bureau provided the Department of Homeland Security with a massive cache of information on how many Arab Americans lived in each ZIP Code around the nation, and which country they originated from
The Census Bureau provides information on how many Arab Americans live in each zip code to everyone. Go to the census website.
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
Huhhh? Laws kind of already do this. Silly Arkansas people.
It struck me then, and strikes me still now, as being a clear demonstration of sexism and bizarre Christian attitudes to sex: the daughter as father's property who needs to be "preserved" in her "innocence" and a ridiculous failure to acknowledge young women as sexual beings.
Are you kidding me? Christian? You think that's limited to Christianity?
The anti-nuclear group will always come up with something to deter nuclear plants from taking off.
And the pro-nuclear group will always have a reason why nuclear plants are never a danger, any accident would never happen again, and nuclear waste is absolutely no problem because waste from burning coal is more radioactive, so that means concentrated nuclear waste has to be safer than diffuse coal plant waste, just like a glass of arsenic is safer to drink than a glass of sea water because there's more arsenic in the ocean than in a glass of arsenic. Strawmen are fun on both sides!
How many retail workers make $300,000 a year? As a function of wages, malpractice premiums are for most specialties, eminently manageable. There are exceptions that really do require government action (and I don't mean tort reform, or not JUST tort reform), but for most doctors they can pay their malpractice premiums and still live quite a nice upper-middle-class or higher existence.
No comment, because everyone eventually makes mistakes including myself. No one is perfect, yet somehow society demands perfection from its doctors. Fat chance.
I disagree; I'm sure you're aware of the research that shows an apology drastically reduces the chances of you being sued for malpractice. And as another poster here pointed out there is this sort of physician closing of the ranks at even the hint that some doctors might not be very good (despite the fact that a small minority of physicians, at least in the US, cause most of the malpractice). I think while part of it is tribalism us-vs-them, part of it might be a sort of wounded pride ("medical school was hard, it took me a lot to get through it, so I refuse to believe someone not-so-bright could get through it as well").
If I go to a doctor, he/she treats me, and the treatment doesn't work, then that doctor made a mistake. That doesn't imply incompetence or negligence, just that he/she made a reasonable guess and they were wrong. I don't hold it against them, and the vast majority of patients don't either. Happens all the time but I rarely hear people complain about the initial diagnosis being wrong, so honestly I don't really agree that we demand "perfection."
Obviously the committee didn't include anyone with medical training.
I don't think that's obvious at all. I would guess the committee did include such doctors, but it's possible none of them had sufficient training in trauma response. Or maybe they're just incompetent. There ARE incompetent physicians you know, in fact if you're a physician I'm sure you've run into some.
I'd be interested if a lawyer (or other slashdotter) knew of a case where someone was denied remedy in a negligence case because they waived liability.
Liability waivers are tested all the time in court, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Here, it would vary by state, but it sounds like Google agrees to be on the hook for direct damages anywhere, so if they did something (like publicly release HIPAA-protected info), I would think that a doctor who was sued by a plaintiff could turn around and sue Google in return.
The politician who can exert the greatest political power in the country where they land. Which in most cases won't be someone from that country, but from the US, China, Russia, etc.
Usually the jury does what the judge tells them to... The fact that this case wasn't dismissed on summary judgment is quite telling (only the judge can make such a dismissal).
Summary judgment isn't a dismissal, it's a ruling where the facts are not disputed so it comes down to an interpretation of law. If there remain reasonable questions of fact (i.e., whether a company was negligent), it's not appropriate for summary judgment.
"SawStop asks for licensing fees of 3 percent of the saw's wholesale price to start. As the device becomes more widespread, the fees could increase to 8 percent. The price of table saws range from $200 to several thousand dollars." Doesn't seem high to me. Companies make sociopathic cost-benefit decisions; look at the Ford Pinto.
Slashdot Mirror
makes excuses for failure
"We messed up" isn't really an excuse.
What are you, a liberal?
Your cite does not show that government employees make 45% more than their equivalents, but simply that government workers make more than private sector workers. I have no doubt that a janitor makes less than a college-educated bureaucrat, or a fast food worker makes less than a firefighter. You all have to really read things more closely. A government lawyer makes less than a private sector lawyer, a government doctor makes less than a private sector doctor, a government programmer makes less than a private sector programmer, etc.
I have never understood the idea of taxing things people need like income.
Because that way you can pay for other things people need, like roads, hospital, military protection, police, fire, etc. There honestly isn't really anything taxable other than income that can cover these things.
If you're going to write to your representative, you might want to mention that the average government worker makes 45% more than their equivalent in the private sector (30% more if you only include salary). I don't know the precise situation in Washington, but in most states with deficits, if the workers pay was cut to the same as they would in the private sector, the deficit would be more than closed.
My representative likes me to provide cites when I make pronouncements like that.
Andrew Stack would be upset, again.
So the sociopathic murderer wouldn't like this? So you're saying it's a good thing?
