Ever thought of Oxford or Cambridge over here in the UK?
Overseas tuition fees range in the US$30,000-40,000 range (of course, then there's living fees etc.) but depending on your personal budget, you may find it very enjoyable.
But he wouldn't dare give a short, sharp smack to his little snowflakes!...as has been done through human history and even before we existed.
Young animals are designed to learn through punishment of negative behaviour. Often physical.
Children simply don't have the psychological makeup to understand and process 'modern' idiot parenting techniques such as time-outs. Hence they grow up to be horrors as they age.
Smack your kids. Or at least threaten to do it. They will thank you.
I like your link to that article on the NHS. Very informative, but nothing the average UK taxpayer doesn't already know or suspect.
However, it's a little better to have healthcare that may accidentally kill 0.02% of your population, than to have no access to any form of healthcare whatsoever for 12%...
Just to finish addressing your point, most of which was already well covered by the previous poster:
Newsflash, free shitty health care is available right now in the united states it's called the emergency room and just don't pay the bill.
You do realise that you already pay for that out of your state taxes right? For the many millions of uninsured Americans (and illegal immigrants) without a primary physician or any form of preventative medicine, when a condition gets so bad that they have to turn up to the ER for treatment it is already funded by the hospital?
The steps are thus:
1 - Poor person has high blood pressure 2 - Poor person has no primary physician and doesn't take antihypertensive medications because they're too expensive 3 - Poor person has a heart attack/stroke 4 - Poor person comes to the ER and if they're not already dead... 5 - Poor person has angioplasty/bypass/coiling of stroke/neurosurgery - the US does have the best care available after all 6 - Poor person spends days in hospital/ICU 7 - Poor person discharged home without any means to pay for preventative medications etc.. 8 - Poor person is less able to work and contribute to the economy 9 - Lather, Rinse, Repeat 35 million times over...
Now, interventing at step 2, like most western nations with universal healthcare, prevents the number of people reaching step 3 and hence the much higher relative costs of steps 5 onwards. I'm not saying that steps 3 onwards don't happen in Canada, the UK or France, just that we have more people hovering at step 2.
The kicker is this - you already pay for steps 4 through 6. Just as you say 'turn up to the ER and leave without paying the bill' - well, someone has to pay for it. That someone is the hospital, as mandated through a congressional bill. The hospital is not funded for this compulsory treatment however and therefore skims a little bit off everyone who actually has insurance instead. This puts your insurance costs up and hits you in the wallet, the only place you seem to care about.
Sort of like a nationally-applied, universally available fund from which to pay for healthcare? Really?
Not at all like the NHS, the Canadian system, the French communal insurance system etc..etc.. at all...
See, it all sounds good until you call it 'socialised medicine' at which point dyed-in-the-wool American conservatives start foaming in the mouth. In reality, you know it's better than the status quo, you just can't bring yourselves to admit it.
You're absolutely right. The numbers in the original story don't quite work.
Glad you showed us the error of our ways.
Now, how much money does a short-order cook or welfare mother have to tap into in her rented property to cover that new leukaemia diagnosis in one of her children?
None to very little? Really? How is she going to make ends meet and try to save the life of her child? Really? I thought the US was the largest economy the world has ever known, with the most multi-billionaires as well?
But as long as you're sitting pretty because of your financial situation, good for you.
This isn't a direct reply to you UTW, just a little more detail for those reading below +5
If you don't like the idea of forced equality like the Canadian system, you want a service like we have here in the UK - everyone has the NHS but those willing to pay more can buy private cover (which often means faster treatment, not better treatment).
This is the main thrust of many Americans' arguments against the NHS that I read day in day out on the 'net - the 'me, me, me' mentality that says 'I want my sprained ankle seen ahead of that stroke victim because I have better insurance.' - well, whilst there is only one private ER in London that I know of, for outpatient care, you really can pay your way to the front of the queue in the UK.
We also have a great safety net for the many millions of people who can't afford any private cover - the NHS. And as slow, backwards and crappy as you may think it is, at least it covers every citizen. How many poor Americans are completely without access to a primary care physician, coronary bypass surgery, radiotherapy, diabetes medications and the like?
Why should someone have to be a financial genius just to stay healthy?
Your nation has the largest economy the world has known, and the greatest number of multi-billionaires to boot.
