>>>The government can provide health care (of equal or better quality) for half what it costs you in the free market.
You mean like they provide public schools for half what private schools costs? Oh no. I got that backwards. Most private schools are LESS than what the public schools cost, because government bureaucracy (and corruption) drives costs UP not down. And not just schools, but also passenger rail, post office, DMV, military,...
Bimonthly means every other month. A magazine that comes bimonthly comes every other month.
You probably meant $100 every two weeks. I'm in the next state down. No employer help. $55 every two weeks. (So if I got it through my employer with 80% assistance, that would be $11 every two weeks.)
>>>>>We've already decided on universal healthcare - anyone can walk into an ER and get treated
It is only a problem for the corporations. I no more weep for Kaiser-Permanente' than I weep for Microsoft when they have a loss of money.
BTW I do believe in providing a safety net for the poor. We have "food stamps" which the poor can use to get food at the grocery store. I think we should have "medicine stamps" which they can be used to get care from the doctor's office or hospital. The rest of us, those who have so much money we waste it on luxuries like iPhones or MP3 players or cable TV...... can just pay cash (or insurance) directly to the doctor without government help.
>>> If you have a "normal" insurance plan, they cover your checkups and medications because they know it saves them money if you deal with your cholesterol before it gives you a $50k heart attack. >>> To me this makes as little sense as taking my car to the dealer every month for him to "look over" the device and charge me $200 to fix a missing wingnut or grease a tirerod. You end-up spending MORE money than if you just waited for the break to occur ~10 years down the road.
Now this doesn't mean people shouldn't go to the doctor once in awhile to check blood pressure, et cetera...... but it doesn't "save" money to do this. It wastes money. If insurance companies wanted to save money they would DIScourage people from visiting the doctor at all (and ideally: just die at home). Sorry to be so brutally honest but that's what the pure numbers show. It would save the company from paying out.
No but I can afford $110/month which is how much my catastrophic insurance costs through Nationwide. I pay cash for everything while the insurance covers me for long-term care if I get cancer or some other deadly illness.
I don't know where you get your number, but it's probably from the same kind of person who spends $40,000 on a Lexus when they could buy a Toyota (same company; almost the same quality) for $20,000. In other words someone who doesn't know how to handle money.
>>>The Tea Party was created by Republican strategist Dick Armey
No Ron Paul. December 2007. You can see the promotional video on youtube. (Of course some give credit to the guy on the stockfloor in January 2009..... still NOT dick armey.)
>>>and promoted relentlessly by Fox News
Yeah but I also saw it "promoted" on MSNBC and CNN. I think you are confusing COVERAGE of a huge mass of people. These 3 channels also "promoted" Occupy when people first started massing for the protests. It's not promotion; it's coverage of news.
As I said: "I pay someone else to do it." The programmer of the software did all the work of reading through booklets and understanding the convolutions of the tax code. And my mom? No computer. She does it herself.
>>> we get a discounted rate on cable internet. Our total bill is ~$70 or so with taxes.
If that makes sense for you, then good. For me CATV costs $70 with taxes. It made more sense to just put an antenna next to the TV to pull-in the free channels, and get my internet through Verizon ($15).
Even if you dropped that value to zero, it wouldn't make any difference. Congress has a great deal of attraction for people filled with avarice and ambition (love of money and love of power). The only change we really need is to eliminate the ability of corporations to donate money to politicians. It would be as simple as including it in their incorporation licenses. (Of course rich persons like Bill Gates would still donate money, but they are limited to $2000 max.)
The level of Hate Speech on this forum makes me wonder if the posters are actually KKK members in disguise. - Democrats would never be so rude and insulting.
"Tenenbaum's team arguing that the statutory damages for non-commercial use is clearly a major Constitutional issue, and by forcing it through the remittitur process, all the courts are doing is pressuring people like Tenenbaum to settle, rather than ever allowing it to be judged on constitutionality. And that has consequences -- namely in enabling copyright trolls to shake people down, without ever allowing them to challenge the constitutionality of massive statutory damages.
"I actually think this is a much more persuasive argument than I've seen from Team Tenenbaum in the past, but it seems unlikely that the Supreme Court will actually take the case on. I hope I'm wrong (and then, if I am wrong on that, I hope I'm wrong in my guess as to how it will come out, because this version of the Supreme Court doesn't appear to understand the issues around copyright law)..... It's an interesting argument to get around the lack of a circuit split (conflicting rulings in different circuits, which is one of the key reasons why the Supreme Court agrees to hear certain cases)."
If I got a letter from RIAA or MPAA demanding $5000 I'd just throw it in the trash.
