A benevolent plutocracy? Lenin had a similar idea. Since you can't trust the people to do what's best for themselves through this democracy nonsense, you need a small and powerful "elite" to do it for them.
It's becoming clear they have no idea what to do with their billions.
No idea? That's what I thought, until they made this investment, which has the highest ROI of any venture. "Millions" is obviously petty cash to an outfit like Google, but it can be worth billions in getting laws and regs that benefit them. It's worked for other companies and industries.
It's one thing for the president and congress to be whores, but it's downright insulting to the American people that they're such cheap whores. I'd feel better if they held out for $10B before turning on the corruption spigot. The United States of America deserves better than $20 street corner crack whores.
despite the absolute right of way for motorists at these points, I slow to a walking or at least dog-trotting speed in the car at every bike trail intersection
Good practice. I only visit in the summer (don't hate me - my aunt lives there year round) and I do the same (I also love using the bike trails). I don't mind slowing down, because people always make mistakes, but cyclists who habitually act like they shouldn't have to watch out... well... how about open season?
So when you increase penalties for a law violation you won't see any less law violation. Just an increased "revenue stream".
Were you under the impression that governments viewed them as anything other than revenue streams? My favorite is the traffic light cameras, which actually increase the number of accidents. Around here (Long Island) the counties only seemed to become concerned about this aspect of road safety when the economy went south so tax revenues dropped. They jacked up the fines for traffic violations in general, and didn't even pretend that it was for anything other than making money.
If they were serious about traffic safety they'd study which violations are most likely to cause accidents and concentrate on them. Dream on.
You certainly didn't search on that one before you posted. Lots of people bike in the snow, particularly in Europe but in the US as well.
I used an anecdote, and didn't claim that what I see is universal. Several people upthread used their anecdotes (generally personal experience) to say it definitely wasn't universal (not that I had claimed otherwise). Now you claim to have done a search to show that "lots of people bike in the snow". Such insight. Please define "lots". What is the ratio of ridership between non-snow and snow conditions? I'll settle for stats on Europe and the US - you needn't break it down further at this point. I mean I'm terribly impressed by your ability to do a search on the web, but I would like actual statistics since you claim to have superior knowledge (which even the people who do bike in the snow didn't claim to have).
a president whom is all too willing to go along with it
Not "a president", but "presidents". Name the last one who wasn't crooked that way (and no I'm not an Obama supporter). Recently this has been exacerbated by a Supreme Court that claims that money and speech are the same thing, thus legally enshrining the principle that $1M dollar = 1 vote, rather than the quaint 1 citizen = vote. As for their confusion about money and speech, somebody please buy those legal geniuses a dictionary.
How about ticketing the fuckwit car drivers on phones, rolling through stop signs and otherwise making them obey the law?
Around here (Long Island) they ticket for both. Drivers on phones has been the hot thing to ticket for around here for a few years (and yes I think they should do it). They also ticket for not stopping completely at a stop sign, and I've known plenty of people who've gotten them.
Cyclists? I've never heard of anyone getting a ticket for anything.
As for peletons, I've got no problem with them per se. In fact having a bunch of riders together makes them easier to see, and if you have to pass them on a long narrow road (I mean a "country" style road, not an urban/suburban one) you only have to pass them once (yes it's legal to pass them). My big complaint though is that on such roads they often ride 3 or 4 abreast. Uh, slower moving traffic keep right, ok? I always give cyclists a wide berth, but when they're taking up most of a lane on a road with only one lane in each direction, it makes things oh so much more fun.
I didn't know that cyclists stopped for stop signs anyway. I was in Cape Cod, which has some great bike trails (my daughter and I use them). I was driving at the time though, stopped where the bike trail crosses the road, looked around, saw nobody, and proceeded. Somebody went flying across, and the only saving grace was that he swerved to avoid a collision (and I hit the brakes of course). There was a stop sign on the bike path, but at the speed he was going he couldn't have stopped or slowed down for it.
I bike, though not for commuting, and there are a few rules you have to follow. Yes, it's a pain to stop once you've got some speed up, but it's better than getting killed. I'm not saying most cyclists do this, but I felt like blowing off some steam it.
As for the Idaho law, I'm not sure it would work everywhere. What does yield mean? You're supposed to slow down, but by how much? For some cyclists it means glance around quickly before flying through the intersection. As it is, most cyclists don't completely stop at a stop sign, including me, but you've got to use some judgement. Clear view of the intersecting road? Maybe slowing down enough is ok. Blind corner or something? Stop all the way. And the only way to know an intersecting road can be seen clearly is if you've ridden through that area before.
As for comparing Boise to Bakersfield and Sacramento, how about looking at Boise before and after the law changed? Did it actually change anybody's behavior anyway? Has anybody even heard of a cyclist getting a ticket for something like this?
