You'd be surprised by the large number of "younger, poorer, healthier people" that find their way to an emergency room simply because they can't afford a doctor.
If you "can't afford a doctor", you also can't afford to pay for a fancy "everything" health plan. Healthy young people need cheaper, catastrophic insurance plans that protect them from huge unexpected bills, not expensive benefit plans to pay for routine care. Insurance is for large unforeseen expenses, not routine bills.
Also while statistically younger people do not have chronic illness, they make up for it in emergency care resulting from accidents.
Not even close. The expenses for younger people are a tiny, tiny fraction of the total.
It's the overnight stay in the hospital from an emergency that bankrupts most young people. More so when combined with their inability to work and the lack of short term disability benefits.
That's what insurance is for. But governments mandate hundreds of benefits in health plans, so most of them don't qualify as insurance. They're just a wealth transfer to people who have lobbyists for their health problems.
I could also mention that in addition to accidents,
... which are rare, and therefore easy to get inexpensive insurance for...
younger people are prone to pregnancies,
...which is voluntary, and therefore not an insurable event. And which also does not happen to about 50% of the population, even though the government mandates their health benefit plans pay for it...
assaults,
... which are rare and insurable, like accidents...
Of course, the mandate is the keystone that pays for the rest of the parts people like.
By forcing predominantly younger, poorer, healthier people to overpay for health plans far beyond what they need, to subsidize plans for older, wealthier, sicker people -- and to provide special "free" benefits to politically powerful special interest groups.
And, therefore, using the taxing power, the US government has nearly unlimited power to compel you to act against your own interests. There's no escape. The taxing power is absolute.
No, what I get out of this announcement is an oil company is willing to plunk down coin to drill somewhere there is no chance Obama's regulators will ever allow actual production so they are betting on that not being a problem.
Because oil is useful? Also, because a couple of years after "the worst thing that ever happened anywhere, ever" there's very little evidence any oil was spilled in the Gulf of Mexico at all. Incidents without lasting harm are easy to forget or disregard, as they should be.
Why should we care? Do Farsi-speakers really need to jump on the victimization bandwagon? Is grievance politics really the most important thing in the world? Can't it be a simple mistake rather than a cause to rally Apple-haters and race-grievance-mongers and lawyers and every other agitator who gets a paycheck by trying to divide people against each other?
Where's this water going to come from? If you mean from the ocean, yes, as I mentioned, but it takes a long time to engineer it. Longer than the period of time it takes for a drought to strike.
The ocean or a pipeline.
as I mentioned, but it takes a long time to engineer it. Longer than the period of time it takes for a drought to strike.
It would have to be a 5 or 10-year-long drought. Conservation would stretch supplies a long time.
but here in San Diego people still have lawns and landscaping that gets watered every day.
Which is insane.
No it isn't. There's enough water to do it. People are willing to pay the extra $200-500 per year for the water. (Not me though.) If there was less water and it cost $2000-$5000, we'd have very few green lawns and landscaping.
Now consider that to achieve this, people in Colorado are being told they can't collect rainwater for their gardens. Prosecuted for doing so, even.
They shouldn't be. Such things are more about governments asserting their power than anything relating to water. Colorado citizens should fix their stupid laws instead of trying to burden everyone else with their laws' consequences.
And I'd also suggest a more thoughtful and less reactionary response. Just because you're sad about some story you heard once, doesn't mean it's true, doesn't mean it's a problem, doesn't mean it's your problem, and doesn't mean bystanders 1000 miles away need to be immediately forced to change their lives to "fix" it.
As long as there's enough water for frivolous aesthetics, your "future" is still unimaginably distant.
Exactly! It's a tragedy of the commons.
Buzzwords are fun. But no, it's not. It's simply the fact that there's enough water for the current population for the foreseeable future.
Yeah, everyone will abandon their homes and move away rather than spending a little time, effort, and money to engineer another water source.
I don't know what "point in the future" you are thinking about, but here in San Diego people still have lawns and landscaping that gets watered every day. As long as there's enough water for frivolous aesthetics, your "future" is still unimaginably distant. The biggest near-future expense for local water customers comes from bloated salaries and pensions for water district employees.
This is just complete nonsense. If you want a nice place to live, then keeping "lakes" from "catching on fire" (which apparently happens all the time in environmentalist doomsday fantasy worlds) is "cheaper" (or, more accurately, more valuable) than the alternative. On the other hand, if you're struggling to live at all, maybe you let the lakes take care of themselves.
