Well it happens in the US, not just in healthcare but also schools. If I choose to attend a private hospital/school instead of the public variant, I must pay EXTRA money on top of the money I paid to the Uncle Sam monopoly. It's akin to if I decided to buy a Mac or Amiga computer, and yet still had to pay $1000/year to the Microsoft Monopoly.
Choice is not choice, if someone else controls the money.
>>>Do what is good for them? What a stupid, shit headed, arrogant faggoty cocksucker you are.
Ooops. My fault. I forgot my sarcastic tag. I was not being serious. Hence the reference to the Democrat Congresses' $950 fine to punish the People for not buying health insurance. Congress must force the People to do what is good for them.
The average personal debt is about $80,000 per US home. Total would then then be $210,000 public plus personal debt. That exceeds the UK and probably every other civilized country.
>>>public healthcare...coexists with private hospitals.
Same here with our public and private schools. But the monopoly still controls the money. It's akin to if you bought a Macintosh, and yet still had to send $1000 a year to Microsoft. You have "choice" of which device you use, but not where your money goes. It's a monopoly.
Sounds like Germany's healthcare system is in as sad as shape as America's healthcare/retirement system (medicare and SS respectively).
The reason I labeled it a "monopoly" is because even though you have "choice" between doctors, you are still dealing with the same central monopoly. It's akin to if you bought a Macintosh or Amiga or Linux computer, but still had to pay money to Microsoft.
The US is a metric-based country. Everything is measured in liters, meters, et cetera. It's just that trying to get the stubborn People to do what's good for them is difficult, because they keep talking about miles and gallons. Maybe the Congress ought to impose a fine. (Use metric or be fined $950.)
>>>many parts of the world have universal healthcare
Monopoly healthcare. No choice healthcare.
Oh and yeah you're right. The article is about making history in EUROPE, because it would be the first time since Netscape that IE was not #1. The fact Opera is #1 in the former Soviet Republics is irrelevant to European browser share.
The Sci-Fi Channel sent several crew and cameras to Chernobyl, and I didn't see any people living inside the zone. It was still being protected by guards who only allowed people to enter with permission. And the SF crew carried radiation detectors that were "ticking" frequently enough to indicate the area is still filled with radiation. I can't imagine the dictatorial Soviet government allowing people to stay behind... and even after the Soviets fell, it appears the current government still keeps it off-limits.
Scientists in the Ukraine criticised the conclusions..... dismissed the team's previous findings on insects and birds. "Wildlife really thrives in Chernobyl area - due to the low level of [human] influence," Dr Gashchak told BBC News.
So what he's basically saying is that humans are more dangerous to animals than radiation. Make sense.
"We also will access and record information about your computer and Equipment's profile and settings and the installation of software we provide. You agree to permit us to access your computer and Equipment and to monitor, adjust and record such data, profiles and settings for the purpose of providing the Service. You also consent to Verizon's monitoring of your Internet connection and network performance, and to our accessing and adjusting your computer settings, as they relate to the Service, Software, or other services, which we may offer from time to time."
Well hell.
I'm switching to Google ISP as soon as possible..... oh wait. I can't. Because government gave Verizon an exclusive monopoly in this area. Just as they gave the local school an exclusive monopoly. I just love living in an Anti-Choice world.
>>>Most of the telcos ended up using the money for other things
No they didn't. They used the money to upgrade analog phones to digital phones, so as to enable 56k internet (considered very fast at the time). That's what the 1996 Telecommunications TOLD them to do. Try reading it sometime and you'll see for yourself. The telcos were in full compliance.
>>>got cheaper only when it had to due to competition from cell phones and VOIP
Again not true. My long distance had dropped from 25 to 9 cents within ten years (early 90s), and that was long before cellphones existed. Well... they existed but they were still shoebox sized. Not really competition to the wired phone company.
>>>The "regulated monopoly" of the phone lines was actually a huge success story for the United States.
