Then people will get exactly as much end of life care as they can afford and no more.
One of the most stupidly cruel and inhuman sentences I've ever read.
Which, in the end, is how it should have been done from the beginning.
Which was how it was done in the beginning, you ignorant libertarian fundamentalist. And the sight of the old and the poor dying in the streets was exactly the reason that most civilized countries adopted social systems to treat them.
Laser eye surgery has been getting cheaper over the years. Anything covered by Medicare or private health insurance has been getting more expensive.
Every technology and drug has got cheaper over the years. The scope and cost of newer technologies and drugs has gone up, irrespective of how it's paid for.
Probability of visiting a hospital in the next year P
P = R
Where R = 1 if
- you ride a motorbike - you're one of (bullfighter, boxer, lumberjack, cheerleader) - you consume more than 30 hamburgers per week - you consume more than 1 bottle of whiskey a day or equivalent
Assuming we're not talking about assasination, the way to "eliminate competitors" in a free market is to have a better product.
How sweet. Meanwhile, back in the real world competitors are eliminated by buying them out, colluding with some to eliminate others, using predatory pricing, leveraging a dominant position in a different market, infriging on their copyrights or patents, misleading advertizing...
Wow, almost don't know where to start with all this meaningless character assassination, righteous pontification and vague generalization here. But one statement really caught my eye;
That's exactly where this is leading, and what it results in is an environment where closed and repressive societies have an advantage in the information realm over open and democratic societies.
This is almost exactly the opposite of reality - open and democratic societies have an advantage exactly because there is more information available - even the stuff the government doesn't want you to know about.
It's exactly this ambiguity in the language that's being exploited here - the banners read 'America is a Christian Nation!', but when this statement is challenged the response is 'but what that means is that most americans are Christian!' Really, it's the same playing with the definition of words that gives us the 'but evolution is only a theory' argument, the kind of dishonest sophistry that shouldn't fool a twelve year old but seems to confuse way too many americans.
Try this example - more than 3/4 of the US is white. The vast majority of US presidents have been white and the majority of the Supreme Court and both houses of Congress are white. So would you be comfortable with the US being described as a 'white nation' or as 'a country governed by whites'?
Where on earth do you think that money comes from? How much do you think your stocks will be worth if the workers in those companies are sick or can't get to their offices because the roads are in disrepair and the police can't protect them from robbers? How long do you think your land will stay yours when the mob come to take it from you? And just how much do you think your nice pile of shiny dollar bills wil be worth if you don't have a strong economy and government - paid for by taxes - to back it up? So yeh, you might never meet a policeman in your life, your mansion might be totally self sufficient and you might travel around in your own private helicopter, but the richer you are the more you've benefitted from the society that tax has paid for and the more you have to lose if you try to weasel your way out of paying some back.
Creepy? Really? What exactly is 'creepy' about it? Unless you mean 'likely to make a large section of the population feel uneasy because they've been cowed into a pathetic state of guilt and self-censorship in the face of a narrow-minded and hypocritical moral hysteria of a small minority'. Yeh you're right, that is creepy.
Underage sex photos should be restricted (because someone was raped),
It's this kind of inflexible logic that leads to situations where if 15 year old girl sends sex photos to her 16 year old boyfriend, they run the risk of being charged and prosecuted, him as a child molester and her as a child pornographer! Two lives potentially destroyed because 'someone must have been raped'. The only one doing the raping here is the state.
One reason is that as a method of assassination drones are hugely indiscriminate, averaging about 50 non-combatant casualties for each targeted individual. This number of civilian deaths raises all kinds of legal, ethical and tactical questions.
It's worth remembering that all the humanist values that you hold dear... the rights of man, civil liberty, universal suffrage, the civil rights movement... were first nurtured in churches, at a time when these views were very unpopular.
It's also worth remembering that any time churches have been in a positions of real power, power to change and order society, they have universally repressed these things, often with extreme violence.
Could someone offer a meaningful translation to LOC's per disc please?
Why some parts of the world insist on clinging to such arcane and antiquated units as LOC's when most of the rest of the world has moved on to the metric LOTR, I'll never understand.
Well I guess the Mono chaps can breathe easy then. Microsoft may be putting a gun to their heads but they would never, ever pull the trigger. No, really, cross their hearts.
And what if one of those nations has some really oppressive law, like, say making it a criminal offence to play DVD's on.. oh, hang on.
Don't want to start a US v. Europe thing here, let's just say that the flow of stupid laws is likely to be two-way.
Tom
Slashdot Mirror
the financial crimes that were committed stemmed from behavior that was initially within the law before greed took over.
And rape stems from behaviour that is initially within the law before lust takes over.
Then people will get exactly as much end of life care as they can afford and no more.
One of the most stupidly cruel and inhuman sentences I've ever read.
Which, in the end, is how it should have been done from the beginning.
Which was how it was done in the beginning, you ignorant libertarian fundamentalist. And the sight of the old and the poor dying in the streets was exactly the reason that most civilized countries adopted social systems to treat them.
