Maybe colleges and universities have to take the HMO model and assume some of the risk. You know, make the loans to students themselves, and they don't have to pay it back if they flunk out or if they don't have decent income afterwards? There's a lot of BS going on on all sides; students just HAVE to have dorms that are like five star hotels etc. in some instances. Colleges that HAVE to have campuses that rival those of the vatican for cost and loveliness. And so on. "The college experience" - pay $200K for partying for four years. Me? I went to school at a community college for 2 years then at night for 8.5 dreary years. But I graduated debt free; you pay one way or you pay another, but I got an MS by time I was done.
Actually it more has to do with advertising campaigns of drug manufacturers who have created a need for products that are really quite evil for the most people who take them.
I agree with some of this. BUT, let's use an example.
You live in Omaha. You want yardwork done. Do you:
Hire a legal citizen and pay $35/hour or,
Hire an illegal alien and pay $10/hour.
It's easy to say 'corporations should pay higher wages!' but when faced with an immediate, individual choice, most people won't make choices that cost them more money.
You've forgotten the people of modest means who live below their means and invest their money wisely over 30 years. But wait, that goes against instant gratification so these people who denied themselves a bunch of things must have their wealth stolen, sorry, I mean they must 'share ' it.
Terribly sorry, old chap, but I do believe you are deranged. SOME wealthy steal their money - and some poor steal their money. Most folks, wealthy or not, DO earn it.
I had a solution: I stopped watching TV in the mid 1980s. Life much better. What I might want to see I CAN see on the internet. YES, I know about privacy issues there.
Unlikely. It could, but since we don't understand how human intelligence, including leaps of reason and intuition that can lead to incredible breakthroughs, I'm not too sure. Time will tell.
Of course we are. Unfortunately it's outliers - expensive early adopters - that make things better, and cheaper, for the masses once things are perfected. There is no good solution. I do have another prophecy though: Once artificial intelligence takes over in medicine, medical research will grind to a halt.
Actually, no, socialism means that industries and other means of production are owned by the state. The people get no say except (if they're lucky) a vote.
An awful lot of the recyclables in China were simply dumped in landfills. I recall a BBC story of a few years ago where reporters found the bank statements of a man in UK, and rang him to tell him where his trash was going.
The container ships were returning to China anyway and they simply made more money by importing trash and dumping it.
What both parties in the US espouse is a statist agenda, which is extremely similar to what is espoused in ALL European countries, from what I can see from North America.
And yet, a UK oncological nurse resorted to a gofundme to get cancer drugs that the NHS deemed "not cost effective."
Neither place nor system is perfect.
Too bad a Canadian already put links showing that Canada does.
The fact of the matter is...nations can do this. It's call 'protecting domestic industries.'
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe colleges and universities have to take the HMO model and assume some of the risk. You know, make the loans to students themselves, and they don't have to pay it back if they flunk out or if they don't have decent income afterwards? There's a lot of BS going on on all sides; students just HAVE to have dorms that are like five star hotels etc. in some instances. Colleges that HAVE to have campuses that rival those of the vatican for cost and loveliness. And so on. "The college experience" - pay $200K for partying for four years. Me? I went to school at a community college for 2 years then at night for 8.5 dreary years. But I graduated debt free; you pay one way or you pay another, but I got an MS by time I was done.
Actually it more has to do with advertising campaigns of drug manufacturers who have created a need for products that are really quite evil for the most people who take them.
I agree with some of this. BUT, let's use an example. You live in Omaha. You want yardwork done. Do you: Hire a legal citizen and pay $35/hour or, Hire an illegal alien and pay $10/hour. It's easy to say 'corporations should pay higher wages!' but when faced with an immediate, individual choice, most people won't make choices that cost them more money.
You've forgotten the people of modest means who live below their means and invest their money wisely over 30 years. But wait, that goes against instant gratification so these people who denied themselves a bunch of things must have their wealth stolen, sorry, I mean they must 'share ' it.
Terribly sorry, old chap, but I do believe you are deranged. SOME wealthy steal their money - and some poor steal their money. Most folks, wealthy or not, DO earn it.
Yes and I'm SURE that police abusing their authority NEVER happened in the USSR. (Eye Roll)
I had a solution: I stopped watching TV in the mid 1980s. Life much better. What I might want to see I CAN see on the internet. YES, I know about privacy issues there.
Well, one might argue my previous statement was correct, I suppose.
What? I do hope you don't live in the USA then.
Sure I think we're saying similar things.
Unlikely. It could, but since we don't understand how human intelligence, including leaps of reason and intuition that can lead to incredible breakthroughs, I'm not too sure. Time will tell.
Of course we are. Unfortunately it's outliers - expensive early adopters - that make things better, and cheaper, for the masses once things are perfected. There is no good solution. I do have another prophecy though: Once artificial intelligence takes over in medicine, medical research will grind to a halt.
Actually, no, socialism means that industries and other means of production are owned by the state. The people get no say except (if they're lucky) a vote.
I hear you but it isn't In the freer countries, things are way better - even in resource constrained places like (say) Britain or Israel.
An awful lot of the recyclables in China were simply dumped in landfills. I recall a BBC story of a few years ago where reporters found the bank statements of a man in UK, and rang him to tell him where his trash was going. The container ships were returning to China anyway and they simply made more money by importing trash and dumping it.
Every economy is resource constrained.
What both parties in the US espouse is a statist agenda, which is extremely similar to what is espoused in ALL European countries, from what I can see from North America.
And yet, a UK oncological nurse resorted to a gofundme to get cancer drugs that the NHS deemed "not cost effective." Neither place nor system is perfect.
Thanks, this was my thoughts exactly. A quick Google search shows numerous bear markets of the Dow in the 20th century, before Reagan.
Too bad a Canadian already put links showing that Canada does. The fact of the matter is...nations can do this. It's call 'protecting domestic industries.'
Of course it is not really discussed, it was a leftist administration that did it.
You have said it!
They didn't say they wouldn't use AI against the users of Google though!! That, of course, they will do.
With the exception of a few nuts in BOTH parties, nothing ever changes, it's rhetoric. I'm saying what do they DO, not say.
Isn't it unfortunate that BOTH party supporters do this? Sorry, but if you look at the actual policies of both parties, they are virtually identical.