Wait a second, I never made an argument, so everything after "by your argument" came out of your imagination.
But if I had made the argument you seem to think I did, then I would be right, and your comment would have no meaning. So if you want, I'll defend that position, because it is correct.
You didn't look hard enough. My household doesn't buy bread with more than a few ingredients, and I've never shopped in a grocery store where I couldn't find a loaf to buy.
But, yes, they put a lot of shit in a lot of breads.
"King George is quartering soldiers in my home during peacetime! Also, he's forcing me to have healthy habits and receive competent medical care! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!"
Have you considered the possibility that you don't, in fact, know what's good for you? In my experience, people who have never considered that possibility, are exactly the people who should.
If you are the smartest person who has ever lived, then you probably know what's best for you. If not, then you should be open to the idea that someone else might have some valid suggestions.
You don't pay for your own health care, because we Americans pay for it for you. Qatar's government is paid for by Qatar Petrol, a nationalized industry, which sucks cash out of the ground (figuratively). It's not the genius of your economy which provides you with 'free' health care; it is the genius of OUR economy, which produces so much that your little country gets to ride along on the coattails of our need for oil. Thank you for the oil; you're welcome for the health care.
I hope your country is socking some away for when the taps run dry. I'm from Alaska and it's been a problem there.
I didn't know you you had socialists in charge, though. That's interesting.
Jeez, really? How little did you think about it? It's a direct A->B conclusion. Emergency rooms which treat any ill person, are a public burden. All fifty states require emergency rooms to treat any ill person. A, therefore B. There's not even an in-between step.
No, he does not realize that, because he's not thinking about what he's saying. He's staked out a political position, and he's going to defend it forever, even though it is wrong. The wrongness of the position is irrelevant to his defense of it: it is his position, therefore he says whatever it takes to stave off cognitive dissonance.
Okay. So the education was funded by the tax, therefore by your argument the tax enabled the education which led to the reduction of smoking, therefore the tax led to the reduction of smoking. Thank you for admitting when you are wrong. It's rare to see in online forums, but you are a mature adult, willing to admit when you made an incorrect statement and have been corrected. Kudos to you.
"Have you ever had to stick at a crap job because you needed the money?"
Yes, for a couple weeks until I could find a new job. Also, I never accepted a job and then complained about the the exact, specific parameters of that job.
Shut down this thread, because drinkypoo has made the perfectly succinct summary of the entire situation.
I don't complain about being viewed by my employer as nothing more than a programmer.
Almost all the programmers I work with are married. I mean, let me count... 11 out of 13, and one of the other two is too young to be married. I don't have any statistics for this, but I'm pretty sure programmers do just fine attracting mates. I've never noticed any misogyny, all I've noticed is that women apparently don't want to do the difficult and tedious work of programming, in so large of numbers as men do.
"I feel terrible for the women as they could easily be in our industry if they wanted"
Well, no, not "easily". They would have to do the hard work of getting a degree and becoming competent in the craft. Although I've never done boothbabeing, I imagine the prerequisites are a lot easier for that job. Look good? Like to talk to people? Able to direct people toward more knowledgeable staff? That's about what it takes. It takes a lot more effort to become a programmer -- not a hell of a lot of effort, on the scale which goes up to becoming surgeons, but a lot more than becoming a standabout.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait a second, I never made an argument, so everything after "by your argument" came out of your imagination. But if I had made the argument you seem to think I did, then I would be right, and your comment would have no meaning. So if you want, I'll defend that position, because it is correct.
You didn't look hard enough. My household doesn't buy bread with more than a few ingredients, and I've never shopped in a grocery store where I couldn't find a loaf to buy. But, yes, they put a lot of shit in a lot of breads.
Here's one example; there are more if you care to try to educate yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_Wisconsin_milk_strike
LOL. Tyranny? Get some perspective, man.
"King George is quartering soldiers in my home during peacetime! Also, he's forcing me to have healthy habits and receive competent medical care! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!"
Have you considered the possibility that you don't, in fact, know what's good for you? In my experience, people who have never considered that possibility, are exactly the people who should. If you are the smartest person who has ever lived, then you probably know what's best for you. If not, then you should be open to the idea that someone else might have some valid suggestions.
You don't pay for your own health care, because we Americans pay for it for you. Qatar's government is paid for by Qatar Petrol, a nationalized industry, which sucks cash out of the ground (figuratively). It's not the genius of your economy which provides you with 'free' health care; it is the genius of OUR economy, which produces so much that your little country gets to ride along on the coattails of our need for oil. Thank you for the oil; you're welcome for the health care.
I hope your country is socking some away for when the taps run dry. I'm from Alaska and it's been a problem there.
I didn't know you you had socialists in charge, though. That's interesting.
Jeez, really? How little did you think about it? It's a direct A->B conclusion. Emergency rooms which treat any ill person, are a public burden. All fifty states require emergency rooms to treat any ill person. A, therefore B. There's not even an in-between step.
No, he does not realize that, because he's not thinking about what he's saying. He's staked out a political position, and he's going to defend it forever, even though it is wrong. The wrongness of the position is irrelevant to his defense of it: it is his position, therefore he says whatever it takes to stave off cognitive dissonance.
Why? I think we should do those things, because it makes the world better. What part of that do you disagree with, or not like?
Okay. So the education was funded by the tax, therefore by your argument the tax enabled the education which led to the reduction of smoking, therefore the tax led to the reduction of smoking. Thank you for admitting when you are wrong. It's rare to see in online forums, but you are a mature adult, willing to admit when you made an incorrect statement and have been corrected. Kudos to you.
"THIS kind of attitude is why many of us geeks can't get a date."
Before I spend time deconstructing that claim, I'd like to ask if you really believe it and want to defend it.
"Have you ever had to stick at a crap job because you needed the money?"
Yes, for a couple weeks until I could find a new job. Also, I never accepted a job and then complained about the the exact, specific parameters of that job.
Shut down this thread, because drinkypoo has made the perfectly succinct summary of the entire situation. I don't complain about being viewed by my employer as nothing more than a programmer.
Almost all the programmers I work with are married. I mean, let me count... 11 out of 13, and one of the other two is too young to be married. I don't have any statistics for this, but I'm pretty sure programmers do just fine attracting mates. I've never noticed any misogyny, all I've noticed is that women apparently don't want to do the difficult and tedious work of programming, in so large of numbers as men do.
PS not literally
"I feel terrible for the women as they could easily be in our industry if they wanted"
Well, no, not "easily". They would have to do the hard work of getting a degree and becoming competent in the craft. Although I've never done boothbabeing, I imagine the prerequisites are a lot easier for that job. Look good? Like to talk to people? Able to direct people toward more knowledgeable staff? That's about what it takes. It takes a lot more effort to become a programmer -- not a hell of a lot of effort, on the scale which goes up to becoming surgeons, but a lot more than becoming a standabout.
"Women refuse to work in the tech industry because of sexual harassment."
Are you sure about that? I always figured women refuse to work in the tech industry because they don't like doing the work.
"Computer and High-Tech fields lack women because the culture is viewed as being misogynistic."
Are you sure about that? Perhaps the culture is viewed as being misogynistic, because the field lacks women.
Essentially the product that they sell is their body. Guess what profession that reminds me of?
Blood donor?