My choice -- yes. In as much as it's also my choice to either eat right and exercise or not. The latter, while still one of my choices, is obviously less healthy for me.
As was the situation with my 'choice'. If I didn't 'choose' to apply myself the way I did, someone else would have. The very least would have me making significantly less money and someone else as manager -- and frankly, I like being 'the man'.
"This guy", as you say, has choices to make too. Just let him make sure that choice is informed with full understanding of the concequences of either.
I work for a mid-sized medical lab that STARTED as a very small niche lab.
I bent over backwards to make myself valuable to my employer. That includes web accessable alpha paging (straight to my cell phone) and cell access. PLUS support from home/vacations. This was all at my expense.
The downside: It costs me money every month.
The upside: Tax write-off, greater asset to my employer, was able to jump on any major problems BEFORE they effected employee productivity.
Here I am 5 years later earning 4x my starting wage (which wasn't too bad to start with) and I'm the manager of my dept. Further, I may be on a 'leash', but I have incredible amounts of flexability. Twice a week over summer, I leave for a 2.5 hour lunch and spend it with my son (park, catch, arcade, whatever). Whats that worth to some people? For me it's priceless. (Of course that 7 hour drive up the coast from LA to Oakland xmas-eve sucked -- but I made it back before my kids were woke up xmas morning! (I drove to make SURE I didn't get stuck at the airport)).
It all depends on your 'situation'. Plus, working for a privately owned company vs. a heartless evil corporation is a major asset -- and humans appricate effort more than faceless 'boardrooms'. ymmv.
It's kind of neat... However, I remember listening to him read HHGG (audio book) and -- forgive me -- but he doesn't read his own material very well.
I only hold a mild a mild reservation here. Since nearly all of the original cast is back and this particular character isn't present in most of the scenes (remembering from the books), I fully expect to enjoy the show.
And a simple, inexpensive, small pipe (maybe 256kbps max) should be far more than enough for an entire public high-school. For the yearly cost of a single T1 (+install and hardware), they could drop in a simple caching proxy such as squid and farm out maintainance/administration for years.
In my opinion, Roddenberry was somewhat holding back what TNG could be -- it may have been a coincedence that TNG started to get good after Gene passed, but I'm not too sure.
That said, Berman and Bragga are the 'anti-roddenberries'.
Want to revive Trek? Get red of B&B. Do a well-done mini-series on Star Fleet academy -- hell, Scotty could be teaching an engineering class and finally REALLY retire. Run a series spinnoff from characters introduced there -- if it's popular.
What about an ordinary soldier running through an 'urban' jungle? Say downtown Los Angeles? In broad daylight, something like this might provide an 'edge' for the average foot soldier.
More and more, we're seeing urban combat (a la Iraq).
Really. Unless you took a different math than I did, 50!=0. Period.
If I can get a PC -$50 but without windows, I do it.
That said, depending on what the machine was to be USED for, I'd either install win2k, or BSD. IF I'm going to use windows, I'd much rather use a non-branded OEM.
... if you take my comment out of the context of the thread
It's not about context. It's about grammatical form and your snide remarks regarding confusion you yourself caused.
It is bad grammatical form to use a pronoun without a clear antecedent. The closest thing to an antecedent you had was in reference to the 'headphones'. It would be quite easy to assume your error was one of saying "he" instead of "they" or "it" rather than a more uncommon grammatical error.
Normally I would ignore this, but your "SAT" remark was so asinine that I felt you needed this pointed out.
Again, I suggest you save the snide remarks for issues you are sure aren't caused or exacerbated by the guy who looks back at you in the mirror. Otherwise you just look like a jerk.
I would suggest that YOU are lucky it wasn't an SAT question. You need to re-read what you said and note how anybody would believe you made a type-o. Either you dropped the wrong word ('they' for 'he') or you confused the antecedent. The subject of your prior sentence was NOT your neighbors, but the headphones. As it was in each prior sentence to be exact. The use of a pronoun ('he' in your case) was inappropriate to denote your neighbors. The correct use of a pronoun there would have been "it" or "they" as the antecedent were those headphones.
