About 2 years, one of the GE bulbs that I bought caught on fire. It was an R-30 that was in a can. Likewise, we have had 10 GE china-made bulbs die within their first year (include a 180W rated one; expensive bugger to lose). That is a LOT OF BULBS to lose the more so considering how expensive they are.
Nonsense. Clearly this is YOUR fault not the bulb. Get with the program! Sig heil to the Green Flag!/end sarcasm
No I understand exactly where you're coming from, expect in my case the bulbs were not cheap. They were Lights of America (made in USA shcokingly) and Philips (made in Germany). People keep trying to blame everything else - me, my power company, my wallet, my alignment with pluto - but that's not the root cause. The root cause is when you hang a bulb upside-down, it will fry its own electronics in the base.
>>>You have to remember that it IS possible to spend so much money on energy efficiency that you'll never see a return on your money
True but after the oil drought hits and cost rises to $200 or even $300 a barrel, increased energy efficiency will pay itself back very fast. Also I disagree that the PassivHaus won't work in the south. It's based upon the idea of using lots of mass to keep the house at thermal equilibrium, and that principle still applies even in hot Georgia. Once the house's mass is cooled it will stay cool, even on bright sunny days. Yes you might have to upgrade the PassivHaus's current circulating fan with a small 500 watt central air conditioner, but that's still better than the 10,000 watt version in today's Georgia homes.
>>>you should have at least taken advantage of replacement guarantees
Yeah well you know how money-back guarantees work. In almost every case they claimed it was my fault and refused to replace the bulb. No they didn't explain WHY it was my fault - they just said it was. Convenient for them.
This is similar to what Toyota did a few years ago when Sienna engines were sludging (dying) after only 20-30,000 miles use - they blamed the customer for not making oil changes (even though most customers had dealer records of regular maintenance). This went on for about five years until finally the U.S. government threatened to sue Toyota of America, at which point Toyota finally honored the warranty instead of blaming customers.
POINT - Just because something is warranted does not means it's honored. And even when it is honored, that doesn't mean much. In one case after I bitched loud enough, the Lights of America manufacturer decided to honor the warranty but they made the assumption I had the bulb turned-on 24 hours a day over six months (even though by my estimate it was more like 3-4 hours a day). Based on that they figured I had used half the lifespan, and returned half my initial cost - $1.50 back. Minus postage costs of 42(?) cents to provide them a copy of my receipt, I basically got a dollar refund on a bulb that originally cost me $3.18.
I'd take your challange with some measures - 1. I provide the CFLs. 2. Outlets are checked for proper voltage/installation/suitability - IE no sockets in series with lights, no putting a 100watt equivalent in a fixture intended for a 40. 3. Somebody installs a home level surge supressor in your house....
I thought CFLs were supposed to save money??? Your preconditions will result in me spending hundreds of dollars upfront, just so I can switch to CFLs and save ~15 cents per month in lighting costs. It is Not reasonable to expect the 110 million homeowners to go through all that hassle just to save a few pennies each month.
I say stick with the incandescent Edison bulbs which don't require all that extraneous upgrade cost. They just work.
>>>And then you have people like that Joe Wilson moron (go go civil discourse) who screams about lies, about things that are objectively NOT lies (read the bill, okay?).
I have. Although it says non-citizens are excluded, there's no requirement for verification, so any illegal person can walk into a hospital, lie, and get free service as a U.S. citizen even though they aren't.
As for sound arguments here's at least one of many. You'll probably reject it as "nonsense" but I consider it valid: A monopoly is never a good idea. The Comcast monopoly over my local cable tv is bad, the near-monopoly Microsoft holds over operating systems is bad, and the monopoly Congress will hold over healthcare will also be bad. And yes it is in the bill. Effective "year one" of the legislation, which is 2013 in normal language, people will no longer be able to choose private options. Yes if you are a grandparent who has had the same ABC Insurance for twnety years, you'll be able to keep it, but for the rest of us who don't currently have coverage we will HAVE to choose the government option. We won't be able to elect a private company. .
