... make it seem as if atheism is supported by science.
Atheism does not require support. It is *absence* of religion, not a different kind of religion. That's the definition of the word. Religion has no scientific basis, so someone who fully embraces science is not religious, which is what is called atheism.
I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine whether an average politician being motivated by their own interests is the better bet.
It's possible to be skeptical of a politician's motive without accusing him of crimes and infidelity to his wife. If you want patterns, the story of politicians reflects the general population: the majority are law abiding and faithful to their spouses. Neither patterns or evidence support the (tongue in cheek) claims of the original poster.
What motivates me in this thread is avoiding the destructive, lazy and incorrect "government is populated exclusively by immoral criminal scum" cop out. It fixes nothing, and guarantees those who actually attempt to *do* something useful will be beaten down along with real sociopaths. This is a restatement of another fine saying: don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
You missed my point. I restated the golden rule: treat others as you would have them treat you. It's not about getting something out of it (preferential treatment by the government), it's about doing the right thing.
He'll take a nice long vacation in the Bahamas with his secretary and never press the issue again.
You accuse someone you most likely know little about of committing future crimes and cheating on his wife of 30 years with no evidence whatsoever. If you would not want the government to do the same to you, maybe you could find it in your character to walk back those accusations.
You forgot the required step 1: be born to wealth and privilege. Of course the "socialists" who don't believe the aristocracy is entitled to own everything will whine about how unfair that is.
According to the article, the streaming is just a rebranding of their existing video on demand service, which the last time I looked had an extremely narrow list of recent movies available for $7.99 per viewing. (I am a current Dish subscriber)
That can't be right. Who would pay an extra $10/month to pay the same per view charge they currently pay for the same content? It can't be all you can view streaming like netflix, because that would kill their existing VOD service profits. I guess the article is crap and we need to wait until the official announcement to get the facts.
It takes more than half an hour to prepare before it can drive, requires watering every 20 miles, and has a top speed of 37mph. That sounds like most of the crap American cars from the 70s I drove. A funny video they could make would have it cut off by Mr. Bean in his British Leyland Mini 1000.
If a person may makes enough to afford food or college, but not both, they would not qualify for food stamps. Starving is not a choice. Food stamps are also under attack from republicans, such as Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC) who is pushing cuts to the program.
As for Pell Grants, they help but don't pay for all expenses. They are also under attack from republicans, such as house budget chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) who is pushing cuts to the program.
You are dead on right. In Texas, the legislature has been eating away at state support for higher education after eliminating caps on state university tuition. The legislature said with a straight face that this would not increase tuition, but it doubled over the last decade. The Texas GOP views higher education as "liberal brainwashing", so I expect the GOP controlled government to continue down this path.
I guess people will pay just about anything for TV.
This is the crucial issue. If true, then Netflix will morph into an inconvenient service costing as much as cable/satellite. If false, then Netflix will go broke and disappear as they try to morph into an inconvenient service costing as much as cable/satellite.
Netflix streaming originally provided good value for the customer, and content providers and Netflix both made money. This was popular with customers. Netflix responds by destroying value as quick as possible to try and make more money. This is not popular with customers. How will it end?
I pay about $8/month for renting a max of 1 DVD, and I get about 2 DVDs by mail each week.
Way back when I had the 1 DVD option, I was lucky to get one disc per week. To get 2 per week, you would need to watch and mail it the day you receive it and hope the USPS is functioning perfectly. 25% were unplayably damaged. Realistically the average person can get 3 playable discs per month if you keep your queue full of unpopular choices that are not back ordered and watch the disc soon after receiving it.
...some bright spark goes "Let's double it agaiiiinnnn!:D"
You won't be laughing when they introduce Office NBR (Nothing But Ribbon) which has optimized the document portion of the interface away to avoid distraction from the hypnotic, all consuming awesomeness of The Ribbon (blessed be its name).
Slashdot Mirror
... make it seem as if atheism is supported by science.
Atheism does not require support. It is *absence* of religion, not a different kind of religion. That's the definition of the word. Religion has no scientific basis, so someone who fully embraces science is not religious, which is what is called atheism.
I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine whether an average politician being motivated by their own interests is the better bet.
It's possible to be skeptical of a politician's motive without accusing him of crimes and infidelity to his wife. If you want patterns, the story of politicians reflects the general population: the majority are law abiding and faithful to their spouses. Neither patterns or evidence support the (tongue in cheek) claims of the original poster.