It's doubtful they'd come after me, and if they did, then I'd enjoy fighting them in court. And if I wound-up losing and owing $1.5 million (two songs infringed upon), I'd consider that a life sentence. That's worse than the punishment for murder.
Maybe they're using low-quality feeds? I watch Hulu and Youtube at 240p, which is only ~200 megabyte per hour streamed. So it doesn't add up to a lot even over a month of viewing.
BTW comcast has a disincentive to provide unlimited: They don't want you canceling their TV service. Ditto Time-Warner, Cox, Cablevision, Verizon,... Now I just watch my TV free off the antenna.
>>>This is why the US is so far behind in broadband when looking at other country's broadband statistics.
False. According to speedtest.net, the average U.S. speed is 1 Mbit/s faster than the average speed for the E.U. And yes there are some EU states that have very fast internet, but there are some U.S. states that also have very fast internet: Like New Jersey. New York. Washington.
Vice-versa there are EU states like Greece and Spain and Portugal that have internet slower than the U.S. average. Thank your lucky stars you don't like there. (Or in the UK where they have decent speeds, but are censoring the net.) The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence, but rarely is.
>>> It's actually more economical on a dollars per byte basis to keep your network near saturation
That makes zero sense. The more the datalines are used, the more electricity is being burned-up. It would be advantageous for an ISP to want to reduce their electric use by reducing how much data customers transfer. (And also eliminate the need to replace slow lines with faster lines.)
Disclaimer: I hate Comcast. I get my TV free over-the-air, and my internet over DSL.
>>>When have you ever known a publicly held company to prioritize development and long term results, over short term profits.
When they are facing competition from another company that could steal-away their customers. I know a lot of people who jumped to FiOS because it was faster than Comcast.
Anyway: I think the pricing being based on "use" is good. It's just like a phone plan..... you pay for X number of minutes per month, and then get charged for each additional minute.
I can't do my taxes either. It's not lack of ability, but lack of motivation. (1) Nobody is paying me for ~8 hours wasted reading through the booklets, and (2) it's cheaper to just work 1 extra hour and then pay someone else to do it.
My mother does her own taxes, but it takes her 2-3 days. Which is just nuts. The tax code should be simpler without all the confusing deductions, credits, and social engineering.
I don't know where you get that idea. (looks over/. comments). Never mind. Yes the name calling is over the top. It's ironic that Democrats passed hate-speech legislation, and yet they are the ones who engage in it the most. Maybe it's like how a thief is more likely to believe someone stole from him..... we see what we are.
BTW I'm republican. I support: - higher taxes on the rich - but not corporations (they provide jobs) - eliminating the cap which does not collect SSI/Medicare on earnings over $100,000. - Extending medicare to cover everyone of all ages - Converting medicare to a catastrophic plan to cover major bills (cancer, longterm hospitalization), not incidentals like doctor visits or broken arms.
D.C. women are hot. Not because they are better-looking then the average female, but because they dress-up every day in order to look their best. And most are smart.
FOX News is involved with the Tea Party? As in giving funds and organizing the events? I'd like to see a citation of that, because it's the first I ever heard it.
You're right. Medicare won't go bankrupt. Instead they (meaning both parties) will just make it like Welfare, where only the poor get assistance and the rest of us have to fend for ourselves. They won't have any choice, due to lack on money.
As for Obama his medical act that was passed in 2010 will actually make the debt climb higher, faster, according to the latest CBO estimates. So rather than fix the problem..... it got worse. Bush's Prescription Drug plan also made things worse. We were unfortunate enough to get 2 lousy presidents in a row.
You sound libertarian to me. Or Jeffersonian (he supported small government but also public works).
>>> too expensive to afford for a single person. Military, fire departments, roads, park and environmental protection, health care, etc.
95% of us can afford to pay healthcare, just as we pay for our new cars (times two)(times every five year) == $80,000 per decade. My doctor bills are only ~$2000 per decade in comparison. It is only when things get really bad, like cancer, that we need assistance and that's what catastrophic insurance is for... just like car insurance if we wreck.
We don't need the government to pay our hospital or doctor bills, unless we're so poor we need food stamps to survive. Then and only then should government pay the doctor bill. IMHO.
It's about time the Republicans and Democrats merge into one party (since they act basically alike), and a new 2nd party arise so we can have some real choice.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>The government can provide health care (of equal or better quality) for half what it costs you in the free market.
You mean like they provide public schools for half what private schools costs? ...
Oh no.
