>>>Gen. Hippy and the government are on speaking terms??
The hippies grew-up and found the government to be useful in getting free handouts like social security and medicare, and also useful for preserving the status quo (i.e. bailouts for companies that would otherwise go bankrupt; i.e. saved baby boomer jobs). Basically the 60s/70s-era hippies turned into pro-government sellouts.
You are aware that there's enough energy in a single gallon of crude oil to power an entire American home for 1 year, right? It's just a matter of harnessing all that power.
Point-
It isn't that easy. The inefficiencies inherent in converting one form of energy to another leads to waste. Solar panels are lucky to get even 1% of the solar energy converted top electricity. They also take-up a lot of room... which is already occupied by homes, roads, trees, et cetera.
I can live pretty cheaply (trees for shade in the summer; minimal heating in the winter), but I know most Americans would not be willing to make that sacrifice.
>>>"Oh, #4 tooth? We don't cover root canals on that tooth. Sorry." This is a direct quote.
I don't believe you. I don't think you're telling the whole story.
But even if we assume you're telling the truth, you could just pay cash. Mine cost a mere $900..... that's comparable to how much people spend on trivial shit like cable tv or cellphones. And $900 is basically nothing compared to the two cars/SUVs (total cost == ~$60,000) sitting in your driveway. If you can afford to waste thousands on that other stuff, then you can afford a root canal.
BTW I don't have dental insurance. I just pay cash for everything It's cheaper in the long term.
>>>Proper healthcare is vital to a strong workforce. A strong workforce results in stronger returns in taxes. Higher tax income pays for healthcare.
More people == more pollution and accelerated global warming.
If Microsoft had the ability to withdraw $5,000 every year from your wallet, it would be the same as a monopoly. It doesn't matter that you run Apple or Linux instead - MS would still have the monopoly over the cash.
>>>Nobody is saying that the NHS is perfect, or even wonderful. However, it is a good baseline for people that need it in an emergency or can't afford better.
So basically it's the healthcare equivalent of "the projects" aka inner-city slums. Yeah I want that. Sign me up. (rolls eyes)
I think a better approach would be to leave healthcare as it is now (many, many choices from many companies), and simply pay for the poor. Like Welfare or Food Stamps, but for hospitals. I don't want an Uncle Sam Health Monopoly, anymore than I want a Uncle Sam Civic or an Uncle Sam Prius or an Uncle Sam Beetle. I want competition and I want multiple choices.
Without choice, I'm no better than a damn serf on a manor.
Hmmm. The Democrats want to toss us in jail for not having health insurance, but we're not allowed to compare them to a certain German part of the 1930s/40s.
I'm sorry but I'm not buying it. Everyone I know has two cars. Some might only be worth $20,000 each or $40,000 total, but that's a big chunk of money.
If you can afford to waste all that cash on rubber, metal, and plastic, why can't you afford half that for a typical hospital stay of $19k? I'm reminded of one of my ex-coworkers who kept saying, "I can't afford food. I get help from the government," and then she'd turn around and spend around $1000 a month on buying herself new dresses or shoes or toys (for her kid).
Don't sit there and tell me "I can't afford it" when you're wasting money on other shit. I'm not that easily duped.
>>>Please go to college. You'll learn all about the Constitution. You really need the knowledge.
Yes you do. Here is what James Madison, the author of the Constitution, had to say about your belief the federal government can do almost anything it wants:
- "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity." (Federalist 41)
- He further clarifies: "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." (James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792)
And finally if you're still confused, just read the Supreme Law for yourself, which makes clear most powers belong to the State governments, not Congress: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
My daughter and I watched Miley's concert in 3D. She's definitely not 1D or 2D. More like DD. It was fun watching her bounce... and wiggle... and gyrate...
I read this... uh two weeks ago? All the same things we said back then still apply (you'll lose ~99% of your power over the 20,000 mile beaming distance), et cetera, et cetera. Highly inefficient.
Now maybe if they converted the solar to hydrogen first, and then used that to fuel spaceships to colonize Mars and other planets, it might make sense.
(shrug). Whatever. I think mankind is about to experience a major energy drought. The last two centuries were built-upon the solar power captured over 100 million years (by evergreens). Now it's almost all gone. We won't die-out of course, but life in the 2100s might look a lot like life in the 1700s (cold homes, very little travel, and dark nights).
>>>American produced Dr Who special really doesn't deserve to exist
Okay I'm sick of hearing this again-and-again-and-again over the last two decades.