And yet for the average man on the street, they have to gamble each time they want to shift their health coverage in case they get disease X or need drug Y.
You might need to be an accountant to calculate how to maximise your health coverage at age 65, but you don't need to be a genius to see a nationalised/collectivised healthcare system would serve your diverse population far better in the long run.
Ah, the idiocy of the right. What is it about you people that means you can't accept the fact that better educated, more intelligent people may have considered an issue more carefully than you have and simply come to a different conclusion?
But no, there is one correct answer, and it's the one I have (shades of Marx's historical inevitability there) and anyone who disagrees needs re-education, or is misled, or brainwashed by lying right wing propaganda etc etc
These devices are being installed by shopkeepers who have experienced violence and intimidation from gangs of children around their shops, who are also driving customers away.
They are not being installed willy-nilly throughout town centres, they are being used as a means of retaliation or protection.
You have no idea how commonplace teen-on-adult violence is in the UK at present, do you? How scared the general public is to approach gangs of youths or even ask them to move on?
Parents kicked to death in front of their own children just outside their homes, cars smashed and stolen - the list includes everything you could imagine.
This device may be unpalatable, but the alternatives are worse.
You raise an important point but it's not really an issue.
Broadcom, who manufacture a vast percentage of all the 3G radio chips in use, have forseen this issue and the new chip purported to have been sourced by Apple for the next-gen iPhone can use all international 3G frequencies.
My original point of a US company trying to force a US subscription model on Europe as their major failing still stands however. It's business arrogance, plain and simple.
Intelligent pillboxes are not a new phenomenon, and this will not be the final say on the matter - I should know, I started a company to try to produce one for the UK market.
The patent landscape is littered with numerous attempts to solve the problem of patient compliance with self-administered, even back to the 1960s. They all rely on a similar solution to this one - an intelligent alarm, an internal counter, and some form of interface for either the physician or the patient.
The problems my product was trying to address were these - noone wants to get their packs of medications and then dispense them into some special second device which counts them back out to the patient; and no pharmacist or drug company wants to issue a new pill box for each prescription.
Once these issues are solved, this idea may fly - but I don't think the MIT team are offering anything the marketplace hasn't seen before.
I am a classic Apple fanboi, and a UK resident. Often, I find these two facts in opposition with each other - particularly over the iPhone.
Apple's continued US-centricity is a ridiculous holdover for such a large company with even larger intentions. Their insistence on selling first to a US market which has always lagged behind the rest of the world in terms of mobile phone infrastructure is a case in point.
If Apple instead decided to throw their weight behind launching the iPhone that the rest of the world wants, it would force the US phone market to modernise, kicking and screaming on the way.
We already have data that iPhones exist (illegally and unlocked...) in most countries around the world, even some surprising locations. This shows what a strong global brand and product Apple has sitting ready to be unleashed. But instead, they insist on catering to the often backwards, domestic US market first.
Even worse, they have then tried to force a US-based model for phone subscription services on the rest of the world, where such practices don't exist.
I posit that the slow uptake of iPhones in Europe is due to a combination of initial outlay for the phone, high subscription rates not in keeping with the service provided, limited number of networks you can legally sign up to, and ultimately network lock-in. Each of these devices exists in the US. The do not exist in Europe for any phone other than the iPhone, and this is what the market is finding hard to swallow, even though we really love the product.
So my final message is this - Apple, get your head out of your arse and realise that there is a world outside the USA.
As for Boot Camp, if I wanted to buy a computer and buy a copy of Windows to run on it, I wouldn't have bought a Mac...
Why not? PCWorld (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136649-page,3-c,notebooks/article.html) recommended a MacBook Pro running Boot Camp as the best Windows PC of 2006/7...
Slashdot Mirror
Or you could install OS X...
What does being in the UK have to do with anything you've mentionned?
Are cell phones different elsewhere?
Ever thought of Oxford or Cambridge over here in the UK?
Overseas tuition fees range in the US$30,000-40,000 range (of course, then there's living fees etc.) but depending on your personal budget, you may find it very enjoyable.
You yanks fucking sicken me with your excuses for not providing you fellow Americans with good healthcare.
Richest nation on earth?
Land of the free?
My fat ass it is.
But he wouldn't dare give a short, sharp smack to his little snowflakes! ...as has been done through human history and even before we existed.
Young animals are designed to learn through punishment of negative behaviour. Often physical.