>>>Sadly I haven't seen any of the "opposition" bring this $1500 fine up
Maybe it's time to stop watching MSNBC's or CNN's censored reports that conveniently don't cover what "the opposition" is discussing, because those channels are not telling you the whole story. *I* heard about the $1500 fine ($3500 for married people) from the opposition, else I wouldn't even know about it. So yes it's being talked about even if you're not hearing it. .
>>>Our last president was much closer to a tyrant than Obama will ever be, but he's a-okay in many people's books.
No not really. A few still like Bush, but not anyone I've ever met. The $700 billion bailout was the final straw for nearly everyone who used to like Bush. They consider him a traitor to small government principles and the Republican party.
>>>Obama is a tyrant in your eyes,
Strawman argument. I never said that. No wonder you fail to understand the opposition if you fail to listen to what they say. I think Obama's a decent, intelligent man. I just disagree with his ideas. I think if we want government to provide healthcare as is the case in the UK or France, then the proper procedure is an amendment to the Constitution, which would grant that power to the Congress. Without that grant of power then Amendment 10 takes effect.
By that logic Seinfeld should be arrested because he was dating a 20/21 year old woman who was "not mature enough to understand the consequences of their decisions and avoid predation"
When Europe colonized various places around the world land==wealth. Having more land was desirable. The industrial revolution changed that equation such that land had little value, and in some cases it actually became a burden to care for those overseas citizens. So Europe cut ties.
Reading comprehension is not your forte' is it? He never said anything about eliminating credit cards completely. He said he'd still offer both but offer a 5% discount for cash customers.
>>>I want to get hours if not days away from buildings and wiring.
There's no such place in North America. Even along the Alaska Highway, which is pretty desolate, you're never more than a half-an-hour's drive away from humans and their buildings. And you mentioned the Appalachian Trail - well almost the entire length of that trail is only a short drive from the nearest interstate (I-81) or state highway.
Riding through Utah or Arizona on a motorcycle is no fun. Even further north like Montana can get pretty darn hot. Give me a car with air conditioning, so I can enjoy my cross-country journey in comfort, even when I'm cruising through the middle of a desert.
Just imagine if Roman-Latin has been stabilized in 500 A.D. with fixed spelling and mandatory education. Rather than have a bunch of devolved Latinate dialects, Western Europe would now be united under one universal tongue which would make communication between the peoples of the EU much easier.
If spelling changes then we'll no longer be able to read Shakespeare's plays, our founding documents the Declaration and the Constitution, or great works of literature like A Tale of Two Cities. By affixing spelling and stabilizing it, you preserve access to the past generations' writings. By allowing changes, you end-up with incomprehensible documents such as this:
Bifil that in that seson, on a day, In Southwerk at the Tabard as I lay, Redy to wenden on my pilgrymage, To Caunterbury with ful devout corage, At nyght was come into that hostelrye, Wel nyne and twenty in a compaignye, Of sondry folk, by aventure yfalle, In felaweshipe, and pilgrimes were they alle, That toward Caunterbury wolden ryde. The chambres and the stables weren wyde, And wel we weren esed atte beste; And shortly, whan the sonne was to reste, So hadde I spoken with hem everichon, That I was of hir felaweshipe anon, And made forward erly for to ryse, To take our wey, ther as I yow devyse.
>>>U.S. government works are automatically public domain. Shouldn't state government materials be the same way? The latest absurdity to come out of my home state. (The first was yesterday [Congress Mulls Research Into a Vehicle Mileage Tax]) >>>
I like the Per-Mile Road Toll system, so long as it eliminates the current gasoline tax, and the money is earmarked for only road projects. I also believe it will be necessary as we transition to EVs or pluggable hybrids that don't burn any gasoline. They need to be assessed for their road usage somehow, and the per-mile toll system seems a logical solution. Perhaps at your annual car inspection you would say, "My odometer claims I drove 20,000 miles," and hand-over around $180 to the state inspector after he verifies the claim. That seems like a good approach to me.