Yes it aired on FOX, an american network, but it was written by a BBC writer, starred a BBC actor, was funded almost-entirely by BBC money, and first aired on BBC TV. If you don't like that mid-90s series pilot, fine, but don't blame americans since it was largely the BBC in charge of it.
ALSO: remember it was the British that produced the abomination that was the spoon-playing bumbling idiotic fool known as the seventh doctor - that is the second-lowest point in Who universe (the lowest point being the year that never happened-1985). Anyway blaming Americans for the BBC-written, produced, acted 90s-tv-pilot is as colossally stupid as if you tried to blame us for the ~100 pound TV tax. It makes no logical sense to blame us for BBC actions.
>>>your body spends the next twenty-four hours burning extra calories trying to repair the damage you've done.
Damage? Sounds like a path to an early death. According to a recent Time Magazine article, the other reason exercise doesn't work is because it makes people hungry, and they end-up eating more than they lost during the exercise... hence gaining weight.
Yes and thanks to your bass-backwards thinking, two teenagers spent a night in a Pennsylvania jail because they shared "child porn" photos with one another. It's stupid that teens can't even take photos of their own God-created bodies.
Your bass-backwards thinking has also made it illegal to even own a CARTOON of two kids having sex in Australia. What the hell? There's no victim there stupid shithead Aussie judge! (sigh). How about taking into account that images are just images (i.e. harmless), and focusing efforts on arresting the criminal who raped a kid.
Yes and thanks to you bass-backwards thinking, two teenagers spent a night in a Pennsylvania jail because they shared "child porn" photos with one another. It's stupid that teens can't even take photos of their own God-created bodies.
How about taking into account that images are just images (i.e. harmless), and focusing efforts on the criminal who raped a kid.
Now I know how to get rid of Madam Pelosi. Just load a few images of naked boys sucking other boys onto her office PCs. Even if she manages to salvage her political career, she'll never again by Speaker.
Your idea is antithetical to the government's goal to dictate morality, even when no victims exist. You will be audited. Prepare thyself. Even if you have nothing more than *drawings* of children having sex (like that comic called Y), you will be found guilty of this victimless crime.
I don't even know why this is illegal. First-off, nude images are not a crime, even if you're a 15-year-old taking pictures of yourself in the mirror and sending them to your boyfriend. Second, a photo of sex is not a crime, since it's considered free speech (hence the existence of Penthouse and other porn websites).
The only person who's committed a crime is the adult raping an underage child, and also the photographer (an accessory). They are the ones who should be arrested.
It's also a bit nuts when some Australian court can say, "Cartoons of children having sex is illegal." No victims; no crime.
>>>Yes you do. If you buy a plane ticket but don't like the flight do you not get to pay?
I do if the stewardess dumps a pile of Transformer... ooops I mean shit in my lap. Satisfaction guaranteed or a refund (or free trip next time). Even candy bar manufacturers will refund your money if you find your snack unsatifactory. If candy bar makers can do that, why can't media companies?
>>>Dude READ THE REVIEWS!
But the reviews are funded by the MPAA. They buy good reviews, and those reviews that are negative typically get cnensored don't appear on websites). They even go so far as to pay employees to go to amazon.com and write positive reviews. And finally because I'm so damn picky I often hand-out 1s or 2s to movies that average 7 or 8 on imdb.com. ----- Well whatever. If they are not going to offer a refund for shit like TF2, then I'm not going to pay $20 on a gamble. I can't afford it.
Alright. I have two questions. Since government care is so damn wonderful, why is there a need for private car in the UK?
And second, why did the college girl let herself be denied access to a PAP smear when the UK Health service said no? Why didn't she go get a PAP smear from the private option? (Wow saying "private option" has a weird echo of "public option".) Overall it sounds like the UK's not the promised paradise either.
>>>"Insenstive Clod" doesn't begin to do your post justice. My mom had cancer in her 30s.
And how was I supposed to know that? I can't read minds, you insensitive clod. Furthermore the question was directed at ME, and I answered what *I* would do. What you do with your life, being this is a free country, is none of my business. Had I been your mother, given a young age in the 30s, then I too would have spent the 20 or 40 thousand in treatments since the gain would be another 50 years of life. But if I'm already near the end (i.e. 60 or up), then I would not bother. Death is not avoidable; better to accept that shitty fact than live in denial.
>>>So $19,000 isn't unreasonable for you? Good for you.