For the usage you indented, you would have wanted to explicitly state your "neighbors".
Advice: Don't make snide remarks about others confusion until you are SURE you weren't the cause of such confusion. Otherwise you come off as being a jerk.
Yes I am. Perhaps I didn't make clear what I was doing. I was using a common rhetorical device called "hyperbole" to help demonstrate how silly the lawsuit was. I wasn't trying to make a serious comparison.
If it works, maybe they can use this argument in criminal court. Serial killers could sue local governments for incarceration using the arguement that they should have stopped him earlier and told him the consequences if he continued.
Hyperbole? Yes. But sometimes the ridicules helps to illuminate it's ilk.
I have never even heard of "Kaye report", I don't keep that close tabs on what goes on in US Senate.
There was a quote I heard some time ago -- and your statement is the living epitome of that statement. It went something like this: "I am not a liberal. You can tell because I have no opinions about things I know nothing about"
Then again, I actually pay attention to things... And I generally dont form opinions about things unless I'm knowlegable about them.
Your very language suggests to me you've formed your opinion and it's based on emotion -- not facts. "GWB and the rest of his gang", indeed.
From Kay's testimony:
KAY: Senator Warner, I think the world is far safer with the disappearance and the removal of Saddam Hussein. I have said I actually think this may be one of those cases where it was even more dangerous than we thought.
I think when we have the complete record you're going to discover that after 1998 it became a regime that was totally corrupt. Individuals were out for their own protection. And in a world where we know others are seeking WMD, the likelihood at some point in the future of a seller and a buyer meeting up would have made that a far more dangerous country than even we anticipated with what may turn out not to be a fully accurate estimate.
In particular, you should read the section where Kennedy is questioning him. Kennedy tries to get Kay to say that the current administration DR'd or cherry picked intellegence. Boy did he put Kennedy in his place. I never saw that man shut up so fast.
You've just shown yourself to be intellectually dishonest. I suggested you read the Kaye report in answer to your "Then how could Iraq be a "source of WMD's for terrorists" if they don't have any WMD's?" statement. Had you been interested in facts and the truth rather than invested being RIGHT regardless of the facts we could continue to have a constructive discussion. The Kaye report to the Senate made it very clear what the dangers were, that we have have been too late ANYWAY and a danger still exists.
It's clear to me that you've no interest in the truth or the facts. Your post is full of logical fallacies and overly simple answers to complex issues.
I'll let you live in your world where simple answers exist for complex problems. As for myself, I'm a grown up and I live in the real world. I turned in my rose-colored glasses over 20 years ago.
Have you found any of those WMD's? No? Then how could Iraq be a "source of WMD's for terrorists" if they don't have any WMD's?
I strongly suggest you read the Kaye report.
Further, I strongly suggest you check your facts. Virtually EVERYONE from Hans Blix to France, to Germany etc believied Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs. Hell, Iraqi GENERALS believed they had them. It's awfully 'cute' to say "some pople had ASSumptions", but it does nothing but provide you some rhetorical tripe while sidestepping the actual facts. It's a documented fact that Iraq continued WMD programs which included live bio-weapons strains, nerve agents and delivery systems.
Why get your panties in a bunch over Iraq, but not Pakistan?
Let's ignore the clear fallacy of your suggestion for a moment. Why Iraq over Pakistan? Lets list just a few:
Because Pakistan hadn't agreed to be bound by terms of a cease fire
There's no documented evidence showing Pakistan has used nerve agents against a foe, let alone their own people
Pakistan hasn't been targeting and shooting at our aircraft over the past 10+ years
Pakistan hasn't been the subject of numerous UN resolutions demanding verified disarmement while disregarding and actively circumventing said resolutions
Pakistan hadn't sponsored the assassination of the leader of a soverign nation
Please remember that the US going in to IRAQ wasn't about the immediate threat of WMDs, or that IRAQ was an immediate threat. I'd be happy to through a number of quotes where the administration constantly stated that we must act BEFORE the threat was imminent.