What motivates me in this thread is avoiding the destructive, lazy and incorrect "government is populated exclusively by immoral criminal scum" cop out. It fixes nothing, and guarantees those who actually attempt to *do* something useful will be beaten down along with real sociopaths. This is a restatement of another fine saying: don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I don't know what font they used to print those scrolls, but it's so distorted it doesn't even look like English.
You missed my point. I restated the golden rule: treat others as you would have them treat you. It's not about getting something out of it (preferential treatment by the government), it's about doing the right thing.
He'll take a nice long vacation in the Bahamas with his secretary and never press the issue again.
You accuse someone you most likely know little about of committing future crimes and cheating on his wife of 30 years with no evidence whatsoever. If you would not want the government to do the same to you, maybe you could find it in your character to walk back those accusations.
...handled with all things soft and heralded with golden trumpets when they enter
Damn, they even have better bathrooms than working people!
In today's US, Gekko would be painted a lefty socialist by the GOP.
Save up for your Stanford MBA
You forgot the required step 1: be born to wealth and privilege. Of course the "socialists" who don't believe the aristocracy is entitled to own everything will whine about how unfair that is.
And then there are still people claiming Moore's law is dead
Moore's Law: "I don't want to go on the cart."
...without imposing cultural imperialism.
Great Britain increased Australian diversification through an extended cultural outreach program headed by their best and brightest.
According to the article, the streaming is just a rebranding of their existing video on demand service, which the last time I looked had an extremely narrow list of recent movies available for $7.99 per viewing. (I am a current Dish subscriber)
That can't be right. Who would pay an extra $10/month to pay the same per view charge they currently pay for the same content? It can't be all you can view streaming like netflix, because that would kill their existing VOD service profits. I guess the article is crap and we need to wait until the official announcement to get the facts.
It takes more than half an hour to prepare before it can drive, requires watering every 20 miles, and has a top speed of 37mph. That sounds like most of the crap American cars from the 70s I drove. A funny video they could make would have it cut off by Mr. Bean in his British Leyland Mini 1000.
...at the Robot Arms Apartments, you optimal trajectory to high-rise comfort.
This is what food stamps and Pell grants are for.
If a person may makes enough to afford food or college, but not both, they would not qualify for food stamps. Starving is not a choice. Food stamps are also under attack from republicans, such as Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC) who is pushing cuts to the program.
As for Pell Grants, they help but don't pay for all expenses. They are also under attack from republicans, such as house budget chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) who is pushing cuts to the program.
You are dead on right. In Texas, the legislature has been eating away at state support for higher education after eliminating caps on state university tuition. The legislature said with a straight face that this would not increase tuition, but it doubled over the last decade. The Texas GOP views higher education as "liberal brainwashing", so I expect the GOP controlled government to continue down this path.
Mentioning Meg Whitman is offtopic in a discussion about Meg Whitman? Classic mods on crack.
They could film these people eating live babies...
Give it to us raw and w-r-r-riggling... Gollum, CEO
Dumbass.
I was thinking he was a smartass. We should compromise and just call him an ass.
Wow, Comcast is a generous, community oriented company that just wants to help people. I feel all warm and fuzzy.
A lot of the major "players" helped make the "game" the nightmare of litigation and stifled innovation that it is today.
I guess people will pay just about anything for TV.
This is the crucial issue. If true, then Netflix will morph into an inconvenient service costing as much as cable/satellite. If false, then Netflix will go broke and disappear as they try to morph into an inconvenient service costing as much as cable/satellite.
Netflix streaming originally provided good value for the customer, and content providers and Netflix both made money. This was popular with customers. Netflix responds by destroying value as quick as possible to try and make more money. This is not popular with customers. How will it end?
I pay about $8/month for renting a max of 1 DVD, and I get about 2 DVDs by mail each week.
Way back when I had the 1 DVD option, I was lucky to get one disc per week. To get 2 per week, you would need to watch and mail it the day you receive it and hope the USPS is functioning perfectly. 25% were unplayably damaged. Realistically the average person can get 3 playable discs per month if you keep your queue full of unpopular choices that are not back ordered and watch the disc soon after receiving it.
They could chose the name Q*bert and have customers choose discs on a pyramid of cubes. It would make as much sense.
What about Texas? Come for the drought and wildfires, stay for the Tea Party madness.
...some bright spark goes "Let's double it agaiiiinnnn! :D"
You won't be laughing when they introduce Office NBR (Nothing But Ribbon) which has optimized the document portion of the interface away to avoid distraction from the hypnotic, all consuming awesomeness of The Ribbon (blessed be its name).