3. The Federal Government doesn't HAVE to have the power to 'fine people for not buying a product'; your State/Commonwealth has been doing it for years with Auto Insurance.
Your state government has the authority to do all sorts of things the Federal Government cannot.
No, really. What would it take to persuade YOU that one particular faith's omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, incomprehensible, infinitely complex, but basically good god actually existed?
Can anyone point out for me the mechanism that is going to require ALL citizens to buy health care coverage? I can't seem to find it. What happens under this plan of someone does not?
To prevent this problem, you might try contacting your regular health-care provider right away. Assuming they fall under HIPAA, you usually have the right to make requests to the provider regarding how they will handle your medical records, and who can access them. Make a request that your records not be stored in a shared electronic database.
The provider can refuse the request, but few do.
(Of course, 15 years from now, when your new doctor at General Hospital does not realize that you're the ONLY patient who still has paper records in that filing cabinet at the back of the server room, there could be a problem...)
You cannot recreate those things on message boards.
Look, whether you adopt old-earth evolution, young-earth evolution, or some flavor of creationism, one thing we can all agree on is this:
You cannot win an argument with someone in an on-line message board. You just keep going until either (a) someone gets tired and quits, or (b) someone mentions Nazis.
1. Upkeep costs for an easement include everything related to record keeping, courthouse and law enforcement needed to track, maintain and enforce that easement.
2 through 6: These taxes differ from state to state. In many, if not most states, they do not fully cover the cost to the state for providing the services indicated.
In short, the infrastructure you're using gets paid for from multiple sources. It appears you favor raising telecom, fuel, and property taxes rather than extending the reach of sales taxes. This is certainly a possible solution, but why should I pay higher telecom and property taxes just so that you can shop online?
So now I should be thankful the government let someone put copper/fiber down on the ground? And they want a piece of the pie because of that?
Consider that copper in the ground for a moment. Here is what the state government contributes to it:
1. The legal authority to run lines across private property even if the land-owners do not like it. 2. The regulatory framework to keep the company that owns those lines from abusing the customer. 3. The roads that are used to haul the copper in, as well to move the equipment and labor required to install and maintain it. 4. The regulatory framework to handle production and distribution of electricity that runs down that line. 5. Protection for those lines from vandals and angry landowners. 6. A workforce educated at public expense to provide the labor for installation and maintenance.
The whole system fails if these elements are not provided. If they're not going to be funded by a sales tax, how would you LIKE the state to get the money to pay for it?
If denying others equal rights by codifying your beliefs into the laws of this nation The laws of this nation are not at issue here. The issue is Proposition 8. This law applies only to California, and reflects the unique society and culture of the citizens of California.
"The skull was discovered during an exploratory dig at Heslington Eastin, an area of extensive prehistoric farming landscape of fields, trackways and buildings dating back to at least 300 BC."
I've often wondered how a universal, single pay system could legally be created within these United States. It seems to me that the Federal government may not have the authority to create a workable system for universal coverage. It can regulate most forms of employment and most commercial activity, but a lot of the people who need coverage are retired, unemployed, or children.
Each state certainly has the authority to do this, but I suspect some states will lack the resources or desire. This would probably make it possible for folks to "game the system" by moving between states depending on their health needs.
So, how could this work? Or would we HAVE to stick with private insurance, and just assume the rates will go up to compensate for people who game the existing system?
I disagree. I suspect we disagree because you don't find Christians nearly as interesting as I do, and no amount of discussion or reason is going to change your mind. Knowing full well the futility of the effort, I respond to your comments as follows:
Part of the idea is such that, most of the mono-theists think God is really all about them. God is so they can justify what they want. It justifies the suppression of the rights of minorities, It justifies the abuse of women, and children.
Can you point to any evidence or studies which demonstrate that MOST mono-theists think this way, or are you relying on anecdotal matters?