Am I conceding that there are no WMD stockpiles? No. Clearly, we advertised an invasion weeks -- no -- MONTHS before hand. It's not unreasonable to believe that if they existed they were well hidden. Remember, back in the 90's, it took UN inspectors dozen's of months to find them -- and THEN only because a general defected. Do I believe this? No. I lean against it, but I don't dismiss the idea outright.
Scary stuff, and oh so real. Even in modern-day USA.
It appears you are suggesting that what has happened so far is the US following a script layed out by Goering in 46. Interesting... Lets look at this...
All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked
Thousands dead in the WTO -- OBL saying it is every muslim's duty to aquire and use WMDs against the US, the US Cole attack... there are many many others... Is it a scripted Nazi Plot when we ARE under attack?
and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to a greater danger
However, in the US, it is less 'denoucement' and more an issue for debate. A legitimate issue. "Are we safe" doing nothing? Will 'stirring' up a hornets nest get us stung ONLY in the short term? Or will we be safer in the long haul. These are LEGITIMATE questions.
Am I suggesting there was a direct link between Iraq and 911? No. What I am suggesting is that Iraq could have been a source of WMDs for terrorists and the US was unwilling to take any chances given 911 and the rhetoric coming from militant islam.
It's too easy to answer a complex issue such as this with simple "nazi" parallels -- we could contrast your analogy with Poland prior to 1940 which through inaction allowed Germany to completely take over their nation -- then suggest we can't sit by like Poland and wait to be overrun. Both are silly "simple" answers to complex problems.
I don't fully consider myself LUCKY as it was in part by design, but I realize I'm in the minority. I live about a 20 min walk from work. About a 5 minute drive.
Particularly in my city/state, (LA/CA) this is the exception rather than the rule. MANY people work 60+miles away from their job. Just so they can afford a nice new house (they get cheaper further out from the typical work-centers). We also have 'diamond lane' laws that allow single occupant drivers to use commuter lanes on the freeway.
I can see that as a bonus. And tech *IS* cool... I just dont feel that way about transportation... As much as my wife dislikes my truck (it's OLD! Get a new one!), I can't justify the expense even though I can afford it. Then again, I just spent $450+ on a new palm zire 72 and accessories (hard case, memory cards). While I could have LIVED with a much more modest model, I was willing to pay 2x or 3x for some geek features.
Are there any statistics on maintenance costs on hybrids?
Currently, I drive an '88 Toyota pick-up (a 4-banger). It's got over 120k miles, averages about 30 mpg (28-31 -- varies with gas grade and what I'm doing). I have next to no maintenance expenses other than oil changes, filter changes, two clutches, and a starter (installed it myself) over the life of the vehicle. I will be needing to change hoses soon, and belts and a few other things which will probably result in the largest single expense for my truck over the last 14 years. I still can't see replacing it yet. ANYTHING would cost me more per month.
For me, the bottom line is total operation cost. I've got a wife and two children. Every penny saved benefits my family. (I shy away from 'luxury' items -- particularly cars).
if you can easily afford your $250,000.00 home and the three newer cars you have (like that overpriced volvo do you? it's no better than a chevy but TCO of it is more than 5 times the chevy )
I know why you posted anon. You didn't want to make a fool of yourself.
First, where I live (CA), houses in my area are running closer to $500k on AVERAGE statewide. The base yearly income in my area to afford an AVERAGE home is nearly $100k/year. Yes, in CA, $100k/year is BARELY middle class. According to you, they are RICH ($80k or above). Yet $80k/year in LA will get you not much better than a double-wide at the local trailer park -- UNLESS you already have huges gobs of EQUITY in a pre-existing home. I don't.
Second, I personally drive an '88 toyota pickup (a 4 banger) with over 120k miles on it and some mild rust damage. I paid $3000 for it in 90 (got it used) and it averages close to 29mpg. Why the HELL would I pay over $500/mo PLUS insurance -- EXPENSIVE in my area -- about $200/mo for a newish car? My wife drives a smallish Nissan 4-door.
Third, we don't OWN a home. We've got $100k saved and STILL are having trouble trying to budget a house AND education costs for our kids WITHOUT sentancing both me and my wife to full time employment.