Anyway back to topic -
Although all U.S. government works are automatically public domain, State Legislatures have no such law. Apparently Oregon is one of those that does not make laws or documents public domain.
>>>That makes about as much sense as saying that if you own a share of Microsoft stock, Microsoft can't enforce its copyrights against you
You've forgotten founding principles. Microsoft was created by a man named Bill Gates for his own self and own profit. He choose to sell shares and share the profit, but not copyright. It's a private enterprise.
In contrast the Oregon Government was created by the People - we are not merely stockholders in the enterprise. We are the master of the government, and the government is our servant. In effect the People of Oregon are the collective "CEO" of the government, and the government is obligated to follow our wishes, including providing unrestrained access to its documents.
Or be dissolved and a new government put into its place.
>>>Since neither causes much wear the higher tax on the Prius' extra weight could be negligible (the $-per-ton graph doesn't have to be linear).
Why is is that every time somebody proposes a good idea, somebody else has to come-along and ruin it with anal-retentiveness? You just admitted the difference between a Miata (~2000 pounds) and Prius (~4000 pounds) is negligible and the damage they cause essentially nothing compared to a 100,000 pound freight truck, so why worry about such trivialities???
- Just tax them equally as "cars". - Tax SUVs/vans as "heavy cars". - Tax campers, RVs, or freight based-upon how many wheels they have (6, 8,..., 18).
Simple. Easy. Non-complex. I don't know about you, but I've found life is much more enjoyable when you follow the KISS principle instead of nitpicking over shit.
>>>But that system makes no distinction between a Honda CRX, a Hummer, and a 4-wheeled backhoe
(1) Backhoes don't pay road taxes. They use non-taxed offroad fuel. Ditto tractors, cornhuskers, et cetera.
(2) The current gas tax system does not make a distinction either - it's purely MPG-based which means a Miata pays a higher rate than a Prius, even though the Prius weighs almost twice as much and therefore damages the road more. And EV cars pay nothing, even though a RAV4 EV tears-up the road just as much as the gasoline version.
(3) So in other words arguments that a new per-mile toll is "unfair" don't hold any water with me. The current gas tax system is ALSO unfair (see point 2) but at least the per-mile toll can have secondary adjustments made for different cars. You can't do that with the current gas tax. I think the per-mile toll ("You drove 10,000 miles last year - please pay $200 to the state inspector") makes more logical sense than the current gas-based system which fails to tax EVs.
Yes that is one advantage of the markets - If you tax a corporation, the cost will trickle-down, but some of the cost will also be borne by the overpaid CEO and directors (they get smaller salaries). Plus people will look for alternatives, like eating food grown locally rather than in distant China, since the local food will be cheaper.
The drawback is if the tax is applied to a corporation that can move. The trucking industry is pretty much "stuck" here, but if you heavily tax someone like Microsoft then they will move to another country, which is a negative outcome.
>>>Direct green house gas emissions(meaning electric cars aren't taxed based on the green house gases released while producing the electricity to power it)
Uh... why shouldn't they be? If their usage creases excess greenhouse gases, then they should be taxed for that. Carbon taxes should be applied equally to all cars, without exceptions.
Also it may surprise you but according to greenercars.org, a natural gas Civic or a hybrid Insight, are cleaner than an EV1. This is due to the EV1 being predominantly coal-powered (yes even in California this is true), and also because the EV1 uses more kilowatt-hours per mile than a CNG Civic or hybrid Insight. The EV1 is rated as tie with the Prius in terms of overall well-to-wheel cleanliness.
I'm sorry but I don't see how playing games is educational. I've been doing that for almost a year now, with my PS2 and Gamecube collections, and I don't think it's taught me anything.