How many people ride a bike in the snow anyway? I'm in the NY area, and at my job (1000+ people) we have some bicycle commuters, but none when there's snow on the ground.
China... makes high quality as well as low quality items.
Really? Where are they hiding the high quality stuff?
Note they have high speed rail, we don't
They have hi-speed rail because it's very heavily subsidized. The same is true of France's famed TGV. As much as I like hi-speed rail, I think there is a limit to how heavily subsidized it should be.
First, this isn't about high speed rail - it would mostly be for freight. Second, I'd gladly take a French or Japanese hi-speed train than a Chinese one. Last time I checked, China and the US aren't the only two places in the world.
No, water is always the cheapest way to ship things long distance. In fact it's not unusual for container ships from China to use NY harbor (just take a look from the Narrows) in spite of the much longer distance than shipping to the West Coast and then shipping cross-country by rail.
The problem is the proverbial "slow boat to China" (or from China these days). A trans-Pacific cargo ship generally takes around 3 weeks. You could steam faster, but the fuel consumption would rise dramatically.
Is the headline "Single Gene Can Boost IQ By Six Points" a self parody? It should be "Single Allele Can Boost IQ By Six Points". The thing I love about irony is that it knows no bounds - there's an endless supply of it.
How, exactly, do we define a clinical term as having a certain score on a mythical scale?
The scale is real - the myth is that it's a terribly good measure of intelligence. It's such an objective and repeatable test that you can increase a kid's intelligence by offering them ice cream if they do well.
So how can you justify using it as part of a DSM diagnosis? They had to put something in there. Many, if not most DSM diagnoses are subject to "interpretation", which is a black art that psychiatrists get paid a lot of money for. Ask a parent of a kid who is MR or some other sort of mental handicap - you can get different diagnoses by going to different doctors. Just pick the diagnosis that will get your kid the most help because the state says they get get A for a diagnosis of X, but B for a diagnosis of Y. It's even worse with psychiatric diagnoses. The borderline part of borderline personality disorder is that it's on the borderline with a dozen other diagnoses.
The IQ test is useful for putting kids into gross categories like "slow" or "really bright", but that's about it. That's all it was originally intended for too, for the sake of deciding how to help kids who weren't doing well in school. It was eugenicists who turned it into a fetish, which ironically showed their lack of understanding of the issue.
wow, people still believe in the IQ myth? That is so CUTE.
Modded down to -1? Thank goodness Slashdot mods are unbiased, and their frail egos aren't based on a single number of which they don't understand the significance or lack thereof.
What about Africans... are they lacking this gene?
What about people who are too stupid to understand that sub-Saharan Africa has a larger number of groups with significant population genetics differences than anywhere else? Oh, that's right, you just categorize them as dark skinned folks, as though that were a terribly significant genetic difference. Why not throw Australian Aborigines into that mix too, and ignore that they're the people who have the greatest genetic difference from most African groups.
I'm not sure, but pre-Civil War citizenship might have been given at the State level.
Nope. The first naturalization law was passed by the 1st Congress. They also got around to passing the Bill of Rights. I guess congress worked better in those days.
The O is not a dual-purpose visa. I'm only allowed to work so long as I do so with NO immigration intent.
File an I-140 and an I-485. You can stay here, work, and apply for a green card.
Look me up. My real name's Jim Dovey...
Nice creds. You shouldn't have any problem finding a good job in the UK, or Canada where you were working. So what's the problem from your POV? If you prefer the US, you already have your O-1 and a way to apply for a green card (issued on a priority basis).
I highly doubt that your anecdotal experience has any more weight than my own.
I find it very hard to believe that the purpose of the H1-B program is to suppress Americans' wages.
Is that tongue in cheek, or are you that naive?
It *looks* like its purpose is to allow foreign workers to enter the US, contribute to the economy
How do they contribute to the economy since there is no shortage of domestic talent with at least equal ability to the typical H-1B? Please find me one objective statistical piece of data that shows the the alleged shortage of such workers is real, and not just the self-serving statements of CEO's and immigration lawyers.
Lump of labor doesn't say "GDP raises by a larger amount than the pay of the skilled immigrant", and in fact nothing in the article address what you're claiming.
Slashdot Mirror
He might actually do some good in those areas.
A benevolent plutocracy? Lenin had a similar idea. Since you can't trust the people to do what's best for themselves through this democracy nonsense, you need a small and powerful "elite" to do it for them.
This is why we need a 28th Amendment to get money out of politics forever.
wolf-pac.com
Hear, hear! I'm going to send them some money - the only political contribution I've ever made.
If the Supremes make absurd and crooked decisions, the only way around them is an amendment.