Unless their "director of computing" can't tell the difference between ink and toner, which wouldn't surprise me overmuch.
Or, which I assumed, she was giving a simplified, technically wrong but non-misleading statement to the press. Also, I would presume that any large-scale university printing operation would use a hodgepodge of printer types, some of which may include inkjet.
Where does it say they're using inkjet printers?
I mean has anyone even looked into exactly why water covers more of the island now? Have the coast lines reflected the same gain?
No, sea level rose but only around that island. It's like a plateau of water rising out of the sea, careful if you're waterskiing, you don't want to trip over it.
In 2003-04, the Census Bureau provided the Department of Homeland Security with a massive cache of information on how many Arab Americans lived in each ZIP Code around the nation, and which country they originated from
The Census Bureau provides information on how many Arab Americans live in each zip code to everyone. Go to the census website.
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
Huhhh? Laws kind of already do this. Silly Arkansas people.
Judging by traveling through Europe in the summer, they've never discovered "air conditioning."
It struck me then, and strikes me still now, as being a clear demonstration of sexism and bizarre Christian attitudes to sex: the daughter as father's property who needs to be "preserved" in her "innocence" and a ridiculous failure to acknowledge young women as sexual beings.
Are you kidding me? Christian? You think that's limited to Christianity?
Cool, exactly what I made fun of.
X is dangerous. Y is more dangerous than X. Therefore X is not dangerous.
That's a logical fallacy known formally as "stupidity."
The anti-nuclear group will always come up with something to deter nuclear plants from taking off.
And the pro-nuclear group will always have a reason why nuclear plants are never a danger, any accident would never happen again, and nuclear waste is absolutely no problem because waste from burning coal is more radioactive, so that means concentrated nuclear waste has to be safer than diffuse coal plant waste, just like a glass of arsenic is safer to drink than a glass of sea water because there's more arsenic in the ocean than in a glass of arsenic. Strawmen are fun on both sides!
Maintain similar levels of marketshare.
How many retail workers make $300,000 a year? As a function of wages, malpractice premiums are for most specialties, eminently manageable. There are exceptions that really do require government action (and I don't mean tort reform, or not JUST tort reform), but for most doctors they can pay their malpractice premiums and still live quite a nice upper-middle-class or higher existence.
No comment, because everyone eventually makes mistakes including myself. No one is perfect, yet somehow society demands perfection from its doctors. Fat chance.
I disagree; I'm sure you're aware of the research that shows an apology drastically reduces the chances of you being sued for malpractice. And as another poster here pointed out there is this sort of physician closing of the ranks at even the hint that some doctors might not be very good (despite the fact that a small minority of physicians, at least in the US, cause most of the malpractice). I think while part of it is tribalism us-vs-them, part of it might be a sort of wounded pride ("medical school was hard, it took me a lot to get through it, so I refuse to believe someone not-so-bright could get through it as well").
If I go to a doctor, he/she treats me, and the treatment doesn't work, then that doctor made a mistake. That doesn't imply incompetence or negligence, just that he/she made a reasonable guess and they were wrong. I don't hold it against them, and the vast majority of patients don't either. Happens all the time but I rarely hear people complain about the initial diagnosis being wrong, so honestly I don't really agree that we demand "perfection."
With that in mind, we're going to have to ask you to place your bets now.
Ok, I bet on Microsoft.
Obviously the committee didn't include anyone with medical training.
I don't think that's obvious at all. I would guess the committee did include such doctors, but it's possible none of them had sufficient training in trauma response. Or maybe they're just incompetent. There ARE incompetent physicians you know, in fact if you're a physician I'm sure you've run into some.
I'd be interested if a lawyer (or other slashdotter) knew of a case where someone was denied remedy in a negligence case because they waived liability.
Liability waivers are tested all the time in court, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Here, it would vary by state, but it sounds like Google agrees to be on the hook for direct damages anywhere, so if they did something (like publicly release HIPAA-protected info), I would think that a doctor who was sued by a plaintiff could turn around and sue Google in return.
The politician who can exert the greatest political power in the country where they land. Which in most cases won't be someone from that country, but from the US, China, Russia, etc.
Usually the jury does what the judge tells them to... The fact that this case wasn't dismissed on summary judgment is quite telling (only the judge can make such a dismissal).
Summary judgment isn't a dismissal, it's a ruling where the facts are not disputed so it comes down to an interpretation of law. If there remain reasonable questions of fact (i.e., whether a company was negligent), it's not appropriate for summary judgment.
"SawStop asks for licensing fees of 3 percent of the saw's wholesale price to start. As the device becomes more widespread, the fees could increase to 8 percent. The price of table saws range from $200 to several thousand dollars." Doesn't seem high to me. Companies make sociopathic cost-benefit decisions; look at the Ford Pinto.
have a good hiking backpack and like being a social outcast
Uhhh...what university did you go to where this was true? Sounds like high school.