On the other hand, it's completely unsurprising to me that people like you are utterly blind to reality when it doesn't match their ideological tenets.
How ignorant can a person be to think that large societal changes such as legislation will be enacted quickly when a rather small, but completely revolutionary field arises.
Seriously, consider how long it took for something as universally useful, and universally dangerous as motorized traffic to become legislated from its inception into a reasonable form.
This is a field that is utterly marginal, completely voluntary to participate in, and impacts almost no one in comparison, and time it was viable is a tiny fraction of what it took to legislate a proper framework for motorized vehicles.
It took several decades before something as pervasive and as utilitarian as traffic controls were finalized into what is recognisable today. It has been less than a decade since this particular form of business has become viable.
Incorrect. Banks paid it back. Early. With interest. Because limitations bailout deal put on them was restricting their abilities to do things like pay their employees large bonuses.
Hindsight is 20:20 and that was a great investment in hindsight. But when you're blinded by ideology, you cannot see even that much.
If people receiving social assistance were on contract to repay it in full with interest within a few years, which is how bank bailouts worked, you wouldn't call it social assistance. Social assistance is something you're entitled to, and something you're not under strict contract to repay in full and have limits placed on your actions until you repay it in full.
Basically, same thing as we saw here in Finland. We're rediscovering why it is that we demand evidence for why you can't earn the money on your own as a condition for social assistance from society.
I guess this is my confirmation of the fact that all you have is one liners, and you have no actual understanding of the subject. As you literally went straight onto yet another one liner with zero ability to discuss the topic in any reasonable depth.
But I suppose this is to be expected of the person who immediately defaults to cries of "racism" when hearing about real social issues. When you are utterly ignorant of the subject matter, and can only regurgitate things you have no actual understanding of to address them, the only way to win the argument is to call anyone presenting views you don't like names in hope they go on defensive.
The fact that you see no learning opportunities being lost in isolating people born into certain birthright from the overwhelming majority of population tells us a lot about the serious blind spot you have on this issue. The fact that the only point of potential you can imagine is the furthest extreme humanity has ever gone to shows just how ignorant you are of gradients that actually exist in reality on this subject.
Consider looking at the world as something that isn't black and white.
This your one last chance to redeem yourself. Stop giving me one liner slogans, and actually go into details of the issue. Because right now, you look like an indoctrinated and rather stupid individual who doesn't have a coherent thought of his own and can only regurgitate slogans. In this case, as is usual, devil is as usual in details, and I'm not going to trust you for details when you have already proven to be utterly ignorant on principles. Especially considering the well established stereotype on "shiny American teeth vs crappy looking European teeth".
So how many are able to get their teeth done in a reasonable fashion, vs how many that can't get them done at all? Also, you seem to assume that people don't have their teeth pulled because they couldn't get timely care because the system was clogged. Yet I personally know a man who was just in that situation. And guess what? Public health care doesn't do cosmetic treatments and prosthetic front teeth are considered cosmetic, even if damage to the tooth was because of fuck up of the long wait time to get initial problem taken care of.
Guy in question had to save money for about two years to get prosthesis done. I know this because he was fairly young, and it was wrecking his love live, as missing a front tooth is apparently quite a turn off for ladies in their early 20s.
Only if you're a complete muppet and cannot type "remove windows 7 telemetry" into google, in case you don't read what updates actually do. Because if you do, the first result will be this page:
Your insulting name calling and utter opinionated ignorance nonwithstanding, I live in what is internationally recognised as one of the best countries in Europe when it comes to efficiency and quality of outcomes of healthcare system and am telling you what is going on here today. I'm currently in a queue to get my teeth checked by dentist. When I was 18, and immigration was very low, I could get a yearly appointment within a week of calling to reserve one.
Today, the waiting time is "longer than six months" for "bi-yearly check" (and you cannot get teeth checked yearly by dentist even if you ask in public system any more). I'm currently on the fifth month of waiting, with no notification that I will get my time any time soon. Primary reason - influx of immigrants who's teeth are in awful condition by our standards. With healthcare that prioritises people based on their needs, it prioritises people who do not pay into the system and are here to abuse it.