Its a little bit selfish to think that you matter so much to the creator of the universe, if there is such a thing, that he cares about small pointless things, that Humanity and its Earth somehow hold some special place in the cosmos. If there is a "First one." does it not stand to reason that we really wouldn't matter?
I agree with your observation that, in the grand scheme of things, people are insignificant. I think the christians do too. That is, to my knowlege, the whole reason they dedicate so much time to worshiping that creator.
For example. Christians argue against abortion. but that has nothing to do with God really. It has everything to do with Muslims not outnumbering Christians because of population control.
Again, can you point out a study or other evidence to support this? In South Dakota (one of the United States) the abortion question is frequently brought to the voters. According to the ever-reliable wikipedia, South Dakota's total non-christian population is around 3%. It seems unlikely that the muslim share of this 3% of the population is the motivating factor for South Dakota's Christians to oppose abortion.
Its even more self centered to think that a creator of the Universe would want to entertain or torment us until the end of time. Thats completely and utterly pointless.
What evidence do we have that time even applies to this "creator of the Univers" of which you speak? It seems silly to assume that time matters at all from that perspective.
You see where I'm going with this? its a Huge huge universe. Human beings are small, insignificant. The creator of the universe if he exists wouldn't blink twice at what Humans care about.
Again, the only point where you and the christians disagree is whether or not this creator actually DOES care about these little humans.
Theists are not more socially adapted to survival. Quite the opposite. The rational survive in an emergency. The religious panic and pray, and as a result die.
Which is of course why the theists died out long ago, right?
My original comment was intended as something of a churc history joke. If Rome could iron out its issues with the protestants, the reformed, the orthodox, and the lutherans... they'd ALL have "quite a decent stance with the secular side of the world."
Then we could all turn our energy toward more productive arguments, like whether E85 fuel is as great an idea as I think it is.
Actually, I was referring to matters within the church, like the reverence of saints, the issuance of indulgences, relics, and justification by faith. These are the things that got the Lutherans kicked out, and contributed to the rise of the protestant churches in the first place.
The study appears flawed from the outset. The United States do not employ a single unified educational system. Education is a state-by-state matter (with some federal money thrown in.) lumping together all the schools in every state for a single study is similar to lumping together all of the schools in Asia.
I have a right to be safe on the road withouut idiots putting me in danger
I'm very interested in this right you mention. I've never seen it written in any of the constitutions or laws in my (united) State. Can you tell me where you're finding this right? Or, are you suggesting that you have a natural, inherent right to use roads be safe from idiots?
Any input or citations to the law you can give would be appreciated.
This is a really great idea. I really, really great idea. This is the kind of "duh" stuff that all of our modern technology is supposed to help fix.
You know what would be an even better idea? Make these ballot printers with a special, proprietary ink cartridge. This would help prevent counterfeit ballots. Of course, since you can't let these machines break down, the cartidges would probably have to have an internal sensor that shuts down the printer when the ink level gets low. Maybe, just to be safe, they would have to kick in when about 60% of the ink is gone. We need to protect the voters, after all....and really, how many tax-payers pay attention to the money their government spends on ink?
Like anything else, the benefits will vary depending on who you are. You indicate that you have a successful life in the IT industry. You probably work for a school or business, and have no need for people to be able to find you on the Internet.
By contrast, small businessmen, artists, private doctors, lawyers, politicians, and a host of other types of people not only benefit from being visible on the internet, they need to be there in order to seem legitimate to potential clients or customers.
My guess is, in the future, how we think about the face we present on the internet will be a lot like how we think about getting dressed in the morning. We'll ask ourselves, "Where am I going, and is anyone important going to see me there?"
Slashdot Mirror
3. The Federal Government doesn't HAVE to have the power to 'fine people for not buying a product'; your State/Commonwealth has been doing it for years with Auto Insurance.
Your state government has the authority to do all sorts of things the Federal Government cannot.
I researched this subject thoroughly and found that it's almost completely undocumented.'
Is this the new way to say "I checked it out and it's legit!"