The flaw is the economics. This company claims it can make $10/barrel oil, but that calculation is based-upon getting scrap plastic for essentially free. What happens a few years from now when people discover their scrap plastic, like scrap gold, silver, or copper, has value? They will stop throwing-it away, and start demanding that Envion pay for the scrap plastic. Then the $10/barrel plastic-oil will skyrocket to a much higher value.
>>>"...any statement made is assumed to be false unless you prove it's true." Now that's good science, why can't everybody stand behind this simple phrase. >>>
Yes true but it also enables people to sell stuff like "water-fueled engines" and "magnetic devices to get 100 MPG", and there's no way for journalists, bloggers, or even people here on slashdot to say, "That stuff is bunk" for fear of getting sued.
Another example is when a Marylander said "Dunkin Donuts is filthy," and got sued by the local owner. Because this happened in the States it was thrown-out as protected free speech (an opinion), but in the UK presumably that woman would be spending time in jail for libel.
Nope. The term originated in France, and it was carried over to London during the 1066 invasion. The French administered the courts and legal system, which of course was in Norman-French. Some 500 years later when those French terms were translated to English, some of the backwards phrasing like "Attorney General" stuck.
I say we need to stop such nonsense, and follow proper English grammar. He's not a General in the army; he's an Attorney of law. It should be General Attorney. ----- I also think we need to stop saying such hackneyed phrases as "you guys" or "yall" or "youse" and revive the correct plural pronoun which is "ye".
>>>I'm all for allowing people to self-insure provided...
Fortunately I'm not a slave, and you are neither my master nor my king, so your opinion although welcome, will be ignored. I will follow my own path in life as a freeman (aka liberated person).
The Liberty to choose for yourself (instead of having a monopoly) is more important than saving a few dollars. Also you exaggerate the cost. There are only 8 million citizens who do not have either private or government coverage. The other ~290 million are just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
About 2 years, one of the GE bulbs that I bought caught on fire. It was an R-30 that was in a can. Likewise, we have had 10 GE china-made bulbs die within their first year (include a 180W rated one; expensive bugger to lose). That is a LOT OF BULBS to lose the more so considering how expensive they are.
Nonsense. Clearly this is YOUR fault not the bulb. Get with the program! Sig heil to the Green Flag! /end sarcasm
No I understand exactly where you're coming from, expect in my case the bulbs were not cheap. They were Lights of America (made in USA shcokingly) and Philips (made in Germany). People keep trying to blame everything else - me, my power company, my wallet, my alignment with pluto - but that's not the root cause. The root cause is when you hang a bulb upside-down, it will fry its own electronics in the base.
>>>You have to remember that it IS possible to spend so much money on energy efficiency that you'll never see a return on your money
True but after the oil drought hits and cost rises to $200 or even $300 a barrel, increased energy efficiency will pay itself back very fast. Also I disagree that the PassivHaus won't work in the south. It's based upon the idea of using lots of mass to keep the house at thermal equilibrium, and that principle still applies even in hot Georgia. Once the house's mass is cooled it will stay cool, even on bright sunny days. Yes you might have to upgrade the PassivHaus's current circulating fan with a small 500 watt central air conditioner, but that's still better than the 10,000 watt version in today's Georgia homes.
>>>you should have at least taken advantage of replacement guarantees
Yeah well you know how money-back guarantees work. In almost every case they claimed it was my fault and refused to replace the bulb. No they didn't explain WHY it was my fault - they just said it was. Convenient for them.
This is similar to what Toyota did a few years ago when Sienna engines were sludging (dying) after only 20-30,000 miles use - they blamed the customer for not making oil changes (even though most customers had dealer records of regular maintenance). This went on for about five years until finally the U.S. government threatened to sue Toyota of America, at which point Toyota finally honored the warranty instead of blaming customers.