It's becoming clear they have no idea what to do with their billions.
No idea? That's what I thought, until they made this investment, which has the highest ROI of any venture. "Millions" is obviously petty cash to an outfit like Google, but it can be worth billions in getting laws and regs that benefit them. It's worked for other companies and industries.
It's one thing for the president and congress to be whores, but it's downright insulting to the American people that they're such cheap whores. I'd feel better if they held out for $10B before turning on the corruption spigot. The United States of America deserves better than $20 street corner crack whores.
despite the absolute right of way for motorists at these points, I slow to a walking or at least dog-trotting speed in the car at every bike trail intersection
Good practice. I only visit in the summer (don't hate me - my aunt lives there year round) and I do the same (I also love using the bike trails). I don't mind slowing down, because people always make mistakes, but cyclists who habitually act like they shouldn't have to watch out ... well ... how about open season?
So when you increase penalties for a law violation you won't see any less law violation. Just an increased "revenue stream".
Were you under the impression that governments viewed them as anything other than revenue streams? My favorite is the traffic light cameras, which actually increase the number of accidents. Around here (Long Island) the counties only seemed to become concerned about this aspect of road safety when the economy went south so tax revenues dropped. They jacked up the fines for traffic violations in general, and didn't even pretend that it was for anything other than making money.
If they were serious about traffic safety they'd study which violations are most likely to cause accidents and concentrate on them. Dream on.
You certainly didn't search on that one before you posted. Lots of people bike in the snow, particularly in Europe but in the US as well.
I used an anecdote, and didn't claim that what I see is universal. Several people upthread used their anecdotes (generally personal experience) to say it definitely wasn't universal (not that I had claimed otherwise). Now you claim to have done a search to show that "lots of people bike in the snow". Such insight. Please define "lots". What is the ratio of ridership between non-snow and snow conditions? I'll settle for stats on Europe and the US - you needn't break it down further at this point. I mean I'm terribly impressed by your ability to do a search on the web, but I would like actual statistics since you claim to have superior knowledge (which even the people who do bike in the snow didn't claim to have).
a president whom is all too willing to go along with it
Not "a president", but "presidents". Name the last one who wasn't crooked that way (and no I'm not an Obama supporter). Recently this has been exacerbated by a Supreme Court that claims that money and speech are the same thing, thus legally enshrining the principle that $1M dollar = 1 vote, rather than the quaint 1 citizen = vote. As for their confusion about money and speech, somebody please buy those legal geniuses a dictionary.
How about ticketing the fuckwit car drivers on phones, rolling through stop signs and otherwise making them obey the law?
Around here (Long Island) they ticket for both. Drivers on phones has been the hot thing to ticket for around here for a few years (and yes I think they should do it). They also ticket for not stopping completely at a stop sign, and I've known plenty of people who've gotten them.
Cyclists? I've never heard of anyone getting a ticket for anything.
As for peletons, I've got no problem with them per se. In fact having a bunch of riders together makes them easier to see, and if you have to pass them on a long narrow road (I mean a "country" style road, not an urban/suburban one) you only have to pass them once (yes it's legal to pass them). My big complaint though is that on such roads they often ride 3 or 4 abreast. Uh, slower moving traffic keep right, ok? I always give cyclists a wide berth, but when they're taking up most of a lane on a road with only one lane in each direction, it makes things oh so much more fun.
I didn't know that cyclists stopped for stop signs anyway. I was in Cape Cod, which has some great bike trails (my daughter and I use them). I was driving at the time though, stopped where the bike trail crosses the road, looked around, saw nobody, and proceeded. Somebody went flying across, and the only saving grace was that he swerved to avoid a collision (and I hit the brakes of course). There was a stop sign on the bike path, but at the speed he was going he couldn't have stopped or slowed down for it.
I bike, though not for commuting, and there are a few rules you have to follow. Yes, it's a pain to stop once you've got some speed up, but it's better than getting killed. I'm not saying most cyclists do this, but I felt like blowing off some steam it.
As for the Idaho law, I'm not sure it would work everywhere. What does yield mean? You're supposed to slow down, but by how much? For some cyclists it means glance around quickly before flying through the intersection. As it is, most cyclists don't completely stop at a stop sign, including me, but you've got to use some judgement. Clear view of the intersecting road? Maybe slowing down enough is ok. Blind corner or something? Stop all the way. And the only way to know an intersecting road can be seen clearly is if you've ridden through that area before.
As for comparing Boise to Bakersfield and Sacramento, how about looking at Boise before and after the law changed? Did it actually change anybody's behavior anyway? Has anybody even heard of a cyclist getting a ticket for something like this?
How many people ride a bike in the snow anyway? I'm in the NY area, and at my job (1000+ people) we have some bicycle commuters, but none when there's snow on the ground.