"Cheaper" is always what we get. When wealth is abundant (and thus "cheaper"), we can afford environmental improvements. The more wealthy we are, the further we can afford to go toward a "clean" environment. Poor people struggle to eat, and exhaustion sends them to sleep at night before they have time to worry about marginal environmental improvements. A clean environment is a luxury good.
If you are "going to attempt to do what is right" for the environment, then congratulations on being wealthy. Apparently you've led an easy life, sheltered from hardship and difficulty. Good for you. I suggest you try to learn about others' lives and try to learn a little humility. If you do learn these things, your choices can be guided by understanding and wisdom rather than ignorance and self-righteousness.
Yeah, gas prices peak in the late spring around Memorial Day. Refineries have less capacity in May as they transition from making home heating oil in the winter to summer gasoline blends. Last winter was one of the mildest on record, so less home heating oil was needed. Also, cheap natural gas and popular migration to warmer areas of the country are leading to less use of home heating oil in the northeast. So refineries were able to stop making home heating oil earlier than normal this year. The gas price spike happened earlier in the year than normal, at a time that coincided with Iranian sabre-rattling about closing down the Persian Gulf. Now, as TFA mentions, weak economic growth worldwide is holding down demand, and prices are dropping.
Why does anyone listen to stupid news reports predicting future gas prices anyway? You only get on the news by predicting extreme change or extreme hardship. When you say it will be about the same as always, there's (magically) no air time available for that report. This goes for all predictions that masquerade as news. Predictions are not news, and no one know the future. Stop listening to them.
...That doesn't mean he contracted "the Black Death". The Black Death was almost certainly caused by a variant of Y. pestis which is no longer around...
This is obviously just a misunderstanding. Once Newegg understands the hardware is genuinely defective (assuming it actually is), they'll take the machine back.
So what's with the pretense that this is some sort of policy? Are you guys really that desperate to proclaim your victim status?
Would you be comfortable working on risk assessment software for oil companies that incorporates the likelihood of resistance from the local population?
How is fiddling with computers "ethical" when there are people -- and apparently much more important than people, animals -- in the world who don't live perfect, utopian lives? Shouldn't you be out growing organic crops to feed the homeless? Or to feed to rats and bunnies?
You can't hug a child with Euclidean arms! (But you can let a child die of a preventable disease because there's no way to test the vaccine.)
If you're looking for a job, try searching Indeed.com for "CUDA" AND "Must be extremely full of himself".
Are they "greedy" "leeches" if they only pay it back 10 times over instead of 12? How much is enough?
And who says "universal" so-called "free education" is ideal anyway? If parents had to try to get their kids an education, they would value it more. If parents had to try, they'd find a way to get their kids to behave. And then all the other kids could learn too.
I don't know about Finland, but in US schools one of the biggest problems is that all the kids who want to learn are locked up together with apathetic or disruptive or violent kids. So the kids who want to learn lose much of their opportunity to learn. And the ones who don't want to learn don't get educated anyway.
By wanting it to be "universal", we lose much of the "education". And no one who earns a paycheck thinks education is "free".
Except, now that they've already paid Finland back many, many times over, they're "greedy" and "leeches" for wanting to use legal means to start to pay less. So it's never enough, no matter how much they pay. They're still evil for not paying more.
BTW: I can't get that deal where I pay taxes and get decent infrastructure, education, and healthcare in return. My taxes all go to freeloaders, overpaid government workers and pensioners, lawyers, and corruption. Infrastructure crumbles, schools cheat children out of an education, and my healthcare is not included. I only have "smaller" government or "corrupt, useless, giveaway" government to choose from. There's no "efficient, you get what you pay for" government in California. So "smaller" is the only rational choice for anyone not on the payroll.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. It's like saying you can "vote" not to be forced to eat turds. If you lose, you eat turds.
It's supposed to be great, because if you win ... you can force the losers to eat turds. Isn't that great?
Some of us were told the US was a free country though. Guess not.
You'd be surprised by the large number of "younger, poorer, healthier people" that find their way to an emergency room simply because they can't afford a doctor.