I got that backwards. Most private schools are LESS than what the public schools cost, because government bureaucracy (and corruption) drives costs UP not down. And not just schools, but also passenger rail, post office, DMV, military,
Bimonthly means every other month. A magazine that comes bimonthly comes every other month.
You probably meant $100 every two weeks. I'm in the next state down. No employer help. $55 every two weeks. (So if I got it through my employer with 80% assistance, that would be $11 every two weeks.)
>>>>>We've already decided on universal healthcare - anyone can walk into an ER and get treated
It is only a problem for the corporations. I no more weep for Kaiser-Permanente' than I weep for Microsoft when they have a loss of money.
BTW I do believe in providing a safety net for the poor. We have "food stamps" which the poor can use to get food at the grocery store. I think we should have "medicine stamps" which they can be used to get care from the doctor's office or hospital. The rest of us, those who have so much money we waste it on luxuries like iPhones or MP3 players or cable TV...... can just pay cash (or insurance) directly to the doctor without government help.
>>> If you have a "normal" insurance plan, they cover your checkups and medications because they know it saves them money if you deal with your cholesterol before it gives you a $50k heart attack.
>>>
To me this makes as little sense as taking my car to the dealer every month for him to "look over" the device and charge me $200 to fix a missing wingnut or grease a tirerod. You end-up spending MORE money than if you just waited for the break to occur ~10 years down the road.
Now this doesn't mean people shouldn't go to the doctor once in awhile to check blood pressure, et cetera...... but it doesn't "save" money to do this. It wastes money. If insurance companies wanted to save money they would DIScourage people from visiting the doctor at all (and ideally: just die at home). Sorry to be so brutally honest but that's what the pure numbers show. It would save the company from paying out.
>>>You can afford more than $1000/month?
No but I can afford $110/month which is how much my catastrophic insurance costs through Nationwide. I pay cash for everything while the insurance covers me for long-term care if I get cancer or some other deadly illness.
I don't know where you get your number, but it's probably from the same kind of person who spends $40,000 on a Lexus when they could buy a Toyota (same company; almost the same quality) for $20,000. In other words someone who doesn't know how to handle money.
>>>The Tea Party was created by Republican strategist Dick Armey
No Ron Paul. December 2007. You can see the promotional video on youtube. (Of course some give credit to the guy on the stockfloor in January 2009..... still NOT dick armey.)
>>>and promoted relentlessly by Fox News
Yeah but I also saw it "promoted" on MSNBC and CNN. I think you are confusing COVERAGE of a huge mass of people. These 3 channels also "promoted" Occupy when people first started massing for the protests. It's not promotion; it's coverage of news.
As I said: "I pay someone else to do it." The programmer of the software did all the work of reading through booklets and understanding the convolutions of the tax code. And my mom? No computer. She does it herself.
>>> we get a discounted rate on cable internet. Our total bill is ~$70 or so with taxes.
If that makes sense for you, then good.
For me CATV costs $70 with taxes.
It made more sense to just put an antenna next to the TV to pull-in the free channels, and get my internet through Verizon ($15).
For the same reason I'd throw a letter from Nigeria demanding $5000 in the trash. I don't respond to extortion.
>>> how much money can be SPENT on a campaign
Even if you dropped that value to zero, it wouldn't make any difference. Congress has a great deal of attraction for people filled with avarice and ambition (love of money and love of power). The only change we really need is to eliminate the ability of corporations to donate money to politicians. It would be as simple as including it in their incorporation licenses. (Of course rich persons like Bill Gates would still donate money, but they are limited to $2000 max.)
The level of Hate Speech on this forum makes me wonder if the posters are actually KKK members in disguise.
- Democrats would never be so rude and insulting.
"Tenenbaum's team arguing that the statutory damages for non-commercial use is clearly a major Constitutional issue, and by forcing it through the remittitur process, all the courts are doing is pressuring people like Tenenbaum to settle, rather than ever allowing it to be judged on constitutionality. And that has consequences -- namely in enabling copyright trolls to shake people down, without ever allowing them to challenge the constitutionality of massive statutory damages.
"I actually think this is a much more persuasive argument than I've seen from Team Tenenbaum in the past, but it seems unlikely that the Supreme Court will actually take the case on. I hope I'm wrong (and then, if I am wrong on that, I hope I'm wrong in my guess as to how it will come out, because this version of the Supreme Court doesn't appear to understand the issues around copyright law)..... It's an interesting argument to get around the lack of a circuit split (conflicting rulings in different circuits, which is one of the key reasons why the Supreme Court agrees to hear certain cases)."
If I got a letter from RIAA or MPAA demanding $5000 I'd just throw it in the trash.