Laser eye surgery has been getting cheaper over the years. Anything covered by Medicare or private health insurance has been getting more expensive.
Every technology and drug has got cheaper over the years. The scope and cost of newer technologies and drugs has gone up, irrespective of how it's paid for.
Probability of visiting a hospital in the next year P
P = R
Where R = 1 if
- you ride a motorbike
- you're one of (bullfighter, boxer, lumberjack, cheerleader)
- you consume more than 30 hamburgers per week
- you consume more than 1 bottle of whiskey a day or equivalent
Now where's my 3 million?
...and indications that the FBI may have committed upwards of 40,000 possible crimes in the 9 years since 9/11.
There, fixed that for you.
Assuming we're not talking about assasination, the way to "eliminate competitors" in a free market is to have a better product.
How sweet. Meanwhile, back in the real world competitors are eliminated by buying them out, colluding with some to eliminate others, using predatory pricing, leveraging a dominant position in a different market, infriging on their copyrights or patents, misleading advertizing ...
How would less regulation help that?
Wow, almost don't know where to start with all this meaningless character assassination, righteous pontification and vague generalization here. But one statement really caught my eye;
That's exactly where this is leading, and what it results in is an environment where closed and repressive societies have an advantage in the information realm over open and democratic societies.
This is almost exactly the opposite of reality - open and democratic societies have an advantage exactly because there is more information available - even the stuff the government doesn't want you to know about.
and frankly I wonder why anyone would be opposed to spying if we are at war already. It might end the war earlier and save lives on both sides.
...if we're on the winning side.
Right, because anyone who works hard enough can have their own yacht. Go peddle your naive american dream elsewhere.
Leaving aside the stupidity of the "yeh, but they're worse" argument, you win the 'whoosh' prize for not knowing it's a quote from the movie Sneakers.
It's exactly this ambiguity in the language that's being exploited here - the banners read 'America is a Christian Nation!', but when this statement is challenged the response is 'but what that means is that most americans are Christian!'
Really, it's the same playing with the definition of words that gives us the 'but evolution is only a theory' argument, the kind of dishonest sophistry that shouldn't fool a twelve year old but seems to confuse way too many americans.
Try this example - more than 3/4 of the US is white. The vast majority of US presidents have been white and the majority of the Supreme Court and both houses of Congress are white. So would you be comfortable with the US being described as a 'white nation' or as 'a country governed by whites'?
Where on earth do you think that money comes from?
How much do you think your stocks will be worth if the workers in those companies are sick or can't get to their offices because the roads are in disrepair and the police can't protect them from robbers? How long do you think your land will stay yours when the mob come to take it from you? And just how much do you think your nice pile of shiny dollar bills wil be worth if you don't have a strong economy and government - paid for by taxes - to back it up?
So yeh, you might never meet a policeman in your life, your mansion might be totally self sufficient and you might travel around in your own private helicopter, but the richer you are the more you've benefitted from the society that tax has paid for and the more you have to lose if you try to weasel your way out of paying some back.
Creepy? Really? What exactly is 'creepy' about it?
Unless you mean 'likely to make a large section of the population feel uneasy because they've been cowed into a pathetic state of guilt and self-censorship in the face of a narrow-minded and hypocritical moral hysteria of a small minority'. Yeh you're right, that is creepy.
Underage sex photos should be restricted (because someone was raped),
It's this kind of inflexible logic that leads to situations where if 15 year old girl sends sex photos to her 16 year old boyfriend, they run the risk of being charged and prosecuted, him as a child molester and her as a child pornographer! Two lives potentially destroyed because 'someone must have been raped'. The only one doing the raping here is the state.
One reason is that as a method of assassination drones are hugely indiscriminate, averaging about 50 non-combatant casualties for each targeted individual. This number of civilian deaths raises all kinds of legal, ethical and tactical questions.
It's worth remembering that all the humanist values that you hold dear... the rights of man, civil liberty, universal suffrage, the civil rights movement... were first nurtured in churches, at a time when these views were very unpopular.
It's also worth remembering that any time churches have been in a positions of real power, power to change and order society, they have universally repressed these things, often with extreme violence.
You're not looking hard enough. Wikipedia has also been available in Tomeraider format for a while now.
Why some parts of the world insist on clinging to such arcane and antiquated units as LOC's when most of the rest of the world has moved on to the metric LOTR, I'll never understand.
That's 1.5 LOTR's to you, sir.
Well I guess the Mono chaps can breathe easy then. Microsoft may be putting a gun to their heads but they would never, ever pull the trigger. No, really, cross their hearts.
And what if one of those nations has some really oppressive law, like, say making it a criminal offence to play DVD's on.. oh, hang on. Don't want to start a US v. Europe thing here, let's just say that the flow of stupid laws is likely to be two-way. Tom
So exactly where do you go for insurance against getting screwed over by the insurance companies?