And people who do pay into the system get tossed into the back of the line, and keep getting pushed back, because there's always a new arrival with bad teeth that needs care more than you do. Who will be probably be marked for deportation in a couple of years.
And for the record, we have it really well compared to our beloved western neighbours in Sweden. Their healthcare is in utter shambles, to the point where their expecting mothers literally come here to give birth, because while you can afford to save on your healthcare, you cannot afford to take a risk with your baby.
You seem to be incapable of even the most basic of mathematics, understanding that "90% fit criteria" means that "10% do not fit the criteria", as you literally list the examples of 10% as if they somehow contradict the views presented.
As for your "baloney", you seem to miss the obvious fact that no matter how successful your parents are, if you're born with Down's, you're not going to be financially successful.
As your statement was absolute in terms of "this is primary determinant", me demonstrating a clear cut case of this being a determinant being true, yet failing to provide "financial success" debunks your claim in its entirety. Next time, consider saner argument, such as "one of the primary determinants..." instead. Then we would agree, because as I outline above, there's indeed a significant chance of retaining wealth over one generation.
You just showed that you cannot comprehend the text you read, all while complaining that other people "are contradicting themselves, because you can't understand what they are writing, and therefore are in your opinion contradictory".
Hint: "People" in this case doesn't refer to a single person, which is why it's a plural.
Everywhere in Europe fails the criteria on merits, and we're seeing that as multiculturalism advances in Europe, social security and medical system worsen rapidly due to massive pressures of increased free riding. Do you have any actually realistic options that fit the bill?
Slashdot Mirror
Elaborate.
On the other hand, it's completely unsurprising to me that people like you are utterly blind to reality when it doesn't match their ideological tenets.
How is that in any way relevant to this particular discussion?
"University field utterly penetrated by progressives declares that conservatives are evil". News at 11.
How ignorant can a person be to think that large societal changes such as legislation will be enacted quickly when a rather small, but completely revolutionary field arises.
Seriously, consider how long it took for something as universally useful, and universally dangerous as motorized traffic to become legislated from its inception into a reasonable form.
This is a field that is utterly marginal, completely voluntary to participate in, and impacts almost no one in comparison, and time it was viable is a tiny fraction of what it took to legislate a proper framework for motorized vehicles.
How? Even the update for version for disabled people was stopped some time ago.
It took several decades before something as pervasive and as utilitarian as traffic controls were finalized into what is recognisable today. It has been less than a decade since this particular form of business has become viable.
Do you also think that there was no need for laws and regulations related to driving motorized vehicles because drawn carriages weren't new?
Time.
Incorrect. Banks paid it back. Early. With interest. Because limitations bailout deal put on them was restricting their abilities to do things like pay their employees large bonuses.
Hindsight is 20:20 and that was a great investment in hindsight. But when you're blinded by ideology, you cannot see even that much.
If people receiving social assistance were on contract to repay it in full with interest within a few years, which is how bank bailouts worked, you wouldn't call it social assistance. Social assistance is something you're entitled to, and something you're not under strict contract to repay in full and have limits placed on your actions until you repay it in full.
Comparing apples to oranges is not helpful.
Basically, same thing as we saw here in Finland. We're rediscovering why it is that we demand evidence for why you can't earn the money on your own as a condition for social assistance from society.
Basic human laziness.
New industry. Legal framework comes after need is established, not before.
I guess this is my confirmation of the fact that all you have is one liners, and you have no actual understanding of the subject. As you literally went straight onto yet another one liner with zero ability to discuss the topic in any reasonable depth.
But I suppose this is to be expected of the person who immediately defaults to cries of "racism" when hearing about real social issues. When you are utterly ignorant of the subject matter, and can only regurgitate things you have no actual understanding of to address them, the only way to win the argument is to call anyone presenting views you don't like names in hope they go on defensive.
The fact that you see no learning opportunities being lost in isolating people born into certain birthright from the overwhelming majority of population tells us a lot about the serious blind spot you have on this issue. The fact that the only point of potential you can imagine is the furthest extreme humanity has ever gone to shows just how ignorant you are of gradients that actually exist in reality on this subject.