Fourth, from age 19-21, I was homeless. Work in a soup kitchin? I ate in one when I could. I spent my first year in college (community college) living out of a backpack, taking "baths" in public restrooms and 2 or 3 times a week getting a $15/night hotel room in north hollywood.
Yes, I'm doing "good" now. Not "great". Good. La-la land? Spoon fed? What gaul. I've worked my ass off and you dare assume I'm "out of touch"? Stop whining, stop living off of society for a while and WORK.
yopu must be around 23-18 years old with no kids. as that would explain your lack of knowlege into the real world.
Wrong. I'm closer to 40, married and have two kids (the youngest of which is 2). Our annual income (my wife works part time) is far above the national average. We budget our life based on a single income and the rest is saved.
Your cocky and snide remarks suggest you are the one who lacks any reasonable understanding of the REAL WORLD.
It's fairly simple, and to help you overcome your limitations, I'll use small words:
If you force labor to cost more near you, those who need labor will get labor cheaper away from you.
Now, back to big-boy talk:
THAT is the bastard son of globalization. The 1000 lbs gorrilla in the room NOBODY wants to talk about.
The only way to offset these artificial gaps in the cost of labor is to (A) remove the constraints on local labor or (B) add the same constraints on exported labor. Personally, I like (B).
The topic was discussing outsourcing of jobs and blaming it on CEOs. It's obviously not *THEIR* fault. We've paved a road for them, then bitch when they drive down the road.
Slashdot Mirror
Check here. Not everything is -- some things are. And when you hover around two tax brackets, writting off even a little can save you a lot.
As was the situation with my 'choice'. If I didn't 'choose' to apply myself the way I did, someone else would have. The very least would have me making significantly less money and someone else as manager -- and frankly, I like being 'the man'.
"This guy", as you say, has choices to make too. Just let him make sure that choice is informed with full understanding of the concequences of either.
Let me 'chime in' myself.
I work for a mid-sized medical lab that STARTED as a very small niche lab.
I bent over backwards to make myself valuable to my employer. That includes web accessable alpha paging (straight to my cell phone) and cell access. PLUS support from home/vacations. This was all at my expense.
The downside: It costs me money every month.
The upside: Tax write-off, greater asset to my employer, was able to jump on any major problems BEFORE they effected employee productivity.
Here I am 5 years later earning 4x my starting wage (which wasn't too bad to start with) and I'm the manager of my dept. Further, I may be on a 'leash', but I have incredible amounts of flexability. Twice a week over summer, I leave for a 2.5 hour lunch and spend it with my son (park, catch, arcade, whatever). Whats that worth to some people? For me it's priceless. (Of course that 7 hour drive up the coast from LA to Oakland xmas-eve sucked -- but I made it back before my kids were woke up xmas morning! (I drove to make SURE I didn't get stuck at the airport)).
It all depends on your 'situation'. Plus, working for a privately owned company vs. a heartless evil corporation is a major asset -- and humans appricate effort more than faceless 'boardrooms'. ymmv.
Statements like this annoy me. Not every type of information gathering technology translates in to an Orwellian plot.
Damn funny
It's kind of neat... However, I remember listening to him read HHGG (audio book) and -- forgive me -- but he doesn't read his own material very well.
I only hold a mild a mild reservation here. Since nearly all of the original cast is back and this particular character isn't present in most of the scenes (remembering from the books), I fully expect to enjoy the show.
And a simple, inexpensive, small pipe (maybe 256kbps max) should be far more than enough for an entire public high-school. For the yearly cost of a single T1 (+install and hardware), they could drop in a simple caching proxy such as squid and farm out maintainance/administration for years.
Actually, I was thinking more like:
Star Trek: Stripes!
Maybe we're both wrong. Perhapse somewhere in between?
In my opinion, Roddenberry was somewhat holding back what TNG could be -- it may have been a coincedence that TNG started to get good after Gene passed, but I'm not too sure.
That said, Berman and Bragga are the 'anti-roddenberries'.
Want to revive Trek? Get red of B&B. Do a well-done mini-series on Star Fleet academy -- hell, Scotty could be teaching an engineering class and finally REALLY retire. Run a series spinnoff from characters introduced there -- if it's popular.