Yes and it was for Cable TV too, in order to get wires running-out to suburbs of cities in the 80s, but its time has passed. The Bell Monopoly hung-on far too long, and stifled innovation. From the 1950s to the mid-80s telephone network speeds only grew from 110 to 1200 (+30 bps/year). Then the monopoly was broken-up and other competing companies were allowed to sell modems too. The speed increased from 1200 to 56,000 in just a little over ten years (+5000 bps/year). The monopoly had stifled not just freedom of choice, but also progress. When you are the only choice, there's no need to waste money on improvement. .
>>>most other countries that had competition in that market ended up with multiple incompatible system
Which countries? .
>>>(telephone lines), prices did NOT go down!
Sure it did. I used to pay 25 cents per minute of long distance under the Bell Monopoly, which is equivalent to 49 cents in today's devalued paper. But now that I'm not stuck with a monopoly, I can choose any carrier, and it only costs me 5 cents. A 95% reduction. And of course the quality is much better because competitors laid-down fiber optics. Without that competition we'd probably still be using Bell's noisy copper - talking to distant California would be filled with static. .
>>>So it may not be a monopoly, but it's definitely an oligopoly, which is nearly as bad
I have a duopoly. So just like when I vote, I have no real choice. The Republicans/Verizon is a little better than Democrats/Comcast but not by much. I just get screwed less often.
If only we had some kind of technology where you could recharge your car to full in only 5-10 minutes time. Like some kind of fluid you could pour into the EV, and then go whirring down the highway. Hy... Hydro... oh it's right on the tip of my tongue.
How come they never sell these things in the Northeast? I'd buy a Nissan Leaf EV and drive it around Baltimore/DC, but I'm not moving all the way to Desert California just to do it.
>>>My first CD writer... 110 bps acoustic coupler... Windows mouse cost $220... I don't know if electric cars are in that category, but I think there's an excellent chance that they are. >>>
My first Amiga cost about $900 and it went bankrupt. My first console was Atari - they went bankrupt too. I bought a Digital Compact Cassette because I thought its backwards compatible with existing tapes was a sure winner, but it failed to catch on. My first home movie player was actually a videorecord called RCA CED, which also went belly up. Sony made the very first home recorders with Umatic and Betamax... we don't hear much about them today. They also made the first home camcorder called Betamovie, but it flopped too.
Point: A lot more things fail then succeed, because other better things (or better marketers) come along: Macs, PCs, Nintendos, CD-recordables, videotapes, VHS, VHS-C.
I think the EV will also be a flop, and the future lies with high MPG diesels (like the 250mpg VW Commuter) and Hybrids (like my 80mpg Insight). The government should not be so anxious to throw-away tax money on a technology that is almost certain to lose to other, better tech. That would be like if the government threw tax money at HD-DVD.
>>>Why did you think that we pay less than $3/gallon for gas and Europeans pay $7-$8.
Actually the US and EU have the same average cost - about $2.00 per gallon of PREtax cost. Anything above that is government taxation. So no, US government subsidies have not driven down the down the cost for Americans. We pay the same Base cost as our cousins in Europe pay.
As for subsidies, if it were upto me they would cease to exist. Nothing for Big Oil, or Big Pharma, or Big Sugar, and so on. Subsidies distort the market and should not exist.
>>>Electric cars would make economic sense in a truly free market
Except for that annoying 200 mile range. I often travel long distance, not just for my job but also to visit friends, families, or nearby cities. An EV simply wouldn't work for me. ----- This reminds me of Betamax where everyone blamed all kinds of reasons why it failed - but few ever mention that it had a 1 hour limit on tapes. THAT was the real reason it failed. Not practical for most consumers. Neither are EVs.
Now I know a lot of EV fans say have two cars - electric and gasoline. But who can afford that? For that matter who can afford the required 100,000 mile replacement of the batteries, which is as expensive as buying a whole new engine. Make economic sense? Hardly. Nor practical sense.
To me a better solution would be to stick with the cars we have now, which has proven to be effective and flexible, but with better fuel economy like the 90 mpg 5-seat Volkswagen Lupo, or the 250 mpg 2-seat commuter car due to be released this fall. And then gradually transition over from fossil fuels to Solar fuels like ethanol and biodiesel.