Look in your front drive. If you're like the typical American you have two cars that cost about $60,000 (when you include tax and interest). Your home probably cost $200,000 or more (again with interest and tax). And it's not likely you just had two cars; you probably owned several during your life. Say 2 every ten years. So doing the quick math - $200K + $60K times 5 == $500K. Add on top of that recurring expenses for cable television or internet or cellphone for about $2000 a year == about $100K over 50 years. Food is about $200 a week times 52 weeks times 50 years == $500K.
Divide in half in case I made a mistake somewhere. I come-up with a conservative estimate of $500,000 of car, house, food, and entertainment expenses over an adult lifetime. If you can afford those bills, why can't you afford a once or twice-in-a-lifetime 19K hospital bill?
No. You'd rather make ME pay the bill, and frankly I don't want to. You have a right to healthcare. You have a right to smoke, drink, or overeat.
You do NOT have a right to replace your diseased lung, liver, or fatty heart and then expect your neighbors to pay the bill. You made your poor choices; YOU pay the cost. Not your neighbors.
No need. The "50 million uninsured Americans" is the perfect example of just such a lie, where the politicians have repeated it so many times, people cite it without further consideration.
First off, the number is 42.5 million, not 50, and second the number comes from a write-in survey from approximately 2000 postcards. It's completely and totally invalid, scientifically speaking. The number is meaningless. For those who have done actual studies, like Penn State University, they place they number at 18 million Americans, or when illegals are discounted, 8 million uninsured citizens.
The trains which carry your food from the farms to the cities RUN ON OIL you ignorant boob. Duh. As for alternatives, I'm sorry but I don't see how we're going to run our diesel locomotives off solar panels.
If you doubt the oil shock, then just look at what happened in 2008 to the cost of food. It basically doubled, as the cost of oil surpassed the $150 mark. When oil becomes scarce (i.e. a drought) and shoots over $500, you can expect food prices to be 5-6 times higher than now. And many shelves will just be plain empty.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Gen. Hippy and the government are on speaking terms??
The hippies grew-up and found the government to be useful in getting free handouts like social security and medicare, and also useful for preserving the status quo (i.e. bailouts for companies that would otherwise go bankrupt; i.e. saved baby boomer jobs). Basically the 60s/70s-era hippies turned into pro-government sellouts.
You are aware that there's enough energy in a single gallon of crude oil to power an entire American home for 1 year, right? It's just a matter of harnessing all that power.
Point-
It isn't that easy. The inefficiencies inherent in converting one form of energy to another leads to waste. Solar panels are lucky to get even 1% of the solar energy converted top electricity. They also take-up a lot of room... which is already occupied by homes, roads, trees, et cetera.
I can live pretty cheaply (trees for shade in the summer; minimal heating in the winter), but I know most Americans would not be willing to make that sacrifice.
>>>"Oh, #4 tooth? We don't cover root canals on that tooth. Sorry." This is a direct quote.
I don't believe you. I don't think you're telling the whole story.
But even if we assume you're telling the truth, you could just pay cash. Mine cost a mere $900..... that's comparable to how much people spend on trivial shit like cable tv or cellphones. And $900 is basically nothing compared to the two cars/SUVs (total cost == ~$60,000) sitting in your driveway. If you can afford to waste thousands on that other stuff, then you can afford a root canal.
BTW I don't have dental insurance.
I just pay cash for everything
It's cheaper in the long term.
>>>Proper healthcare is vital to a strong workforce. A strong workforce results in stronger returns in taxes. Higher tax income pays for healthcare.
More people == more pollution and accelerated global warming.
>>>It beats having you skip buying insurance, then get in a car wreck and expect the rest of us to pay for your care out of our pocket
I have car insurance dipshit.
Try again with a different example.
If Microsoft had the ability to withdraw $5,000 every year from your wallet, it would be the same as a monopoly. It doesn't matter that you run Apple or Linux instead - MS would still have the monopoly over the cash.
Same applies to the government monopolies.
>>>Nobody is saying that the NHS is perfect, or even wonderful. However, it is a good baseline for people that need it in an emergency or can't afford better.
So basically it's the healthcare equivalent of "the projects" aka inner-city slums.
Yeah I want that. Sign me up. (rolls eyes)
I think a better approach would be to leave healthcare as it is now (many, many choices from many companies), and simply pay for the poor. Like Welfare or Food Stamps, but for hospitals. I don't want an Uncle Sam Health Monopoly, anymore than I want a Uncle Sam Civic or an Uncle Sam Prius or an Uncle Sam Beetle. I want competition and I want multiple choices.