The main reason to keep a landline, in this day of mobile telephones, is to get your name and address in the telephone book so people can find you.
Or am I missing something?
What authority would you accept?
No, really. What would it take to persuade YOU that one particular faith's omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, incomprehensible, infinitely complex, but basically good god actually existed?
Can anyone point out for me the mechanism that is going to require ALL citizens to buy health care coverage? I can't seem to find it. What happens under this plan of someone does not?
To prevent this problem, you might try contacting your regular health-care provider right away. Assuming they fall under HIPAA, you usually have the right to make requests to the provider regarding how they will handle your medical records, and who can access them. Make a request that your records not be stored in a shared electronic database.
The provider can refuse the request, but few do.
(Of course, 15 years from now, when your new doctor at General Hospital does not realize that you're the ONLY patient who still has paper records in that filing cabinet at the back of the server room, there could be a problem...)
You cannot recreate those things on message boards.
Look, whether you adopt old-earth evolution, young-earth evolution, or some flavor of creationism, one thing we can all agree on is this:
You cannot win an argument with someone in an on-line message board. You just keep going until either (a) someone gets tired and quits, or (b) someone mentions Nazis.
A brief response:
1. Upkeep costs for an easement include everything related to record keeping, courthouse and law enforcement needed to track, maintain and enforce that easement.
2 through 6: These taxes differ from state to state. In many, if not most states, they do not fully cover the cost to the state for providing the services indicated.
In short, the infrastructure you're using gets paid for from multiple sources. It appears you favor raising telecom, fuel, and property taxes rather than extending the reach of sales taxes. This is certainly a possible solution, but why should I pay higher telecom and property taxes just so that you can shop online?
So now I should be thankful the government let someone put copper/fiber down on the ground? And they want a piece of the pie because of that?
Consider that copper in the ground for a moment. Here is what the state government contributes to it:
1. The legal authority to run lines across private property even if the land-owners do not like it.
2. The regulatory framework to keep the company that owns those lines from abusing the customer.
3. The roads that are used to haul the copper in, as well to move the equipment and labor required to install and maintain it.
4. The regulatory framework to handle production and distribution of electricity that runs down that line.
5. Protection for those lines from vandals and angry landowners.
6. A workforce educated at public expense to provide the labor for installation and maintenance.
The whole system fails if these elements are not provided. If they're not going to be funded by a sales tax, how would you LIKE the state to get the money to pay for it?
If denying others equal rights by codifying your beliefs into the laws of this nation
The laws of this nation are not at issue here. The issue is Proposition 8. This law applies only to California, and reflects the unique society and culture of the citizens of California.
As your signature shows, you are aware there are other countries then just the USofA.
One might also note that each of the 50 United States has its own separate statute of limitations.
Obviously, it's not to be taken literally. He's referring to any purveyor of dairy products.
"The skull was discovered during an exploratory dig at Heslington Eastin, an area of extensive prehistoric farming landscape of fields, trackways and buildings dating back to at least 300 BC."
Wait, when did 300 BC become prehistoric?
I've often wondered how a universal, single pay system could legally be created within these United States. It seems to me that the Federal government may not have the authority to create a workable system for universal coverage. It can regulate most forms of employment and most commercial activity, but a lot of the people who need coverage are retired, unemployed, or children.
Each state certainly has the authority to do this, but I suspect some states will lack the resources or desire. This would probably make it possible for folks to "game the system" by moving between states depending on their health needs.
So, how could this work? Or would we HAVE to stick with private insurance, and just assume the rates will go up to compensate for people who game the existing system?
I disagree. I suspect we disagree because you don't find Christians nearly as interesting as I do, and no amount of discussion or reason is going to change your mind. Knowing full well the futility of the effort, I respond to your comments as follows:
Part of the idea is such that, most of the mono-theists think God is really all about them. God is so they can justify what they want. It justifies the suppression of the rights of minorities, It justifies the abuse of women, and children.