-jhon
What about an ordinary soldier running through an 'urban' jungle? Say downtown Los Angeles? In broad daylight, something like this might provide an 'edge' for the average foot soldier.
More and more, we're seeing urban combat (a la Iraq).
If I can get a PC -$50 but without windows, I do it.
That said, depending on what the machine was to be USED for, I'd either install win2k, or BSD. IF I'm going to use windows, I'd much rather use a non-branded OEM.
It is bad grammatical form to use a pronoun without a clear antecedent. The closest thing to an antecedent you had was in reference to the 'headphones'. It would be quite easy to assume your error was one of saying "he" instead of "they" or "it" rather than a more uncommon grammatical error.
Normally I would ignore this, but your "SAT" remark was so asinine that I felt you needed this pointed out.
Again, I suggest you save the snide remarks for issues you are sure aren't caused or exacerbated by the guy who looks back at you in the mirror. Otherwise you just look like a jerk.
For the usage you indented, you would have wanted to explicitly state your "neighbors".
Advice: Don't make snide remarks about others confusion until you are SURE you weren't the cause of such confusion. Otherwise you come off as being a jerk.
Perhaps this will help you understand the many uses of 'hyperbole'.
If it works, maybe they can use this argument in criminal court. Serial killers could sue local governments for incarceration using the arguement that they should have stopped him earlier and told him the consequences if he continued.
Hyperbole? Yes. But sometimes the ridicules helps to illuminate it's ilk.
Didn't take me long to find it.
Then again, I actually pay attention to things... And I generally dont form opinions about things unless I'm knowlegable about them.
Your very language suggests to me you've formed your opinion and it's based on emotion -- not facts. "GWB and the rest of his gang", indeed.
From Kay's testimony:In particular, you should read the section where Kennedy is questioning him. Kennedy tries to get Kay to say that the current administration DR'd or cherry picked intellegence. Boy did he put Kennedy in his place. I never saw that man shut up so fast.
I'm through wasting my time with you.
It's clear to me that you've no interest in the truth or the facts. Your post is full of logical fallacies and overly simple answers to complex issues.
I'll let you live in your world where simple answers exist for complex problems. As for myself, I'm a grown up and I live in the real world. I turned in my rose-colored glasses over 20 years ago.
Further, I strongly suggest you check your facts. Virtually EVERYONE from Hans Blix to France, to Germany etc believied Iraq had stockpiles of WMDs. Hell, Iraqi GENERALS believed they had them. It's awfully 'cute' to say "some pople had ASSumptions", but it does nothing but provide you some rhetorical tripe while sidestepping the actual facts. It's a documented fact that Iraq continued WMD programs which included live bio-weapons strains, nerve agents and delivery systems. Let's ignore the clear fallacy of your suggestion for a moment. Why Iraq over Pakistan? Lets list just a few:
Because Pakistan hadn't agreed to be bound by terms of a cease fire
There's no documented evidence showing Pakistan has used nerve agents against a foe, let alone their own people
Pakistan hasn't been targeting and shooting at our aircraft over the past 10+ years
Pakistan hasn't been the subject of numerous UN resolutions demanding verified disarmement while disregarding and actively circumventing said resolutions
Pakistan hadn't sponsored the assassination of the leader of a soverign nation
Please remember that the US going in to IRAQ wasn't about the immediate threat of WMDs, or that IRAQ was an immediate threat. I'd be happy to through a number of quotes where the administration constantly stated that we must act BEFORE the threat was imminent.
Am I conceding that there are no WMD stockpiles? No. Clearly, we advertised an invasion weeks -- no -- MONTHS before hand. It's not unreasonable to believe that if they existed they were well hidden. Remember, back in the 90's, it took UN inspectors dozen's of months to find them -- and THEN only because a general defected. Do I believe this? No. I lean against it, but I don't dismiss the idea outright.
Am I suggesting there was a direct link between Iraq and 911? No. What I am suggesting is that Iraq could have been a source of WMDs for terrorists and the US was unwilling to take any chances given 911 and the rhetoric coming from militant islam.