Without choice, I'm no better than a damn serf on a manor.
Hmmm. The Democrats want to toss us in jail for not having health insurance, but we're not allowed to compare them to a certain German part of the 1930s/40s.
Hmmm.
I'm sorry but I'm not buying it. Everyone I know has two cars. Some might only be worth $20,000 each or $40,000 total, but that's a big chunk of money.
If you can afford to waste all that cash on rubber, metal, and plastic, why can't you afford half that for a typical hospital stay of $19k? I'm reminded of one of my ex-coworkers who kept saying, "I can't afford food. I get help from the government," and then she'd turn around and spend around $1000 a month on buying herself new dresses or shoes or toys (for her kid).
Don't sit there and tell me "I can't afford it" when you're wasting money on other shit. I'm not that easily duped.
>>>Please go to college. You'll learn all about the Constitution. You really need the knowledge.
Yes you do. Here is what James Madison, the author of the Constitution, had to say about your belief the federal government can do almost anything it wants:
- "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity." (Federalist 41)
- He further clarifies: "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." (James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792)
And finally if you're still confused, just read the Supreme Law for yourself, which makes clear most powers belong to the State governments, not Congress: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
My daughter and I watched Miley's concert in 3D. She's definitely not 1D or 2D. More like DD. It was fun watching her bounce... and wiggle... and gyrate...
Ooops gotta go.
Something came up
I read this... uh two weeks ago? All the same things we said back then still apply (you'll lose ~99% of your power over the 20,000 mile beaming distance), et cetera, et cetera. Highly inefficient.
Now maybe if they converted the solar to hydrogen first, and then used that to fuel spaceships to colonize Mars and other planets, it might make sense.
(shrug). Whatever. I think mankind is about to experience a major energy drought. The last two centuries were built-upon the solar power captured over 100 million years (by evergreens). Now it's almost all gone. We won't die-out of course, but life in the 2100s might look a lot like life in the 1700s (cold homes, very little travel, and dark nights).
>>>American produced Dr Who special really doesn't deserve to exist
Okay I'm sick of hearing this again-and-again-and-again over the last two decades.
Yes it aired on FOX, an american network, but it was written by a BBC writer, starred a BBC actor, was funded almost-entirely by BBC money, and first aired on BBC TV. If you don't like that mid-90s series pilot, fine, but don't blame americans since it was largely the BBC in charge of it.
ALSO: remember it was the British that produced the abomination that was the spoon-playing bumbling idiotic fool known as the seventh doctor - that is the second-lowest point in Who universe (the lowest point being the year that never happened-1985). Anyway blaming Americans for the BBC-written, produced, acted 90s-tv-pilot is as colossally stupid as if you tried to blame us for the ~100 pound TV tax. It makes no logical sense to blame us for BBC actions.
>>>your body spends the next twenty-four hours burning extra calories trying to repair the damage you've done.
Damage? Sounds like a path to an early death. According to a recent Time Magazine article, the other reason exercise doesn't work is because it makes people hungry, and they end-up eating more than they lost during the exercise... hence gaining weight.
Yes and thanks to your bass-backwards thinking, two teenagers spent a night in a Pennsylvania jail because they shared "child porn" photos with one another. It's stupid that teens can't even take photos of their own God-created bodies.
Your bass-backwards thinking has also made it illegal to even own a CARTOON of two kids having sex in Australia. What the hell? There's no victim there stupid shithead Aussie judge! (sigh). How about taking into account that images are just images (i.e. harmless), and focusing efforts on arresting the criminal who raped a kid.
>>>Legalising child porn legitimises child abuse, imo
Yes and thanks to you bass-backwards thinking, two teenagers spent a night in a Pennsylvania jail because they shared "child porn" photos with one another. It's stupid that teens can't even take photos of their own God-created bodies.
How about taking into account that images are just images (i.e. harmless), and focusing efforts on the criminal who raped a kid.
Thanks.
Now I know how to get rid of Madam Pelosi. Just load a few images of naked boys sucking other boys onto her office PCs. Even if she manages to salvage her political career, she'll never again by Speaker.
>>>laws passed by retards
You will shortly be arrested for hate speech. Please do not move from your current position. The police will let themselves in.
Your idea is antithetical to the government's goal to dictate morality, even when no victims exist.
You will be audited. Prepare thyself.
Even if you have nothing more than *drawings* of children having sex (like that comic called Y), you will be found guilty of this victimless crime.