Can you point to any evidence or studies which demonstrate that MOST mono-theists think this way, or are you relying on anecdotal matters?
Its a little bit selfish to think that you matter so much to the creator of the universe, if there is such a thing, that he cares about small pointless things, that Humanity and its Earth somehow hold some special place in the cosmos. If there is a "First one." does it not stand to reason that we really wouldn't matter?
I agree with your observation that, in the grand scheme of things, people are insignificant. I think the christians do too. That is, to my knowlege, the whole reason they dedicate so much time to worshiping that creator.
For example. Christians argue against abortion. but that has nothing to do with God really. It has everything to do with Muslims not outnumbering Christians because of population control.
Again, can you point out a study or other evidence to support this? In South Dakota (one of the United States) the abortion question is frequently brought to the voters. According to the ever-reliable wikipedia, South Dakota's total non-christian population is around 3%. It seems unlikely that the muslim share of this 3% of the population is the motivating factor for South Dakota's Christians to oppose abortion.
Its even more self centered to think that a creator of the Universe would want to entertain or torment us until the end of time. Thats completely and utterly pointless.
What evidence do we have that time even applies to this "creator of the Univers" of which you speak? It seems silly to assume that time matters at all from that perspective.
You see where I'm going with this? its a Huge huge universe. Human beings are small, insignificant. The creator of the universe if he exists wouldn't blink twice at what Humans care about.
Again, the only point where you and the christians disagree is whether or not this creator actually DOES care about these little humans.
Theists are not more socially adapted to survival. Quite the opposite. The rational survive in an emergency. The religious panic and pray, and as a result die.
Which is of course why the theists died out long ago, right?
Very well put.
My original comment was intended as something of a churc history joke. If Rome could iron out its issues with the protestants, the reformed, the orthodox, and the lutherans... they'd ALL have "quite a decent stance with the secular side of the world."
Then we could all turn our energy toward more productive arguments, like whether E85 fuel is as great an idea as I think it is.
Actually, I was referring to matters within the church, like the reverence of saints, the issuance of indulgences, relics, and justification by faith. These are the things that got the Lutherans kicked out, and contributed to the rise of the protestant churches in the first place.
The study appears flawed from the outset. The United States do not employ a single unified educational system. Education is a state-by-state matter (with some federal money thrown in.) lumping together all the schools in every state for a single study is similar to lumping together all of the schools in Asia.
Thanks for the link, I did not know this. Now if Rome could just settle a few arguments that have been festering since around 1515....
I wish I had some mod points today, you make a very important point.
What about Pope Benedict?
I have a right to be safe on the road withouut idiots putting me in danger
I'm very interested in this right you mention. I've never seen it written in any of the constitutions or laws in my (united) State. Can you tell me where you're finding this right? Or, are you suggesting that you have a natural, inherent right to use roads be safe from idiots?
Any input or citations to the law you can give would be appreciated.
This is a really great idea. I really, really great idea. This is the kind of "duh" stuff that all of our modern technology is supposed to help fix.
...and really, how many tax-payers pay attention to the money their government spends on ink?
You know what would be an even better idea? Make these ballot printers with a special, proprietary ink cartridge. This would help prevent counterfeit ballots. Of course, since you can't let these machines break down, the cartidges would probably have to have an internal sensor that shuts down the printer when the ink level gets low. Maybe, just to be safe, they would have to kick in when about 60% of the ink is gone. We need to protect the voters, after all.
Like anything else, the benefits will vary depending on who you are. You indicate that you have a successful life in the IT industry. You probably work for a school or business, and have no need for people to be able to find you on the Internet.
By contrast, small businessmen, artists, private doctors, lawyers, politicians, and a host of other types of people not only benefit from being visible on the internet, they need to be there in order to seem legitimate to potential clients or customers.
My guess is, in the future, how we think about the face we present on the internet will be a lot like how we think about getting dressed in the morning. We'll ask ourselves, "Where am I going, and is anyone important going to see me there?"