>>>I have no qualms with a little of that subsidy being shifted to electric vehicles
A better solution would be to eliminate subsidies completely. None for EVs and none for the Big Fat Bastards at the oil corporations. Let them survive or fail on their own merits without a government bailout. Such things distort the free market, and were the root cause of the Housing Bubble (and 2007-8 collapse).
>>>my first ISP cost me 80 per month for 80 hours, way back when
Holy crap. I only spent $15 a month for AOL/Quantum Link back in the 80s. What ISP were you paying off? To date I've never paid more than $19 a month for internet, and hope I never need to in the future.
As for "welfare for the rich" I think that's a good description. Back when I bought my 80mpg Honda Hybrid the state gave a $2000 rebate for sales tax, the US gave me $2000 for it being electric, and I was earning $90,000. I don't consider myself rich, but I'm not poor either. I should not have received any assistance.
There should be a cutoff where if you earn over a certain amount of money (say $50,000) you are ineligible to receive any EV Rebates from the government.
If already know those programming languages, you should be able to pick-up the newer ones easily. Maybe look at some Open Source code to familiarize yourself with the new words and structure, but that's all your really need.
The biggest challenge will not be learning these new languages, but convincing the HR dopes (i.e. liberal arts majors), that just because you've never programmed in C++ or C#, doesn't mean you don't know to do it. That's been the biggest challenge for me: "But we need someone who knows System Verilog, and you only know Verilog. You're not qualified."
Idiots.
Also you may find yourself working against ageism, even if you did have the required skillset. Slashdot just recently ran an article about how hiring managers in tech firms assume anyone over 40 is not suitable for working on new technologies. They want young blood, preferably those with no family, no life, willing to work lots of hours and/or fresh out of school.
Slashdot Mirror
Well it happens in the US, not just in healthcare but also schools. If I choose to attend a private hospital/school instead of the public variant, I must pay EXTRA money on top of the money I paid to the Uncle Sam monopoly. It's akin to if I decided to buy a Mac or Amiga computer, and yet still had to pay $1000/year to the Microsoft Monopoly.
Choice is not choice, if someone else controls the money.
>>>Do what is good for them? What a stupid, shit headed, arrogant faggoty cocksucker you are.
Ooops. My fault. I forgot my sarcastic tag. I was not being serious. Hence the reference to the Democrat Congresses' $950 fine to punish the People for not buying health insurance. Congress must force the People to do what is good for them.
$130,000 is the public debt of the government.
The average personal debt is about $80,000 per US home. Total would then then be $210,000 public plus personal debt. That exceeds the UK and probably every other civilized country.
>>>public healthcare...coexists with private hospitals.
Same here with our public and private schools. But the monopoly still controls the money. It's akin to if you bought a Macintosh, and yet still had to send $1000 a year to Microsoft. You have "choice" of which device you use, but not where your money goes. It's a monopoly.
Sounds like Germany's healthcare system is in as sad as shape as America's healthcare/retirement system (medicare and SS respectively).
The reason I labeled it a "monopoly" is because even though you have "choice" between doctors, you are still dealing with the same central monopoly. It's akin to if you bought a Macintosh or Amiga or Linux computer, but still had to pay money to Microsoft.
Well to put a more realistic view on this whole subject:
51% Microsoft Explorer
31% Mozilla Firefox
10% Google Chrome
4% Apple Safari
3% Opera
StatCounter
>>>DownThemAll
Why would I want to use this instead of Firefox's built-in download manager?
>>>it features an advanced accelerator that increases speed up to 400%
I don't see how this is possible. My ISP is 90 KB/s and I don't see how that could be accelerated upto 360 KB/s
And debt. $130,000 per US home. Is there any country higher than that?
Officially it has.
The US is a metric-based country. Everything is measured in liters, meters, et cetera. It's just that trying to get the stubborn People to do what's good for them is difficult, because they keep talking about miles and gallons. Maybe the Congress ought to impose a fine. (Use metric or be fined $950.)
>>>many parts of the world have universal healthcare
Monopoly healthcare. No choice healthcare.
Oh and yeah you're right. The article is about making history in EUROPE, because it would be the first time since Netscape that IE was not #1. The fact Opera is #1 in the former Soviet Republics is irrelevant to European browser share.
