What exactly is "scientific traffic" and why does it need top priority. The only thing I could think of was scientists discussing science stuff, maybe some science programs, but what all do they have that they would need top priority.
Warrenton Virginia is only 40 miles from Washington DC, and only 10 miles or so from the interstate, I expect them to have decent coverage. Harrisonburg is located right on the interstate, I expect them to have 3G. I happen to think those are poor examples. Others?
In this case, just because you can program assembly code with your eyes closed doesn't mean you're not a moron when it comes to sensible app creation.
I agree 100 % but on the flip side, encouraging poor coders to churn out and distribute everything, is just goint to increase the noise to signal ratio. This in and of itself isnt "horrible" but the fact that by doing this they remove alot of the features available for the good coders, so not only do we have more "crap" to wade through, but the tried and true plugins will have functionality removed. This is what makes this hard to swallow.
Except I can claim that almost every single thing you do is counter to public safety. What if you keep the water running when you brush your teeth, your wasting potable drinking water, causing more money to be spent to produce the potable water, thus you are wasting tax payer public safety by forcing that money to be used on water instead of police. I can do this with pretty much any every day task. It is a bad argument, cause its unrealistic. How about we stop trying to save the kids, with unrealistic laws. I agree that public safety is important, but who gets to decide what needs to be curbed for the benefit of everyone else. The majority? I can show many examples where the majority did the "wrong" thing.
You said "Whether the public option is forced on the public through mandatory purchase or through mandatory taxation, it still has to be paid for. You can't just magic up health care out of sunshine and cotton candy."
My post showed how healthcare would be cheaper then the current system that we already pay for, ergo we dont have to worry about how its gonna be paid for.
Pride, ignorance, lack of time, and many other factors are far more likely to contribute to health negligence than lack of funds or insurance.
Source?
To take your analogy to its logical conclusion, instead of mandating health care for everyone, the government should go straight to mandating periodic checkups for everyone, and footing the bill through additional taxation.
Mandatory checkups, thats cool with me, you dont get the checkup you dont get the heathcare. AOK! Already paid for with the healthcare, no reason to divorce medical checkups from a public option. Just cause they got a checkup doesnt mean they can pay for needed medicine or other services the checkup determines they need. Still falls through to the taxpayer to pay the indignant bill at the hospital.
We can drastically cut down on incidences of lung cancer by banning smoking. We can drastically cut down on incidences of cirrhosis and other health issues by banning alcohol. There are a thousand different mandates the government could enact which will enforce better health (and consequently fewer health-related costs) on everyone. Since you support mandatory health care on the grounds that it will be more cost-effective than our current system, do you support any of these other options, many of which would provide an even greater cost/benefit ratio than mandatory health care?
I prefer the government stay out of what my business is. On that note, certain things that are known to cause bad health AND be addictive in a way that makes it hard for the everyday user to stop, I would support limited measures to curb their use. (FUll disclosure: Im also a smoker whos tried to quit a few times, wish I had never started.)
In fact, often providing insurance or safety encourages people to be MORE reckless with their health, not less; look at the studies regarding the improvements made in automobile safety over the past hundred years compared to the incidences of reckless driving and excessive speed. A person who knows they have a seatbelt and airbags and crumple zones to protect them in the event of an accident has less incentive to drive safely. This is not to say that seatbelts and airbags are a bad idea, only to say that they do not promote safe driving; rather, they mitigate the costs of unsafe driving. Mandating insurance on people without insurance is likely to have many of the same results.
I dont want to mandate insurance, I want a public option. There is a HUGE difference. I think mandating insurance might even be illegal.
"In United States v. Keenan, the accused (Keenan) was found guilty of murder after he obeyed in order to shoot and kill an elderly Vietnamese citizen. The Court of Military Appeals held that "the justification for acts done pursuant to orders does not exist if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be illegal."
An order to commit a crime is illegal. Yes it is sometimes perilous to refuse on such grounds, but if it is obviously against the law (purposely killing unarmed women or children, rape, etc are obviously illegal.) then you must refuse the order or be held just if not more accountable for the crime then the ordering official. Ohh and I was just stating the fact Im a veteran cause it gives me insight into the military thats all.
Note: You cannot disobey orders beacuse of danger or other such things, those are still lawful. You can ask for clarification, and many officers are willing to listen to everyones input to a certain extent. I never met a officer, or senior NCO that did not support an open door policy. Althou there is a time and a place, under fire isnt one.
Hmm 100 years.. give us time to make lotsa solar panels and wind turbines before we run out, not saying we as a collective will have the smarts to do that, but it will give us an opportunity to advance our technology to a less finite resource. Just cause it will eventually (potentially thousands of years) run out isn't a viable reason for not using it.
You sir are a bad horrible person, and represent a major problem in our country.
Um, thanks. Seriously, police tasering is not a major problem in our country. You're more likely to die from a terrorist attack than from a taser. Really.
So cause it probably wont kill me its ok for the cops to taser meas many times as they want? SRSLY?