Oops, didn't read the 2nd link. It is for high speed rail - which makes it even dumber than I thought.
Alaska is not for sale!
Of course it isn't - we already bought it.
China ... makes high quality as well as low quality items.
Really? Where are they hiding the high quality stuff?
Note they have high speed rail, we don't
They have hi-speed rail because it's very heavily subsidized. The same is true of France's famed TGV. As much as I like hi-speed rail, I think there is a limit to how heavily subsidized it should be.
What's America's high speed rail network like?
First, this isn't about high speed rail - it would mostly be for freight. Second, I'd gladly take a French or Japanese hi-speed train than a Chinese one. Last time I checked, China and the US aren't the only two places in the world.
Train freight is far cheaper than shipping.
No, water is always the cheapest way to ship things long distance. In fact it's not unusual for container ships from China to use NY harbor (just take a look from the Narrows) in spite of the much longer distance than shipping to the West Coast and then shipping cross-country by rail.
The problem is the proverbial "slow boat to China" (or from China these days). A trans-Pacific cargo ship generally takes around 3 weeks. You could steam faster, but the fuel consumption would rise dramatically.
Is the headline "Single Gene Can Boost IQ By Six Points" a self parody? It should be "Single Allele Can Boost IQ By Six Points". The thing I love about irony is that it knows no bounds - there's an endless supply of it.
How, exactly, do we define a clinical term as having a certain score on a mythical scale?
The scale is real - the myth is that it's a terribly good measure of intelligence. It's such an objective and repeatable test that you can increase a kid's intelligence by offering them ice cream if they do well.
So how can you justify using it as part of a DSM diagnosis? They had to put something in there. Many, if not most DSM diagnoses are subject to "interpretation", which is a black art that psychiatrists get paid a lot of money for. Ask a parent of a kid who is MR or some other sort of mental handicap - you can get different diagnoses by going to different doctors. Just pick the diagnosis that will get your kid the most help because the state says they get get A for a diagnosis of X, but B for a diagnosis of Y. It's even worse with psychiatric diagnoses. The borderline part of borderline personality disorder is that it's on the borderline with a dozen other diagnoses.
The IQ test is useful for putting kids into gross categories like "slow" or "really bright", but that's about it. That's all it was originally intended for too, for the sake of deciding how to help kids who weren't doing well in school. It was eugenicists who turned it into a fetish, which ironically showed their lack of understanding of the issue.
wow, people still believe in the IQ myth? That is so CUTE.
Modded down to -1? Thank goodness Slashdot mods are unbiased, and their frail egos aren't based on a single number of which they don't understand the significance or lack thereof.
I love talking to people who are adamant that intelligence is not heritable
I love talking to people who have no clue what the OP said.
Hint: he said nothing about intelligence, and nothing about heritability.
They thought it was ok to marry your sister as long as both of you have the KL-VS allele.
What about Africans ... are they lacking this gene?
What about people who are too stupid to understand that sub-Saharan Africa has a larger number of groups with significant population genetics differences than anywhere else? Oh, that's right, you just categorize them as dark skinned folks, as though that were a terribly significant genetic difference. Why not throw Australian Aborigines into that mix too, and ignore that they're the people who have the greatest genetic difference from most African groups.
'tard with a "mythical" IQ of 80
I love posts like yours. Mental retardation is defined as an IQ of 70 or less.
I'm not sure, but pre-Civil War citizenship might have been given at the State level.
Nope. The first naturalization law was passed by the 1st Congress. They also got around to passing the Bill of Rights. I guess congress worked better in those days.
The O is not a dual-purpose visa. I'm only allowed to work so long as I do so with NO immigration intent.
File an I-140 and an I-485. You can stay here, work, and apply for a green card.
Look me up. My real name's Jim Dovey ...
Nice creds. You shouldn't have any problem finding a good job in the UK, or Canada where you were working. So what's the problem from your POV? If you prefer the US, you already have your O-1 and a way to apply for a green card (issued on a priority basis).
I highly doubt that your anecdotal experience has any more weight than my own.
No it doesn't, which is why I was citing statistical data: http://www.cis.org/articles/20...
I find it very hard to believe that the purpose of the H1-B program is to suppress Americans' wages.
Is that tongue in cheek, or are you that naive?
It *looks* like its purpose is to allow foreign workers to enter the US, contribute to the economy
How do they contribute to the economy since there is no shortage of domestic talent with at least equal ability to the typical H-1B? Please find me one objective statistical piece of data that shows the the alleged shortage of such workers is real, and not just the self-serving statements of CEO's and immigration lawyers.
Lump of labor doesn't say "GDP raises by a larger amount than the pay of the skilled immigrant", and in fact nothing in the article address what you're claiming.