POINT - Just because something is warranted does not means it's honored. And even when it is honored, that doesn't mean much. In one case after I bitched loud enough, the Lights of America manufacturer decided to honor the warranty but they made the assumption I had the bulb turned-on 24 hours a day over six months (even though by my estimate it was more like 3-4 hours a day). Based on that they figured I had used half the lifespan, and returned half my initial cost - $1.50 back. Minus postage costs of 42(?) cents to provide them a copy of my receipt, I basically got a dollar refund on a bulb that originally cost me $3.18.
I'd take your challange with some measures - 1. I provide the CFLs. 2. Outlets are checked for proper voltage/installation/suitability - IE no sockets in series with lights, no putting a 100watt equivalent in a fixture intended for a 40. 3. Somebody installs a home level surge supressor in your house....
I thought CFLs were supposed to save money??? Your preconditions will result in me spending hundreds of dollars upfront, just so I can switch to CFLs and save ~15 cents per month in lighting costs. It is Not reasonable to expect the 110 million homeowners to go through all that hassle just to save a few pennies each month.
I say stick with the incandescent Edison bulbs which don't require all that extraneous upgrade cost. They just work.
>>>And then you have people like that Joe Wilson moron (go go civil discourse) who screams about lies, about things that are objectively NOT lies (read the bill, okay?).
I have. Although it says non-citizens are excluded, there's no requirement for verification, so any illegal person can walk into a hospital, lie, and get free service as a U.S. citizen even though they aren't.
As for sound arguments here's at least one of many. You'll probably reject it as "nonsense" but I consider it valid: A monopoly is never a good idea. The Comcast monopoly over my local cable tv is bad, the near-monopoly Microsoft holds over operating systems is bad, and the monopoly Congress will hold over healthcare will also be bad. And yes it is in the bill. Effective "year one" of the legislation, which is 2013 in normal language, people will no longer be able to choose private options. Yes if you are a grandparent who has had the same ABC Insurance for twnety years, you'll be able to keep it, but for the rest of us who don't currently have coverage we will HAVE to choose the government option. We won't be able to elect a private company.
.
>>>Sadly I haven't seen any of the "opposition" bring this $1500 fine up
Maybe it's time to stop watching MSNBC's or CNN's censored reports that conveniently don't cover what "the opposition" is discussing, because those channels are not telling you the whole story. *I* heard about the $1500 fine ($3500 for married people) from the opposition, else I wouldn't even know about it. So yes it's being talked about even if you're not hearing it.
.
>>>Our last president was much closer to a tyrant than Obama will ever be, but he's a-okay in many people's books.
No not really. A few still like Bush, but not anyone I've ever met. The $700 billion bailout was the final straw for nearly everyone who used to like Bush. They consider him a traitor to small government principles and the Republican party.
>>>Obama is a tyrant in your eyes,
Strawman argument. I never said that. No wonder you fail to understand the opposition if you fail to listen to what they say. I think Obama's a decent, intelligent man. I just disagree with his ideas. I think if we want government to provide healthcare as is the case in the UK or France, then the proper procedure is an amendment to the Constitution, which would grant that power to the Congress. Without that grant of power then Amendment 10 takes effect.
By that logic Seinfeld should be arrested because he was dating a 20/21 year old woman who was "not mature enough to understand the consequences of their decisions and avoid predation"
When Europe colonized various places around the world land==wealth. Having more land was desirable. The industrial revolution changed that equation such that land had little value, and in some cases it actually became a burden to care for those overseas citizens. So Europe cut ties.
Reading comprehension is not your forte' is it? He never said anything about eliminating credit cards completely. He said he'd still offer both but offer a 5% discount for cash customers.
>>>I want to get hours if not days away from buildings and wiring.
There's no such place in North America. Even along the Alaska Highway, which is pretty desolate, you're never more than a half-an-hour's drive away from humans and their buildings. And you mentioned the Appalachian Trail - well almost the entire length of that trail is only a short drive from the nearest interstate (I-81) or state highway.