As a veteran I take offense at that statement. By far and large the members of the military dont have mass rape and murder. There are almost 1.5 million people in the Unites States military. That is the current amount, and it doesnt include all of us veterans who are degenerated by your comment. By saying that the morality of the military or the police (Ive met a few in my day, and only one or two I would call bad cops) is worse then the normal citizen would be like saying that Maine (population 1.3 mil) are all morally worse than everyone else. You cannot sterotype 1.5 million people for a very vast amount of backgrounds.
*sigh* I just realised I was talking to an AC so its pointless.
I'm a disabled vet, my initial claim was partially denied (more to crossed wires then anything). Do you know how hard it was for me to get them to look again? I filled out 1 form. Thats it. Went to another doctors appointment, and voila. It was easy. I have no experience with SSA or Medicare so IDK YMMV. Just supplying my anecdotal evidence.
Well obviously they wouldnt make any money doing said things, so they are probably considered under the poverty line. There are provisions to either help really poor people or to let them opt out.
You asshat republicans are fucking stupid. If youd didnt bitch about single payer, then we wouldnt have this fucking problem now would we. Fucking asshat.
It would be cheaper in the long run to have everyone.. EVERYONE have health-care, the sooner then get health-care the less chance they will end up with some particular nasty disease or condition, if everyone saw the doctor when they should, these nasty diseases are a LOT more likely to be caught early, ergo you will have to pay less for their surgeries, or super drugs, i mean who do you think eventually pays for indignant care? (hint: everyone else through higher premiums, and our taxes) You want everyone to go, because they might just be contagious. How does this not make sence?
Heres my analogy: Lower middle class family, they live paycheck to paycheck, but not really horribly. Dad has a family history of bad hearts, but he cant afford to go to the doctor, hes happy he can provide for his kids. Well one day his heart goes out he has a heart attack. Hes rushed to the hospital, by amulance, he almost dies in the emergency room, now he finds out that he needs to have surgery done on his heart. Then there is now an exellent chance his entire family will end up on welfare or some other government assistance cause the bread winner is sick or dead
Or he could have gone to the doctor for his checkups, found out he has high blood pressure years before his ticker stops ticking, he gets advice to change his lifestyle, and some blood pressure pills. Now ass hat which do you think is cheaper.
Ahh Kudzu, gods way of telling southerns to go screw themselves. The bane of all sane people kudzu it made me one miserable teenager, I felt as if I was hacking my way through a tropical jungle clearing that shit.
Slashdot Mirror
What exactly is "scientific traffic" and why does it need top priority. The only thing I could think of was scientists discussing science stuff, maybe some science programs, but what all do they have that they would need top priority.
Warrenton Virginia is only 40 miles from Washington DC, and only 10 miles or so from the interstate, I expect them to have decent coverage. Harrisonburg is located right on the interstate, I expect them to have 3G. I happen to think those are poor examples. Others?
July 27, 2005 thats when the treaty was ratified.. how is this Obama's fault again?
I should explain... I see HFCS and I think soda, The thought of chocolate soda made my teeth hurt.
You made my teeth hurt.
Parish is a term for counties in Louisiana. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parish
I thought politician came from poly, i.e. many and tic, i.e. blood sucking pests.
today. Cause if you thought that was true then Opportunist comes from Op-port-tunist. Or in american terms a op tuner who works at a port.
Actually he has mocked MSNBC, you dont watch the show do you?
how about a esata hard drive then? better?
In this case, just because you can program assembly code with your eyes closed doesn't mean you're not a moron when it comes to sensible app creation.
I agree 100 % but on the flip side, encouraging poor coders to churn out and distribute everything, is just goint to increase the noise to signal ratio. This in and of itself isnt "horrible" but the fact that by doing this they remove alot of the features available for the good coders, so not only do we have more "crap" to wade through, but the tried and true plugins will have functionality removed. This is what makes this hard to swallow.
Except I can claim that almost every single thing you do is counter to public safety. What if you keep the water running when you brush your teeth, your wasting potable drinking water, causing more money to be spent to produce the potable water, thus you are wasting tax payer public safety by forcing that money to be used on water instead of police. I can do this with pretty much any every day task. It is a bad argument, cause its unrealistic. How about we stop trying to save the kids, with unrealistic laws. I agree that public safety is important, but who gets to decide what needs to be curbed for the benefit of everyone else. The majority? I can show many examples where the majority did the "wrong" thing.
apple and DRM-free?
My post showed how healthcare would be cheaper then the current system that we already pay for, ergo we dont have to worry about how its gonna be paid for.
Pride, ignorance, lack of time, and many other factors are far more likely to contribute to health negligence than lack of funds or insurance.
Source?
To take your analogy to its logical conclusion, instead of mandating health care for everyone, the government should go straight to mandating periodic checkups for everyone, and footing the bill through additional taxation.