It's doubtful they'd come after me, and if they did, then I'd enjoy fighting them in court. And if I wound-up losing and owing $1.5 million (two songs infringed upon), I'd consider that a life sentence. That's worse than the punishment for murder.
Maybe they're using low-quality feeds? I watch Hulu and Youtube at 240p, which is only ~200 megabyte per hour streamed. So it doesn't add up to a lot even over a month of viewing.
BTW comcast has a disincentive to provide unlimited: They don't want you canceling their TV service. ...
Ditto Time-Warner, Cox, Cablevision, Verizon,
Now I just watch my TV free off the antenna.
>>>This is why the US is so far behind in broadband when looking at other country's broadband statistics.
False. According to speedtest.net, the average U.S. speed is 1 Mbit/s faster than the average speed for the E.U. And yes there are some EU states that have very fast internet, but there are some U.S. states that also have very fast internet: Like New Jersey. New York. Washington.
Vice-versa there are EU states like Greece and Spain and Portugal that have internet slower than the U.S. average. Thank your lucky stars you don't like there. (Or in the UK where they have decent speeds, but are censoring the net.) The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence, but rarely is.
>>> It's actually more economical on a dollars per byte basis to keep your network near saturation
That makes zero sense. The more the datalines are used, the more electricity is being burned-up. It would be advantageous for an ISP to want to reduce their electric use by reducing how much data customers transfer. (And also eliminate the need to replace slow lines with faster lines.)
Disclaimer: I hate Comcast. I get my TV free over-the-air, and my internet over DSL.
>>>When have you ever known a publicly held company to prioritize development and long term results, over short term profits.
When they are facing competition from another company that could steal-away their customers. I know a lot of people who jumped to FiOS because it was faster than Comcast.
Anyway: I think the pricing being based on "use" is good. It's just like a phone plan..... you pay for X number of minutes per month, and then get charged for each additional minute.
I can't do my taxes either. It's not lack of ability, but lack of motivation. (1) Nobody is paying me for ~8 hours wasted reading through the booklets, and (2) it's cheaper to just work 1 extra hour and then pay someone else to do it.
My mother does her own taxes, but it takes her 2-3 days. Which is just nuts. The tax code should be simpler without all the confusing deductions, credits, and social engineering.
>>>get called a right wing racist teabagger.
I don't know where you get that idea. (looks over /. comments). Never mind. Yes the name calling is over the top. It's ironic that Democrats passed hate-speech legislation, and yet they are the ones who engage in it the most. Maybe it's like how a thief is more likely to believe someone stole from him..... we see what we are.
BTW I'm republican. I support:
- higher taxes on the rich
- but not corporations (they provide jobs)
- eliminating the cap which does not collect SSI/Medicare on earnings over $100,000.
- Extending medicare to cover everyone of all ages
- Converting medicare to a catastrophic plan to cover major bills (cancer, longterm hospitalization), not incidentals like doctor visits or broken arms.
D.C. women are hot.
Not because they are better-looking then the average female, but because they dress-up every day in order to look their best. And most are smart.
>>>no thanks to Fox News and their involvement.
FOX News is involved with the Tea Party? As in giving funds and organizing the events? I'd like to see a citation of that, because it's the first I ever heard it.
You're right. Medicare won't go bankrupt. Instead they (meaning both parties) will just make it like Welfare, where only the poor get assistance and the rest of us have to fend for ourselves. They won't have any choice, due to lack on money.
As for Obama his medical act that was passed in 2010 will actually make the debt climb higher, faster, according to the latest CBO estimates. So rather than fix the problem..... it got worse. Bush's Prescription Drug plan also made things worse. We were unfortunate enough to get 2 lousy presidents in a row.
You sound libertarian to me. Or Jeffersonian (he supported small government but also public works).
>>> too expensive to afford for a single person. Military, fire departments, roads, park and environmental protection, health care, etc.
95% of us can afford to pay healthcare, just as we pay for our new cars (times two)(times every five year) == $80,000 per decade. My doctor bills are only ~$2000 per decade in comparison. It is only when things get really bad, like cancer, that we need assistance and that's what catastrophic insurance is for... just like car insurance if we wreck.
We don't need the government to pay our hospital or doctor bills, unless we're so poor we need food stamps to survive. Then and only then should government pay the doctor bill. IMHO.
The level of Hate Speech on this forum makes me wonder if the posters are actually KKK members in disguise.
Democrats would never be so rude and insulting.
It's about time the Republicans and Democrats merge into one party (since they act basically alike), and a new 2nd party arise so we can have some real choice.
TNG season 7 ends with a great finale to wrap the show.
Too bad the rest of the season is suckish.