I don't even know why this is illegal. First-off, nude images are not a crime, even if you're a 15-year-old taking pictures of yourself in the mirror and sending them to your boyfriend. Second, a photo of sex is not a crime, since it's considered free speech (hence the existence of Penthouse and other porn websites).
The only person who's committed a crime is the adult raping an underage child, and also the photographer (an accessory). They are the ones who should be arrested.
It's also a bit nuts when some Australian court can say, "Cartoons of children having sex is illegal." No victims; no crime.
>>>Yes you do. If you buy a plane ticket but don't like the flight do you not get to pay?
I do if the stewardess dumps a pile of Transformer... ooops I mean shit in my lap. Satisfaction guaranteed or a refund (or free trip next time). Even candy bar manufacturers will refund your money if you find your snack unsatifactory. If candy bar makers can do that, why can't media companies?
>>>Dude READ THE REVIEWS!
But the reviews are funded by the MPAA. They buy good reviews, and those reviews that are negative typically get cnensored don't appear on websites). They even go so far as to pay employees to go to amazon.com and write positive reviews. And finally because I'm so damn picky I often hand-out 1s or 2s to movies that average 7 or 8 on imdb.com. ----- Well whatever. If they are not going to offer a refund for shit like TF2, then I'm not going to pay $20 on a gamble. I can't afford it.
I could not find the original video that I saw in Congress, but I did find this other video where Barney Frank says essentially the same thing.
"If we get a public option it will lead to single-payer [healthcare]." - Congressman Frank. Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3BS4C9el98
>>>http://www.privatehealth.co.uk/
Alright. I have two questions. Since government care is so damn wonderful, why is there a need for private car in the UK?
And second, why did the college girl let herself be denied access to a PAP smear when the UK Health service said no? Why didn't she go get a PAP smear from the private option? (Wow saying "private option" has a weird echo of "public option".) Overall it sounds like the UK's not the promised paradise either.
>>>"Insenstive Clod" doesn't begin to do your post justice. My mom had cancer in her 30s.
And how was I supposed to know that? I can't read minds, you insensitive clod. Furthermore the question was directed at ME, and I answered what *I* would do. What you do with your life, being this is a free country, is none of my business. Had I been your mother, given a young age in the 30s, then I too would have spent the 20 or 40 thousand in treatments since the gain would be another 50 years of life. But if I'm already near the end (i.e. 60 or up), then I would not bother. Death is not avoidable; better to accept that shitty fact than live in denial.
>>>So $19,000 isn't unreasonable for you? Good for you.
Look in your front drive. If you're like the typical American you have two cars that cost about $60,000 (when you include tax and interest). Your home probably cost $200,000 or more (again with interest and tax). And it's not likely you just had two cars; you probably owned several during your life. Say 2 every ten years. So doing the quick math - $200K + $60K times 5 == $500K. Add on top of that recurring expenses for cable television or internet or cellphone for about $2000 a year == about $100K over 50 years. Food is about $200 a week times 52 weeks times 50 years == $500K.
Divide in half in case I made a mistake somewhere. I come-up with a conservative estimate of $500,000 of car, house, food, and entertainment expenses over an adult lifetime. If you can afford those bills, why can't you afford a once or twice-in-a-lifetime 19K hospital bill?
No. You'd rather make ME pay the bill, and frankly I don't want to.
You have a right to healthcare.
You have a right to smoke, drink, or overeat.
You do NOT have a right to replace your diseased lung, liver, or fatty heart and then expect your neighbors to pay the bill. You made your poor choices; YOU pay the cost. Not your neighbors.
No need. The "50 million uninsured Americans" is the perfect example of just such a lie, where the politicians have repeated it so many times, people cite it without further consideration.
First off, the number is 42.5 million, not 50, and second the number comes from a write-in survey from approximately 2000 postcards. It's completely and totally invalid, scientifically speaking. The number is meaningless. For those who have done actual studies, like Penn State University, they place they number at 18 million Americans, or when illegals are discounted, 8 million uninsured citizens.
The trains which carry your food from the farms to the cities RUN ON OIL you ignorant boob. Duh. As for alternatives, I'm sorry but I don't see how we're going to run our diesel locomotives off solar panels.
If you doubt the oil shock, then just look at what happened in 2008 to the cost of food. It basically doubled, as the cost of oil surpassed the $150 mark. When oil becomes scarce (i.e. a drought) and shoots over $500, you can expect food prices to be 5-6 times higher than now. And many shelves will just be plain empty.
http://www.davidstrahan.com/