Mandatory checkups, thats cool with me, you dont get the checkup you dont get the heathcare. AOK! Already paid for with the healthcare, no reason to divorce medical checkups from a public option. Just cause they got a checkup doesnt mean they can pay for needed medicine or other services the checkup determines they need. Still falls through to the taxpayer to pay the indignant bill at the hospital.
We can drastically cut down on incidences of lung cancer by banning smoking. We can drastically cut down on incidences of cirrhosis and other health issues by banning alcohol. There are a thousand different mandates the government could enact which will enforce better health (and consequently fewer health-related costs) on everyone. Since you support mandatory health care on the grounds that it will be more cost-effective than our current system, do you support any of these other options, many of which would provide an even greater cost/benefit ratio than mandatory health care?
I prefer the government stay out of what my business is. On that note, certain things that are known to cause bad health AND be addictive in a way that makes it hard for the everyday user to stop, I would support limited measures to curb their use. (FUll disclosure: Im also a smoker whos tried to quit a few times, wish I had never started.)
In fact, often providing insurance or safety encourages people to be MORE reckless with their health, not less; look at the studies regarding the improvements made in automobile safety over the past hundred years compared to the incidences of reckless driving and excessive speed. A person who knows they have a seatbelt and airbags and crumple zones to protect them in the event of an accident has less incentive to drive safely. This is not to say that seatbelts and airbags are a bad idea, only to say that they do not promote safe driving; rather, they mitigate the costs of unsafe driving. Mandating insurance on people without insurance is likely to have many of the same results.
I dont want to mandate insurance, I want a public option. There is a HUGE difference. I think mandating insurance might even be illegal.
jizz covered Marlboros are a bitch to light.
Excellent I didnt even see that coming. Ill score that 8.6/10
http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/militarylaw1/a/obeyingorders.htm
An order to commit a crime is illegal. Yes it is sometimes perilous to refuse on such grounds, but if it is obviously against the law (purposely killing unarmed women or children, rape, etc are obviously illegal.) then you must refuse the order or be held just if not more accountable for the crime then the ordering official. Ohh and I was just stating the fact Im a veteran cause it gives me insight into the military thats all.
Note: You cannot disobey orders beacuse of danger or other such things, those are still lawful. You can ask for clarification, and many officers are willing to listen to everyones input to a certain extent. I never met a officer, or senior NCO that did not support an open door policy. Althou there is a time and a place, under fire isnt one.
If I say "please, dont tase me bro" will you keep it down to two?
Hmm 100 years.. give us time to make lotsa solar panels and wind turbines before we run out, not saying we as a collective will have the smarts to do that, but it will give us an opportunity to advance our technology to a less finite resource. Just cause it will eventually (potentially thousands of years) run out isn't a viable reason for not using it.
You sir are a bad horrible person, and represent a major problem in our country.
Um, thanks. Seriously, police tasering is not a major problem in our country. You're more likely to die from a terrorist attack than from a taser. Really.
So cause it probably wont kill me its ok for the cops to taser meas many times as they want? SRSLY?
*sigh* I just realised I was talking to an AC so its pointless.
I'm a disabled vet, my initial claim was partially denied (more to crossed wires then anything). Do you know how hard it was for me to get them to look again? I filled out 1 form. Thats it. Went to another doctors appointment, and voila. It was easy. I have no experience with SSA or Medicare so IDK YMMV. Just supplying my anecdotal evidence.
Well obviously they wouldnt make any money doing said things, so they are probably considered under the poverty line. There are provisions to either help really poor people or to let them opt out.
You asshat republicans are fucking stupid. If youd didnt bitch about single payer, then we wouldnt have this fucking problem now would we. Fucking asshat.
It would be cheaper in the long run to have everyone.. EVERYONE have health-care, the sooner then get health-care the less chance they will end up with some particular nasty disease or condition, if everyone saw the doctor when they should, these nasty diseases are a LOT more likely to be caught early, ergo you will have to pay less for their surgeries, or super drugs, i mean who do you think eventually pays for indignant care? (hint: everyone else through higher premiums, and our taxes) You want everyone to go, because they might just be contagious. How does this not make sence?
Heres my analogy: Lower middle class family, they live paycheck to paycheck, but not really horribly. Dad has a family history of bad hearts, but he cant afford to go to the doctor, hes happy he can provide for his kids. Well one day his heart goes out he has a heart attack. Hes rushed to the hospital, by amulance, he almost dies in the emergency room, now he finds out that he needs to have surgery done on his heart. Then there is now an exellent chance his entire family will end up on welfare or some other government assistance cause the bread winner is sick or dead
Or he could have gone to the doctor for his checkups, found out he has high blood pressure years before his ticker stops ticking, he gets advice to change his lifestyle, and some blood pressure pills. Now ass hat which do you think is cheaper.
Ahh Kudzu, gods way of telling southerns to go screw themselves. The bane of all sane people kudzu it made me one miserable teenager, I felt as if I was hacking my way through a tropical jungle clearing that shit.
that would be nine nines after the decimal