The Sci-Fi Channel sent several crew and cameras to Chernobyl, and I didn't see any people living inside the zone. It was still being protected by guards who only allowed people to enter with permission. And the SF crew carried radiation detectors that were "ticking" frequently enough to indicate the area is still filled with radiation. I can't imagine the dictatorial Soviet government allowing people to stay behind... and even after the Soviets fell, it appears the current government still keeps it off-limits.
Scientists in the Ukraine criticised the conclusions..... dismissed the team's previous findings on insects and birds. "Wildlife really thrives in Chernobyl area - due to the low level of [human] influence," Dr Gashchak told BBC News.
So what he's basically saying is that humans are more dangerous to animals than radiation. Make sense.
"We also will access and record information about your computer and Equipment's profile and settings and the installation of software we provide. You agree to permit us to access your computer and Equipment and to monitor, adjust and record such data, profiles and settings for the purpose of providing the Service. You also consent to Verizon's monitoring of your Internet connection and network performance, and to our accessing and adjusting your computer settings, as they relate to the Service, Software, or other services, which we may offer from time to time."
Well hell.
I'm switching to Google ISP as soon as possible..... oh wait. I can't. Because government gave Verizon an exclusive monopoly in this area. Just as they gave the local school an exclusive monopoly. I just love living in an Anti-Choice world.
>>>Most of the telcos ended up using the money for other things
No they didn't. They used the money to upgrade analog phones to digital phones, so as to enable 56k internet (considered very fast at the time). That's what the 1996 Telecommunications TOLD them to do. Try reading it sometime and you'll see for yourself. The telcos were in full compliance.
>>>got cheaper only when it had to due to competition from cell phones and VOIP
Again not true. My long distance had dropped from 25 to 9 cents within ten years (early 90s), and that was long before cellphones existed. Well... they existed but they were still shoebox sized. Not really competition to the wired phone company.
>>>The "regulated monopoly" of the phone lines was actually a huge success story for the United States.
Yes and it was for Cable TV too, in order to get wires running-out to suburbs of cities in the 80s, but its time has passed. The Bell Monopoly hung-on far too long, and stifled innovation. From the 1950s to the mid-80s telephone network speeds only grew from 110 to 1200 (+30 bps/year). Then the monopoly was broken-up and other competing companies were allowed to sell modems too. The speed increased from 1200 to 56,000 in just a little over ten years (+5000 bps/year). The monopoly had stifled not just freedom of choice, but also progress. When you are the only choice, there's no need to waste money on improvement.
.
>>>most other countries that had competition in that market ended up with multiple incompatible system
Which countries?
.
>>>(telephone lines), prices did NOT go down!
Sure it did. I used to pay 25 cents per minute of long distance under the Bell Monopoly, which is equivalent to 49 cents in today's devalued paper. But now that I'm not stuck with a monopoly, I can choose any carrier, and it only costs me 5 cents. A 95% reduction. And of course the quality is much better because competitors laid-down fiber optics. Without that competition we'd probably still be using Bell's noisy copper - talking to distant California would be filled with static.
.
>>>So it may not be a monopoly, but it's definitely an oligopoly, which is nearly as bad
I have a duopoly. So just like when I vote, I have no real choice. The Republicans/Verizon is a little better than Democrats/Comcast but not by much. I just get screwed less often.
If only we had some kind of technology where you could recharge your car to full in only 5-10 minutes time. Like some kind of fluid you could pour into the EV, and then go whirring down the highway. Hy... Hydro... oh it's right on the tip of my tongue.
Oh well.
How come they never sell these things in the Northeast? I'd buy a Nissan Leaf EV and drive it around Baltimore/DC, but I'm not moving all the way to Desert California just to do it.
>>>My first CD writer... 110 bps acoustic coupler... Windows mouse cost $220... I don't know if electric cars are in that category, but I think there's an excellent chance that they are.
>>>
My first Amiga cost about $900 and it went bankrupt. My first console was Atari - they went bankrupt too. I bought a Digital Compact Cassette because I thought its backwards compatible with existing tapes was a sure winner, but it failed to catch on. My first home movie player was actually a videorecord called RCA CED, which also went belly up. Sony made the very first home recorders with Umatic and Betamax... we don't hear much about them today. They also made the first home camcorder called Betamovie, but it flopped too.