Children simply don't have the psychological makeup to understand and process 'modern' idiot parenting techniques such as time-outs. Hence they grow up to be horrors as they age.
Smack your kids. Or at least threaten to do it. They will thank you.
Very nicely put.
Like your sig.
Uhh...he said 'quid' - common parlance for 'uk pound sterling'.
Seven of whch equal around 13.50 of your US dollars...so yet again we are being ripped off royally over here on 'treasure island'.
I like your link to that article on the NHS. Very informative, but nothing the average UK taxpayer doesn't already know or suspect.
However, it's a little better to have healthcare that may accidentally kill 0.02% of your population, than to have no access to any form of healthcare whatsoever for 12%...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7018057.stm
Just to finish addressing your point, most of which was already well covered by the previous poster:
Newsflash, free shitty health care is available right now in the united states it's called the emergency room and just don't pay the bill.
You do realise that you already pay for that out of your state taxes right? For the many millions of uninsured Americans (and illegal immigrants) without a primary physician or any form of preventative medicine, when a condition gets so bad that they have to turn up to the ER for treatment it is already funded by the hospital?
The steps are thus:
1 - Poor person has high blood pressure
2 - Poor person has no primary physician and doesn't take antihypertensive medications because they're too expensive
3 - Poor person has a heart attack/stroke
4 - Poor person comes to the ER and if they're not already dead...
5 - Poor person has angioplasty/bypass/coiling of stroke/neurosurgery - the US does have the best care available after all
6 - Poor person spends days in hospital/ICU
7 - Poor person discharged home without any means to pay for preventative medications etc..
8 - Poor person is less able to work and contribute to the economy
9 - Lather, Rinse, Repeat 35 million times over...
Now, interventing at step 2, like most western nations with universal healthcare, prevents the number of people reaching step 3 and hence the much higher relative costs of steps 5 onwards.
I'm not saying that steps 3 onwards don't happen in Canada, the UK or France, just that we have more people hovering at step 2.
The kicker is this - you already pay for steps 4 through 6. Just as you say 'turn up to the ER and leave without paying the bill' - well, someone has to pay for it. That someone is the hospital, as mandated through a congressional bill. The hospital is not funded for this compulsory treatment however and therefore skims a little bit off everyone who actually has insurance instead. This puts your insurance costs up and hits you in the wallet, the only place you seem to care about.
Sort of like a nationally-applied, universally available fund from which to pay for healthcare? Really?
Not at all like the NHS, the Canadian system, the French communal insurance system etc..etc.. at all...
See, it all sounds good until you call it 'socialised medicine' at which point dyed-in-the-wool American conservatives start foaming in the mouth. In reality, you know it's better than the status quo, you just can't bring yourselves to admit it.
You're absolutely right. The numbers in the original story don't quite work.
Glad you showed us the error of our ways.
Now, how much money does a short-order cook or welfare mother have to tap into in her rented property to cover that new leukaemia diagnosis in one of her children?
None to very little? Really? How is she going to make ends meet and try to save the life of her child? Really? I thought the US was the largest economy the world has ever known, with the most multi-billionaires as well?
But as long as you're sitting pretty because of your financial situation, good for you.
This isn't a direct reply to you UTW, just a little more detail for those reading below +5
If you don't like the idea of forced equality like the Canadian system, you want a service like we have here in the UK - everyone has the NHS but those willing to pay more can buy private cover (which often means faster treatment, not better treatment).
This is the main thrust of many Americans' arguments against the NHS that I read day in day out on the 'net - the 'me, me, me' mentality that says 'I want my sprained ankle seen ahead of that stroke victim because I have better insurance.' - well, whilst there is only one private ER in London that I know of, for outpatient care, you really can pay your way to the front of the queue in the UK.
We also have a great safety net for the many millions of people who can't afford any private cover - the NHS. And as slow, backwards and crappy as you may think it is, at least it covers every citizen. How many poor Americans are completely without access to a primary care physician, coronary bypass surgery, radiotherapy, diabetes medications and the like?
-Nano.
IAADITNHS (I am a doctor in the NHS)
Why should someone have to be a financial genius just to stay healthy?
Your nation has the largest economy the world has known, and the greatest number of multi-billionaires to boot.
And yet for the average man on the street, they have to gamble each time they want to shift their health coverage in case they get disease X or need drug Y.