Riding through Utah or Arizona on a motorcycle is no fun. Even further north like Montana can get pretty darn hot. Give me a car with air conditioning, so I can enjoy my cross-country journey in comfort, even when I'm cruising through the middle of a desert.
P.S.
Just imagine if Roman-Latin has been stabilized in 500 A.D. with fixed spelling and mandatory education. Rather than have a bunch of devolved Latinate dialects, Western Europe would now be united under one universal tongue which would make communication between the peoples of the EU much easier.
Okay.
If spelling changes then we'll no longer be able to read Shakespeare's plays, our founding documents the Declaration and the Constitution, or great works of literature like A Tale of Two Cities. By affixing spelling and stabilizing it, you preserve access to the past generations' writings. By allowing changes, you end-up with incomprehensible documents such as this:
Bifil that in that seson, on a day, In Southwerk at the Tabard as I lay, Redy to wenden on my pilgrymage, To Caunterbury with ful devout corage, At nyght was come into that hostelrye, Wel nyne and twenty in a compaignye, Of sondry folk, by aventure yfalle, In felaweshipe, and pilgrimes were they alle, That toward Caunterbury wolden ryde. The chambres and the stables weren wyde, And wel we weren esed atte beste; And shortly, whan the sonne was to reste, So hadde I spoken with hem everichon, That I was of hir felaweshipe anon, And made forward erly for to ryse, To take our wey, ther as I yow devyse.
>>>U.S. government works are automatically public domain. Shouldn't state government materials be the same way? The latest absurdity to come out of my home state. (The first was yesterday [Congress Mulls Research Into a Vehicle Mileage Tax])
>>>
I like the Per-Mile Road Toll system, so long as it eliminates the current gasoline tax, and the money is earmarked for only road projects. I also believe it will be necessary as we transition to EVs or pluggable hybrids that don't burn any gasoline. They need to be assessed for their road usage somehow, and the per-mile toll system seems a logical solution. Perhaps at your annual car inspection you would say, "My odometer claims I drove 20,000 miles," and hand-over around $180 to the state inspector after he verifies the claim. That seems like a good approach to me.
Anyway back to topic -
Although all U.S. government works are automatically public domain, State Legislatures have no such law. Apparently Oregon is one of those that does not make laws or documents public domain.
>>>That makes about as much sense as saying that if you own a share of Microsoft stock, Microsoft can't enforce its copyrights against you
You've forgotten founding principles. Microsoft was created by a man named Bill Gates for his own self and own profit. He choose to sell shares and share the profit, but not copyright. It's a private enterprise.
In contrast the Oregon Government was created by the People - we are not merely stockholders in the enterprise. We are the master of the government, and the government is our servant. In effect the People of Oregon are the collective "CEO" of the government, and the government is obligated to follow our wishes, including providing unrestrained access to its documents.
Or be dissolved and a new government put into its place.
P.S.
>>>Since neither causes much wear the higher tax on the Prius' extra weight could be negligible (the $-per-ton graph doesn't have to be linear).
Why is is that every time somebody proposes a good idea, somebody else has to come-along and ruin it with anal-retentiveness? You just admitted the difference between a Miata (~2000 pounds) and Prius (~4000 pounds) is negligible and the damage they cause essentially nothing compared to a 100,000 pound freight truck, so why worry about such trivialities???
- Just tax them equally as "cars".
- Tax SUVs/vans as "heavy cars".
- Tax campers, RVs, or freight based-upon how many wheels they have (6, 8,..., 18).
Simple. Easy. Non-complex. I don't know about you, but I've found life is much more enjoyable when you follow the KISS principle instead of nitpicking over shit.
>>>But that system makes no distinction between a Honda CRX, a Hummer, and a 4-wheeled backhoe
(1) Backhoes don't pay road taxes. They use non-taxed offroad fuel. Ditto tractors, cornhuskers, et cetera.