If you "can't afford a doctor", you also can't afford to pay for a fancy "everything" health plan. Healthy young people need cheaper, catastrophic insurance plans that protect them from huge unexpected bills, not expensive benefit plans to pay for routine care. Insurance is for large unforeseen expenses, not routine bills.
Also while statistically younger people do not have chronic illness, they make up for it in emergency care resulting from accidents.
Not even close. The expenses for younger people are a tiny, tiny fraction of the total.
It's the overnight stay in the hospital from an emergency that bankrupts most young people. More so when combined with their inability to work and the lack of short term disability benefits.
That's what insurance is for. But governments mandate hundreds of benefits in health plans, so most of them don't qualify as insurance. They're just a wealth transfer to people who have lobbyists for their health problems.
I could also mention that in addition to accidents,
... which are rare, and therefore easy to get inexpensive insurance for ...
younger people are prone to pregnancies,
...which is voluntary, and therefore not an insurable event. And which also does not happen to about 50% of the population, even though the government mandates their health benefit plans pay for it ...
assaults,
... which are rare and insurable, like accidents ...
and sickness due to acute substance abuse.
...which is also voluntary, like pregnancy.
So it's only absolute power to oppress a minority.
Of course, the mandate is the keystone that pays for the rest of the parts people like.
By forcing predominantly younger, poorer, healthier people to overpay for health plans far beyond what they need, to subsidize plans for older, wealthier, sicker people -- and to provide special "free" benefits to politically powerful special interest groups.
And, therefore, using the taxing power, the US government has nearly unlimited power to compel you to act against your own interests. There's no escape. The taxing power is absolute.
No, what I get out of this announcement is an oil company is willing to plunk down coin to drill somewhere there is no chance Obama's regulators will ever allow actual production so they are betting on that not being a problem.
206 days left
Because oil is useful? Also, because a couple of years after "the worst thing that ever happened anywhere, ever" there's very little evidence any oil was spilled in the Gulf of Mexico at all. Incidents without lasting harm are easy to forget or disregard, as they should be.
But sometimes it isn't.
Whether or not he sells someone an iPad is his business. How is it yours?
It's disheartening that a person ... can make a mistake. Oh, wait, no it's not. It's ordinary.
No wait. I guess I'm just bored.
Why should we care? Do Farsi-speakers really need to jump on the victimization bandwagon? Is grievance politics really the most important thing in the world? Can't it be a simple mistake rather than a cause to rally Apple-haters and race-grievance-mongers and lawyers and every other agitator who gets a paycheck by trying to divide people against each other?
Can we all just mind our own business for once?
Where's this water going to come from? If you mean from the ocean, yes, as I mentioned, but it takes a long time to engineer it. Longer than the period of time it takes for a drought to strike.
The ocean or a pipeline.
as I mentioned, but it takes a long time to engineer it. Longer than the period of time it takes for a drought to strike.
It would have to be a 5 or 10-year-long drought. Conservation would stretch supplies a long time.
but here in San Diego people still have lawns and landscaping that gets watered every day.
Which is insane.
No it isn't. There's enough water to do it. People are willing to pay the extra $200-500 per year for the water. (Not me though.) If there was less water and it cost $2000-$5000, we'd have very few green lawns and landscaping.
Now consider that to achieve this, people in Colorado are being told they can't collect rainwater for their gardens. Prosecuted for doing so, even.
They shouldn't be. Such things are more about governments asserting their power than anything relating to water. Colorado citizens should fix their stupid laws instead of trying to burden everyone else with their laws' consequences.
And I'd also suggest a more thoughtful and less reactionary response. Just because you're sad about some story you heard once, doesn't mean it's true, doesn't mean it's a problem, doesn't mean it's your problem, and doesn't mean bystanders 1000 miles away need to be immediately forced to change their lives to "fix" it.
As long as there's enough water for frivolous aesthetics, your "future" is still unimaginably distant.
Exactly! It's a tragedy of the commons.
Buzzwords are fun. But no, it's not. It's simply the fact that there's enough water for the current population for the foreseeable future.
Who knew Alan Turing was a vampire hunter?
Yeah, everyone will abandon their homes and move away rather than spending a little time, effort, and money to engineer another water source.
I don't know what "point in the future" you are thinking about, but here in San Diego people still have lawns and landscaping that gets watered every day. As long as there's enough water for frivolous aesthetics, your "future" is still unimaginably distant. The biggest near-future expense for local water customers comes from bloated salaries and pensions for water district employees.