You might need to be an accountant to calculate how to maximise your health coverage at age 65, but you don't need to be a genius to see a nationalised/collectivised healthcare system would serve your diverse population far better in the long run.
Yeah, that's the issue here...
Give them a break - they're a new startup with very little experience in rolling out updates for the various configurations of PC on the market!
Oh, what's that you say? They're the world's largest software company with over 20 years of market dominance in the OS sector? Really?
Stop being a Microsoft apologist.
Ah, the idiocy of the right. What is it about you people that means you can't accept the fact that better educated, more intelligent people may have considered an issue more carefully than you have and simply come to a different conclusion?
But no, there is one correct answer, and it's the one I have (shades of Marx's historical inevitability there) and anyone who disagrees needs re-education, or is misled, or brainwashed by lying right wing propaganda etc etc
Umm...RTFA?
:)
These devices are being installed by shopkeepers who have experienced violence and intimidation from gangs of children around their shops, who are also driving customers away.
They are not being installed willy-nilly throughout town centres, they are being used as a means of retaliation or protection.
You have no idea how commonplace teen-on-adult violence is in the UK at present, do you? How scared the general public is to approach gangs of youths or even ask them to move on?
Parents kicked to death in front of their own children just outside their homes, cars smashed and stolen - the list includes everything you could imagine.
This device may be unpalatable, but the alternatives are worse.
Seriously - come visit!
You have no idea what things are like in certain parts of the UK at present.
Come visit!
You raise an important point but it's not really an issue.
Broadcom, who manufacture a vast percentage of all the 3G radio chips in use, have forseen this issue and the new chip purported to have been sourced by Apple for the next-gen iPhone can use all international 3G frequencies.
My original point of a US company trying to force a US subscription model on Europe as their major failing still stands however. It's business arrogance, plain and simple.
Intelligent pillboxes are not a new phenomenon, and this will not be the final say on the matter - I should know, I started a company to try to produce one for the UK market.
The patent landscape is littered with numerous attempts to solve the problem of patient compliance with self-administered, even back to the 1960s. They all rely on a similar solution to this one - an intelligent alarm, an internal counter, and some form of interface for either the physician or the patient.
The problems my product was trying to address were these - noone wants to get their packs of medications and then dispense them into some special second device which counts them back out to the patient; and no pharmacist or drug company wants to issue a new pill box for each prescription.
Once these issues are solved, this idea may fly - but I don't think the MIT team are offering anything the marketplace hasn't seen before.
I am a classic Apple fanboi, and a UK resident. Often, I find these two facts in opposition with each other - particularly over the iPhone.
Apple's continued US-centricity is a ridiculous holdover for such a large company with even larger intentions. Their insistence on selling first to a US market which has always lagged behind the rest of the world in terms of mobile phone infrastructure is a case in point.
If Apple instead decided to throw their weight behind launching the iPhone that the rest of the world wants, it would force the US phone market to modernise, kicking and screaming on the way.
We already have data that iPhones exist (illegally and unlocked...) in most countries around the world, even some surprising locations. This shows what a strong global brand and product Apple has sitting ready to be unleashed. But instead, they insist on catering to the often backwards, domestic US market first.
Even worse, they have then tried to force a US-based model for phone subscription services on the rest of the world, where such practices don't exist.
I posit that the slow uptake of iPhones in Europe is due to a combination of initial outlay for the phone, high subscription rates not in keeping with the service provided, limited number of networks you can legally sign up to, and ultimately network lock-in. Each of these devices exists in the US. The do not exist in Europe for any phone other than the iPhone, and this is what the market is finding hard to swallow, even though we really love the product.
So my final message is this - Apple, get your head out of your arse and realise that there is a world outside the USA.
As for Boot Camp, if I wanted to buy a computer and buy a copy of Windows to run on it, I wouldn't have bought a Mac...
Why not? PCWorld (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136649-page,3-c,notebooks/article.html) recommended a MacBook Pro running Boot Camp as the best Windows PC of 2006/7...
I know, I know, it comes with the subnotebook territory - but who are these "subnotebooks" targeted at, anyway?
The Japanese.
Currently hiring?
*Beep* Wrong!
The "Theory of evolution" is no different today than when Darwin first proposed it - survival of the fittest through means of natural selection.
We've simply added to it and explained things in terms of modern genetic/behavioural knowledge.