(2) The current gas tax system does not make a distinction either - it's purely MPG-based which means a Miata pays a higher rate than a Prius, even though the Prius weighs almost twice as much and therefore damages the road more. And EV cars pay nothing, even though a RAV4 EV tears-up the road just as much as the gasoline version.
(3) So in other words arguments that a new per-mile toll is "unfair" don't hold any water with me. The current gas tax system is ALSO unfair (see point 2) but at least the per-mile toll can have secondary adjustments made for different cars. You can't do that with the current gas tax. I think the per-mile toll ("You drove 10,000 miles last year - please pay $200 to the state inspector") makes more logical sense than the current gas-based system which fails to tax EVs.
Yes that is one advantage of the markets - If you tax a corporation, the cost will trickle-down, but some of the cost will also be borne by the overpaid CEO and directors (they get smaller salaries). Plus people will look for alternatives, like eating food grown locally rather than in distant China, since the local food will be cheaper.
The drawback is if the tax is applied to a corporation that can move. The trucking industry is pretty much "stuck" here, but if you heavily tax someone like Microsoft then they will move to another country, which is a negative outcome.
>>>Direct green house gas emissions(meaning electric cars aren't taxed based on the green house gases released while producing the electricity to power it)
Uh... why shouldn't they be? If their usage creases excess greenhouse gases, then they should be taxed for that. Carbon taxes should be applied equally to all cars, without exceptions.
Also it may surprise you but according to greenercars.org, a natural gas Civic or a hybrid Insight, are cleaner than an EV1. This is due to the EV1 being predominantly coal-powered (yes even in California this is true), and also because the EV1 uses more kilowatt-hours per mile than a CNG Civic or hybrid Insight. The EV1 is rated as tie with the Prius in terms of overall well-to-wheel cleanliness.
I'm sorry but I don't see how playing games is educational. I've been doing that for almost a year now, with my PS2 and Gamecube collections, and I don't think it's taught me anything.
The flaw is not the chemistry.
The flaw is the economics. This company claims it can make $10/barrel oil, but that calculation is based-upon getting scrap plastic for essentially free. What happens a few years from now when people discover their scrap plastic, like scrap gold, silver, or copper, has value? They will stop throwing-it away, and start demanding that Envion pay for the scrap plastic. Then the $10/barrel plastic-oil will skyrocket to a much higher value.
I don't even know what I'm looking at. It looks like something I could have made with my Commodore Amiga.
>>>"...any statement made is assumed to be false unless you prove it's true." Now that's good science, why can't everybody stand behind this simple phrase.
>>>
Yes true but it also enables people to sell stuff like "water-fueled engines" and "magnetic devices to get 100 MPG", and there's no way for journalists, bloggers, or even people here on slashdot to say, "That stuff is bunk" for fear of getting sued.
Another example is when a Marylander said "Dunkin Donuts is filthy," and got sued by the local owner. Because this happened in the States it was thrown-out as protected free speech (an opinion), but in the UK presumably that woman would be spending time in jail for libel.
>>>the term originated in England, not France.
Nope. The term originated in France, and it was carried over to London during the 1066 invasion. The French administered the courts and legal system, which of course was in Norman-French. Some 500 years later when those French terms were translated to English, some of the backwards phrasing like "Attorney General" stuck.
I say we need to stop such nonsense, and follow proper English grammar. He's not a General in the army; he's an Attorney of law. It should be General Attorney. ----- I also think we need to stop saying such hackneyed phrases as "you guys" or "yall" or "youse" and revive the correct plural pronoun which is "ye".
>>>I'm all for allowing people to self-insure provided...
Fortunately I'm not a slave, and you are neither my master nor my king, so your opinion although welcome, will be ignored. I will follow my own path in life as a freeman (aka liberated person).
The Liberty to choose for yourself (instead of having a monopoly) is more important than saving a few dollars. Also you exaggerate the cost. There are only 8 million citizens who do not have either private or government coverage. The other ~290 million are just fine.