Point: A lot more things fail then succeed, because other better things (or better marketers) come along: Macs, PCs, Nintendos, CD-recordables, videotapes, VHS, VHS-C.
I think the EV will also be a flop, and the future lies with high MPG diesels (like the 250mpg VW Commuter) and Hybrids (like my 80mpg Insight). The government should not be so anxious to throw-away tax money on a technology that is almost certain to lose to other, better tech. That would be like if the government threw tax money at HD-DVD.
>>>Why did you think that we pay less than $3/gallon for gas and Europeans pay $7-$8.
Actually the US and EU have the same average cost - about $2.00 per gallon of PREtax cost. Anything above that is government taxation. So no, US government subsidies have not driven down the down the cost for Americans. We pay the same Base cost as our cousins in Europe pay.
As for subsidies, if it were upto me they would cease to exist. Nothing for Big Oil, or Big Pharma, or Big Sugar, and so on. Subsidies distort the market and should not exist.
>>>Electric cars would make economic sense in a truly free market
Except for that annoying 200 mile range. I often travel long distance, not just for my job but also to visit friends, families, or nearby cities. An EV simply wouldn't work for me. ----- This reminds me of Betamax where everyone blamed all kinds of reasons why it failed - but few ever mention that it had a 1 hour limit on tapes. THAT was the real reason it failed. Not practical for most consumers. Neither are EVs.
Now I know a lot of EV fans say have two cars - electric and gasoline. But who can afford that? For that matter who can afford the required 100,000 mile replacement of the batteries, which is as expensive as buying a whole new engine. Make economic sense? Hardly. Nor practical sense.
To me a better solution would be to stick with the cars we have now, which has proven to be effective and flexible, but with better fuel economy like the 90 mpg 5-seat Volkswagen Lupo, or the 250 mpg 2-seat commuter car due to be released this fall. And then gradually transition over from fossil fuels to Solar fuels like ethanol and biodiesel.
>>>I have no qualms with a little of that subsidy being shifted to electric vehicles
A better solution would be to eliminate subsidies completely. None for EVs and none for the Big Fat Bastards at the oil corporations. Let them survive or fail on their own merits without a government bailout. Such things distort the free market, and were the root cause of the Housing Bubble (and 2007-8 collapse).
>>>my first ISP cost me 80 per month for 80 hours, way back when
Holy crap. I only spent $15 a month for AOL/Quantum Link back in the 80s. What ISP were you paying off? To date I've never paid more than $19 a month for internet, and hope I never need to in the future.
As for "welfare for the rich" I think that's a good description. Back when I bought my 80mpg Honda Hybrid the state gave a $2000 rebate for sales tax, the US gave me $2000 for it being electric, and I was earning $90,000. I don't consider myself rich, but I'm not poor either. I should not have received any assistance.
There should be a cutoff where if you earn over a certain amount of money (say $50,000) you are ineligible to receive any EV Rebates from the government.
>>>clueless asshole boss
My goal is to earn a BS in Business and become one of them. Or one of the HR people. That's where the real power lies. And money.
c# is only for Micrsoft platforms? Well that's dumb. Do you think other platforms like Amiga, Mac, or Linux will adopt it?
If already know those programming languages, you should be able to pick-up the newer ones easily. Maybe look at some Open Source code to familiarize yourself with the new words and structure, but that's all your really need.
The biggest challenge will not be learning these new languages, but convincing the HR dopes (i.e. liberal arts majors), that just because you've never programmed in C++ or C#, doesn't mean you don't know to do it. That's been the biggest challenge for me: "But we need someone who knows System Verilog, and you only know Verilog. You're not qualified."
Idiots.
Also you may find yourself working against ageism, even if you did have the required skillset. Slashdot just recently ran an article about how hiring managers in tech firms assume anyone over 40 is not suitable for working on new technologies. They want young blood, preferably those with no family, no life, willing to work lots of hours and/or fresh out of school.