Consider looking at the world as something that isn't black and white.
How did I move the goal post? I literally applied the exact goal post you set, in the exact way you set it.
The fact that you cannot admit to being wrong even after I give you an easy out says just how ideologically compromised you are on this issue.
If you think that personal data of people using IM isn't worth money, I have a bridge on the moon to sell you.
This your one last chance to redeem yourself. Stop giving me one liner slogans, and actually go into details of the issue. Because right now, you look like an indoctrinated and rather stupid individual who doesn't have a coherent thought of his own and can only regurgitate slogans. In this case, as is usual, devil is as usual in details, and I'm not going to trust you for details when you have already proven to be utterly ignorant on principles. Especially considering the well established stereotype on "shiny American teeth vs crappy looking European teeth".
So how many are able to get their teeth done in a reasonable fashion, vs how many that can't get them done at all? Also, you seem to assume that people don't have their teeth pulled because they couldn't get timely care because the system was clogged. Yet I personally know a man who was just in that situation. And guess what? Public health care doesn't do cosmetic treatments and prosthetic front teeth are considered cosmetic, even if damage to the tooth was because of fuck up of the long wait time to get initial problem taken care of.
Guy in question had to save money for about two years to get prosthesis done. I know this because he was fairly young, and it was wrecking his love live, as missing a front tooth is apparently quite a turn off for ladies in their early 20s.
Change is within error range.
They shouldn't be, considering that the offer for "free downgrade to windows 10" has expired.
Only if you're a complete muppet and cannot type "remove windows 7 telemetry" into google, in case you don't read what updates actually do. Because if you do, the first result will be this page:
https://gist.github.com/xvital...
You're welcome.
Your insulting name calling and utter opinionated ignorance nonwithstanding, I live in what is internationally recognised as one of the best countries in Europe when it comes to efficiency and quality of outcomes of healthcare system and am telling you what is going on here today. I'm currently in a queue to get my teeth checked by dentist. When I was 18, and immigration was very low, I could get a yearly appointment within a week of calling to reserve one.
Today, the waiting time is "longer than six months" for "bi-yearly check" (and you cannot get teeth checked yearly by dentist even if you ask in public system any more). I'm currently on the fifth month of waiting, with no notification that I will get my time any time soon. Primary reason - influx of immigrants who's teeth are in awful condition by our standards. With healthcare that prioritises people based on their needs, it prioritises people who do not pay into the system and are here to abuse it.
And people who do pay into the system get tossed into the back of the line, and keep getting pushed back, because there's always a new arrival with bad teeth that needs care more than you do. Who will be probably be marked for deportation in a couple of years.
And for the record, we have it really well compared to our beloved western neighbours in Sweden. Their healthcare is in utter shambles, to the point where their expecting mothers literally come here to give birth, because while you can afford to save on your healthcare, you cannot afford to take a risk with your baby.
You seem to be incapable of even the most basic of mathematics, understanding that "90% fit criteria" means that "10% do not fit the criteria", as you literally list the examples of 10% as if they somehow contradict the views presented.
As for your "baloney", you seem to miss the obvious fact that no matter how successful your parents are, if you're born with Down's, you're not going to be financially successful.
As your statement was absolute in terms of "this is primary determinant", me demonstrating a clear cut case of this being a determinant being true, yet failing to provide "financial success" debunks your claim in its entirety. Next time, consider saner argument, such as "one of the primary determinants..." instead. Then we would agree, because as I outline above, there's indeed a significant chance of retaining wealth over one generation.
You just showed that you cannot comprehend the text you read, all while complaining that other people "are contradicting themselves, because you can't understand what they are writing, and therefore are in your opinion contradictory".
Hint: "People" in this case doesn't refer to a single person, which is why it's a plural.
Everywhere in Europe fails the criteria on merits, and we're seeing that as multiculturalism advances in Europe, social security and medical system worsen rapidly due to massive pressures of increased free riding. Do you have any actually realistic options that fit the bill?