What we should be doing is revoking all welfare programs
No, just the ones that are hopelessly inefficient or are just for show, or create unequal burdens, or are based on treating the unfortunate with pity instead of dignity.
I must be missing something, because this is not anything new, except that technology enables the patient to have a little more information and perspective than before. Anyone given prescription medication always had possibility (actually the duty) to monitor their symptoms and responses, and to seek additional medical intervention if warranted. They may be worse off now because the Internet gives their doctor and pharmacist less of an obligation to provide them with sufficient information to monitor their condition between consultations.
There is additionally a completely different, and perhaps even worse, problem with ADA and similar legislation. Once society has gone through so much expense, inconvenience, and nuisance, private citizens are completely absolved from any moral duty to be charitable to the disabled. And since most of the measures ostensibly meant to help the disabled achieve independence and dignity are actually humiliating in-your-face political statements with little or no practical value (accessibility ramps being about the only significant counter-example, and then only sometimes), the disabled are worse off.
The catch is that you could imagine more or less plausible scenarios where such information would make a material difference. (In fact, television Hollywood movies do so frequently and they really do sound reasonable if you don't think too carefully.)
This means they can fool everyone who doesn't think and/or doesn't remember, which sadly is likely to be a majority.
I sometimes hear that people with disabilities are "just like everybody else". Which, of course, is true. That means that some of them are heroically overcoming adversity, but it also means some of them are self-absorbed jerks.
Everyone I've ever known that described a college degree as 'a piece of paper' was bitter about it it some way - either their family or personal situation had not allowed them to go, maybe they'd been denied a job opportunity without it, maybe they'd flunked out.
Or invested vast amounts of time, energy, and money, and all they got out of it was a piece of paper.
Slashdot Mirror
Well those particles have been keeping their secrets pretty close.
"They can snort black pepper. Do you ban black pepper?"
Oh, crap, you know they're going to try now...
Now that I think about it that sounds more like the NSA than Mr. Snowden.
I guess that means sanctions against members of Congress.
Acting like you care makes a difference.
Even when it's just acting, it sends the message that they at least thought about morale.
has stated numerous times over (even as recently as last week) that their policy is to annihilate a certain other country in the region
Check the translation. It's redrawing the map, which means the two-state solution.
What we should be doing is revoking all welfare programs
No, just the ones that are hopelessly inefficient or are just for show, or create unequal burdens, or are based on treating the unfortunate with pity instead of dignity.
I must be missing something, because this is not anything new, except that technology enables the patient to have a little more information and perspective than before. Anyone given prescription medication always had possibility (actually the duty) to monitor their symptoms and responses, and to seek additional medical intervention if warranted. They may be worse off now because the Internet gives their doctor and pharmacist less of an obligation to provide them with sufficient information to monitor their condition between consultations.
There is additionally a completely different, and perhaps even worse, problem with ADA and similar legislation. Once society has gone through so much expense, inconvenience, and nuisance, private citizens are completely absolved from any moral duty to be charitable to the disabled. And since most of the measures ostensibly meant to help the disabled achieve independence and dignity are actually humiliating in-your-face political statements with little or no practical value (accessibility ramps being about the only significant counter-example, and then only sometimes), the disabled are worse off.
The catch is that you could imagine more or less plausible scenarios where such information would make a material difference. (In fact, television Hollywood movies do so frequently and they really do sound reasonable if you don't think too carefully.)
This means they can fool everyone who doesn't think and/or doesn't remember, which sadly is likely to be a majority.
Humans are life.
I sometimes hear that people with disabilities are "just like everybody else". Which, of course, is true. That means that some of them are heroically overcoming adversity, but it also means some of them are self-absorbed jerks.
Naturally occurring hills cant be helped. An entry ramp can.
Wrong. Both are simply an issue of budget and geometry. But sometimes enough is enough.
NASA-ESA Project Will Shoot an Asteroid...
just to watch it die.
de facto right
Contradiction in terms.
He even claimed he was thrown clear because his wingman - an experienced combat pilot - struck his fighter because of distraction by one explosion.
STEM's big problem? No flying ponies.
Ironically a problem that only STEM can solve.
Your knowledge of the revolution and the governance of England is also rather lacking.
Bear in mind that England ceased to have a government in 1707.
Usually I believe the world can always use more humour.
But I think it's time to say, "less is more".
The emperor dis[s]olved the Senate before the battle of Yavin, my understanding is that the regional governors now have direct control.
Fine.
"Billions more are in mourning, while a number of powerful ex-senators have renewed calls to increase defense spending."
Then again, we don't know what solvent was used....
Only US-owned assets were destroyed. No big loss.
Journalism has really gone downhill.
Because the remaining 50% of the jobs are the skilled ones that demand a good education
...to get the interview because the competition is so fierce. Only rarely will the job itself require advanced education.
I meant to put Bell Canada and Rogers at the top of the list.
[Saddling] people with a lifetime of debt is not the answer.
It is if the question is "how to transfer wealth from the poor to the rich and have it technically not be illegal".
Everyone I've ever known that described a college degree as 'a piece of paper' was bitter about it it some way - either their family or personal situation had not allowed them to go, maybe they'd been denied a job opportunity without it, maybe they'd flunked out.
Or invested vast amounts of time, energy, and money, and all they got out of it was a piece of paper.