It's too easy to answer a complex issue such as this with simple "nazi" parallels -- we could contrast your analogy with Poland prior to 1940 which through inaction allowed Germany to completely take over their nation -- then suggest we can't sit by like Poland and wait to be overrun. Both are silly "simple" answers to complex problems.
(COUGH)Enterprise(/cough)
Ah yes... the commute to work.
I don't fully consider myself LUCKY as it was in part by design, but I realize I'm in the minority. I live about a 20 min walk from work. About a 5 minute drive.
Particularly in my city/state, (LA/CA) this is the exception rather than the rule. MANY people work 60+miles away from their job. Just so they can afford a nice new house (they get cheaper further out from the typical work-centers). We also have 'diamond lane' laws that allow single occupant drivers to use commuter lanes on the freeway.
I can see that as a bonus. And tech *IS* cool... I just dont feel that way about transportation... As much as my wife dislikes my truck (it's OLD! Get a new one!), I can't justify the expense even though I can afford it. Then again, I just spent $450+ on a new palm zire 72 and accessories (hard case, memory cards). While I could have LIVED with a much more modest model, I was willing to pay 2x or 3x for some geek features.
Too each his own...
Hmmm... I've found a couple of things on the net that suggest that a hybrid just isn't cost effective right now. Like this. Maybe down the road...
I guess I'll drive my truck until it falls apart...
Are there any statistics on maintenance costs on hybrids?
Currently, I drive an '88 Toyota pick-up (a 4-banger). It's got over 120k miles, averages about 30 mpg (28-31 -- varies with gas grade and what I'm doing). I have next to no maintenance expenses other than oil changes, filter changes, two clutches, and a starter (installed it myself) over the life of the vehicle. I will be needing to change hoses soon, and belts and a few other things which will probably result in the largest single expense for my truck over the last 14 years. I still can't see replacing it yet. ANYTHING would cost me more per month.
For me, the bottom line is total operation cost. I've got a wife and two children. Every penny saved benefits my family. (I shy away from 'luxury' items -- particularly cars).
First, where I live (CA), houses in my area are running closer to $500k on AVERAGE statewide. The base yearly income in my area to afford an AVERAGE home is nearly $100k/year. Yes, in CA, $100k/year is BARELY middle class. According to you, they are RICH ($80k or above). Yet $80k/year in LA will get you not much better than a double-wide at the local trailer park -- UNLESS you already have huges gobs of EQUITY in a pre-existing home. I don't.
Second, I personally drive an '88 toyota pickup (a 4 banger) with over 120k miles on it and some mild rust damage. I paid $3000 for it in 90 (got it used) and it averages close to 29mpg. Why the HELL would I pay over $500/mo PLUS insurance -- EXPENSIVE in my area -- about $200/mo for a newish car? My wife drives a smallish Nissan 4-door.
Third, we don't OWN a home. We've got $100k saved and STILL are having trouble trying to budget a house AND education costs for our kids WITHOUT sentancing both me and my wife to full time employment.
Fourth, from age 19-21, I was homeless. Work in a soup kitchin? I ate in one when I could. I spent my first year in college (community college) living out of a backpack, taking "baths" in public restrooms and 2 or 3 times a week getting a $15/night hotel room in north hollywood.
Yes, I'm doing "good" now. Not "great". Good. La-la land? Spoon fed? What gaul. I've worked my ass off and you dare assume I'm "out of touch"? Stop whining, stop living off of society for a while and WORK.
Your cocky and snide remarks suggest you are the one who lacks any reasonable understanding of the REAL WORLD.
It's fairly simple, and to help you overcome your limitations, I'll use small words:
If you force labor to cost more near you, those who need labor will get labor cheaper away from you.
Now, back to big-boy talk:
THAT is the bastard son of globalization. The 1000 lbs gorrilla in the room NOBODY wants to talk about.
The only way to offset these artificial gaps in the cost of labor is to (A) remove the constraints on local labor or (B) add the same constraints on exported labor. Personally, I like (B).
The topic was discussing outsourcing of jobs and blaming it on CEOs. It's obviously not *THEIR* fault. We've paved a road for them, then bitch when they drive down the road.