You don't have to tell me. Clearly absolutely everything is "critical". The internet, and possibly even life itself, will cease to exist if there's even 1 penny less in funding for any area of research.
But the backhoe operator is paid a lot more than the shovel operator. Because automation boosted his productivity by 50-100x.
I don't think drones can boost package delivery productivity enough to even pay for the drone itself -- unless the people delivering the packages are artificially overpaid by 5-10x already.
How much to you think it costs to employ a rural delivery driver? How many packages to you think rural people receive? (Exclude heavy or bulky packages, anything delivered in bad weather, anything that requires a signature, etc.) How much do you think autonomous flying drones (big enough to carry a substantial package) cost?
Think about it. How long will it take the drone to pay for itself?
Bush was governor of one of the the largest states. Governors balance budgets and oversee the government of their states. But I'm not for Bush. We've had too many Bushs and Clintons already. Scott Walker is clearly better than Bush. Even Chris Christie is better.
Rand Paul is leading on getting rid of mandatory prison sentences. He crafted a balanced budget plan a couple years ago. He's a clear leader. But he has a similar accomplishment issue to Hillary.
Unlike Rand Paul, Hillary has had many many years to accomplish something important in several different roles.
It's because neither one of them has much of a resume. What else is there to say about Hillary?
What else was there to say about Obama? He was running as the first black President. No one was going to say he isn't black.
Maybe we can choose a President based on something more substantial this time. If we do it will be really hard for Hillary to win because she has no prominent achievements.
How about the fact that she was in charge when a U.S. Ambassador was killed for the fist time in 30 years? How about the fact that she has zero accomplishments as Secretary of State? (Feel free to refute this by listing her accomplishments.) How about the fact that she has zero important accomplishments as Senator? How about the fact that she was put in charge of health care as First Lady and accomplished nothing?
If you're weighing her pros and cons, what are the pros?
Which Republican candidate(s) do you disagree with? On what issue? Why? What is the specific bad thing that will happen if that candidate gets elected instead of Hillary?
Put some thought into it if you haven't already. Let's at least try to choose a President based on thought and reasoning this time.
I'm against some of the Republican candidates. Jeb Bush especially, because we have had enough Bushes and Clintons and there are at least 3 or 4 better choices.
I don't see anyone arguing for that. I generally see arguments for whose choices should be imposed on everyone, not arguments against imposing one person's choices on others.
As for a well balanced social contract, generally I see people who demand things be balanced in their favor -- even if (or especially if) they contribute little or nothing to society.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it's "critical".
You don't have to tell me. Clearly absolutely everything is "critical". The internet, and possibly even life itself, will cease to exist if there's even 1 penny less in funding for any area of research.
Without funding, how would we know that climate change causes truffle shortages and violence in Darfur ?
because every area facing cuts is always "critical".
And it's impossible for anyone to make software easy to use without government money to run a study.
The cure for a cold is to wait 2 weeks.
I'm the guy arguing that employing people for package delivery is more economical that employing robots.
But the backhoe operator is paid a lot more than the shovel operator. Because automation boosted his productivity by 50-100x.
I don't think drones can boost package delivery productivity enough to even pay for the drone itself -- unless the people delivering the packages are artificially overpaid by 5-10x already.
How much to you think it costs to employ a rural delivery driver? How many packages to you think rural people receive? (Exclude heavy or bulky packages, anything delivered in bad weather, anything that requires a signature, etc.) How much do you think autonomous flying drones (big enough to carry a substantial package) cost?
Think about it. How long will it take the drone to pay for itself?
Probably need three, maybe four delivery guys to service the greater Manhattan area.
Because the drones will enter office buildings and deliver packages door-to-door and collect signatures?
Only if postal workers are overpaid relative to the value of their skills.
It's not news.
Why won't this useless search engine tell me the best place to ford the thunderbird river?
Equal to what? Why should it be equal? A company like Yahoo would be very happy to have a search that was half as profitable as Google's.
They could sell ads without tracking people.
Understood. No human empathy for wrong gender, wrong race. Thanks for making it so clear what kind of person you are.
No one should vote for me for President either.
Bush was governor of one of the the largest states. Governors balance budgets and oversee the government of their states. But I'm not for Bush. We've had too many Bushs and Clintons already. Scott Walker is clearly better than Bush. Even Chris Christie is better.
Rand Paul is leading on getting rid of mandatory prison sentences. He crafted a balanced budget plan a couple years ago. He's a clear leader. But he has a similar accomplishment issue to Hillary.
Unlike Rand Paul, Hillary has had many many years to accomplish something important in several different roles.
Certain people get a pass. That's the real explanation. That's why it doesn't matter in Hillary's case.
When all your eggs are in one basket, you protect the basket, regardless of how many monsters are hiding there behind the eggs.
Government control of health care is the first thing that comes to mind.
It's because neither one of them has much of a resume. What else is there to say about Hillary?
What else was there to say about Obama? He was running as the first black President. No one was going to say he isn't black.
Maybe we can choose a President based on something more substantial this time. If we do it will be really hard for Hillary to win because she has no prominent achievements.
Not really much of a list. It's not exactly zero accomplishments, but there's nothing prominent. What's the headliner? Funds for the WTC site?
We will be hearing she has no meaningful accomplishments a lot. This is a poor response.
Number of dead Ambassadors: 1 -- Number of accomplishments in public life: 0
...but I hate the dishonesty of the jackoffs on the Right even more
Why should non-haters vote for her?
Some people can say they have accomplishments to balance out thier mistakes. What are Hillary's accomplishments?
How about the fact that she was in charge when a U.S. Ambassador was killed for the fist time in 30 years?
How about the fact that she has zero accomplishments as Secretary of State? (Feel free to refute this by listing her accomplishments.)
How about the fact that she has zero important accomplishments as Senator?
How about the fact that she was put in charge of health care as First Lady and accomplished nothing?
If you're weighing her pros and cons, what are the pros?
Which Republican candidate(s) do you disagree with? On what issue? Why? What is the specific bad thing that will happen if that candidate gets elected instead of Hillary?
Put some thought into it if you haven't already. Let's at least try to choose a President based on thought and reasoning this time.
I'm against some of the Republican candidates. Jeb Bush especially, because we have had enough Bushes and Clintons and there are at least 3 or 4 better choices.
I don't see anyone arguing for that. I generally see arguments for whose choices should be imposed on everyone, not arguments against imposing one person's choices on others.
As for a well balanced social contract, generally I see people who demand things be balanced in their favor -- even if (or especially if) they contribute little or nothing to society.