This is just complete nonsense. If you want a nice place to live, then keeping "lakes" from "catching on fire" (which apparently happens all the time in environmentalist doomsday fantasy worlds) is "cheaper" (or, more accurately, more valuable) than the alternative. On the other hand, if you're struggling to live at all, maybe you let the lakes take care of themselves.
"Cheaper" is always what we get. When wealth is abundant (and thus "cheaper"), we can afford environmental improvements. The more wealthy we are, the further we can afford to go toward a "clean" environment. Poor people struggle to eat, and exhaustion sends them to sleep at night before they have time to worry about marginal environmental improvements. A clean environment is a luxury good.
If you are "going to attempt to do what is right" for the environment, then congratulations on being wealthy. Apparently you've led an easy life, sheltered from hardship and difficulty. Good for you. I suggest you try to learn about others' lives and try to learn a little humility. If you do learn these things, your choices can be guided by understanding and wisdom rather than ignorance and self-righteousness.
Yeah, gas prices peak in the late spring around Memorial Day. Refineries have less capacity in May as they transition from making home heating oil in the winter to summer gasoline blends. Last winter was one of the mildest on record, so less home heating oil was needed. Also, cheap natural gas and popular migration to warmer areas of the country are leading to less use of home heating oil in the northeast. So refineries were able to stop making home heating oil earlier than normal this year. The gas price spike happened earlier in the year than normal, at a time that coincided with Iranian sabre-rattling about closing down the Persian Gulf. Now, as TFA mentions, weak economic growth worldwide is holding down demand, and prices are dropping.
Why does anyone listen to stupid news reports predicting future gas prices anyway? You only get on the news by predicting extreme change or extreme hardship. When you say it will be about the same as always, there's (magically) no air time available for that report. This goes for all predictions that masquerade as news. Predictions are not news, and no one know the future. Stop listening to them.
...That doesn't mean he contracted "the Black Death". The Black Death was almost certainly caused by a variant of Y. pestis which is no longer around...
That's racist.
One claims he had a bad experience.
This is obviously just a misunderstanding. Once Newegg understands the hardware is genuinely defective (assuming it actually is), they'll take the machine back.
So what's with the pretense that this is some sort of policy? Are you guys really that desperate to proclaim your victim status?
Would you be comfortable working on risk assessment software for oil companies that incorporates the likelihood of resistance from the local population?
Sure. But that sounds boring.
Or on the guidance software of an ICBM?
Because an unguided ICBM is more ethical?
How is fiddling with computers "ethical" when there are people -- and apparently much more important than people, animals -- in the world who don't live perfect, utopian lives? Shouldn't you be out growing organic crops to feed the homeless? Or to feed to rats and bunnies?
You can't hug a child with Euclidean arms! (But you can let a child die of a preventable disease because there's no way to test the vaccine.)
If you're looking for a job, try searching Indeed.com for "CUDA" AND "Must be extremely full of himself".
Are they "greedy" "leeches" if they only pay it back 10 times over instead of 12? How much is enough?
And who says "universal" so-called "free education" is ideal anyway? If parents had to try to get their kids an education, they would value it more. If parents had to try, they'd find a way to get their kids to behave. And then all the other kids could learn too.
I don't know about Finland, but in US schools one of the biggest problems is that all the kids who want to learn are locked up together with apathetic or disruptive or violent kids. So the kids who want to learn lose much of their opportunity to learn. And the ones who don't want to learn don't get educated anyway.
By wanting it to be "universal", we lose much of the "education". And no one who earns a paycheck thinks education is "free".
Except, now that they've already paid Finland back many, many times over, they're "greedy" and "leeches" for wanting to use legal means to start to pay less. So it's never enough, no matter how much they pay. They're still evil for not paying more.
BTW: I can't get that deal where I pay taxes and get decent infrastructure, education, and healthcare in return. My taxes all go to freeloaders, overpaid government workers and pensioners, lawyers, and corruption. Infrastructure crumbles, schools cheat children out of an education, and my healthcare is not included. I only have "smaller" government or "corrupt, useless, giveaway" government to choose from. There's no "efficient, you get what you pay for" government in California. So "smaller" is the only rational choice for anyone not on the payroll.
Why should the Rovio founders and employees have to pay back those costs 20 or 50 or 100 times over? Why isn't is ever, ever enough?