Mothers would do the same in the US if they had the option. The same option that (most) fathers are using, which is to continue to work AND raise their child. Just because you are not with your child 24/7 doesn't mean you are not raising him/her.
Women should consider the ability to hold a job and contribute to their total family as a "Battle Win".
Then they should look at their long-term ability to have children and raise them well as a "Winning the War."
Apart from the short period relative to childbirth (possibly longer if you include breastfeeding), why should it be any different for men an women? I mean for the years 1 to 18+ of raising a child?
This is why in civilized societies parental leaves are collectively paid and not directly paid by the employer of the person taking the leave. Why should employers with a 80% female workforce get the burden for the whole society?
The problem is not that they leave and do not come back. They didn't steal that money. Just like I don't steal my employer when I go on vacation, I earned it. And I am free to quit right after my vacation if I want to, in fact, a lot of people do that.
Regarding that particular drug it seems it is much cheaper outside the US, and this seem to be the rule not the exception.
But to answer your question, it must depends on countries but I doubt any country would offer a $1 billion/pill drug to its citizens even if proved effective. Drugs are covered by patents, the only reason why they can't be cloned and sold at lower price. These patents last for a few years so in the worst case the drug won't be offered for that period. But sometimes I guess it's cheaper to pay the full price for a drug than to develop a generic clone especially if very few people needs it.
The government is also free not to cover your product, and can negotiate a better deal with your competitor. All other developed countries have a public health care system and it works just fine, they end up spending less on health care than the US with its private system, and the population is generally in better health condition.
He can publish whatever he wants but may and will get fined if he illegally uses the reserved title "engineer". My point was that reserving titles doesn't infringe free speech.
Just like entering a subway station and yelling "I have a bomb" has nothing to do with free speech. You will and SHOULD be arrested. In both cases, you are committing something illegal (although only one is criminal). Oregon is free to reserve the title engineer to licensed engineers. This is not a free speech violation.
To me it sounds like you don't have very good friends if you don't trust them to pay you the $15-20 they owe you every month or if you fear they will cancel your phone line without asking.
honest question from someone who lives in a country where these kind of cheap ($10) additional lines do not exist. What is stopping group of friends from subscribing together and splitting the bill? One must be an idiot to get one line for $50 when you can get 8 for an average of $17.50/line before tax and your international calling add-on.
just as Western democracies (especially the United States) have grown increasingly skeptical of the value of intellectual property and have weakened protection and enforcement
What? The author must have been living under a rock for the past 20 years. DMCA, EUCD, software patents, western democracies have gone way to far in the protection and enforcement of intellectual property.
You can't even legally rip a DVD to watch it on your PC/tablet/phone/whatever in many western democracies.
Airlines shouldn't be allowed to ask for name/ID. You read that right. I should be able to anonymously buy plane tickets. It's none of their business where I go and if I actually take the plane myself or give the ticket to someone else. There are security concerns, but the government/airport security handle this part. I have no problem with the government knowing that I am flying (so they can check I am not a terrorist/whatever) but I should never have to present an ID to an airline employee.
So since the ticket should be mine, there would be no overbooking since I could sell the ticket on eBay myself if I can't board the flight.
Slashdot Mirror
Mothers would do the same in the US if they had the option. The same option that (most) fathers are using, which is to continue to work AND raise their child. Just because you are not with your child 24/7 doesn't mean you are not raising him/her.
Women should consider the ability to hold a job and contribute to their total family as a "Battle Win".
Then they should look at their long-term ability to have children and raise them well as a "Winning the War."
Apart from the short period relative to childbirth (possibly longer if you include breastfeeding), why should it be any different for men an women? I mean for the years 1 to 18+ of raising a child?
This is why in civilized societies parental leaves are collectively paid and not directly paid by the employer of the person taking the leave. Why should employers with a 80% female workforce get the burden for the whole society?
The problem is not that they leave and do not come back. They didn't steal that money. Just like I don't steal my employer when I go on vacation, I earned it. And I am free to quit right after my vacation if I want to, in fact, a lot of people do that.
sounds like it, although this clause probably won't stay for long if countries start abusing it.
no need, there are already alternatives to epipen
Regarding that particular drug it seems it is much cheaper outside the US, and this seem to be the rule not the exception.
But to answer your question, it must depends on countries but I doubt any country would offer a $1 billion/pill drug to its citizens even if proved effective.
Drugs are covered by patents, the only reason why they can't be cloned and sold at lower price. These patents last for a few years so in the worst case the drug won't be offered for that period. But sometimes I guess it's cheaper to pay the full price for a drug than to develop a generic clone especially if very few people needs it.
The government is also free not to cover your product, and can negotiate a better deal with your competitor.
All other developed countries have a public health care system and it works just fine, they end up spending less on health care than the US with its private system, and the population is generally in better health condition.
He can publish whatever he wants but may and will get fined if he illegally uses the reserved title "engineer".
My point was that reserving titles doesn't infringe free speech.
Yes, you would be illegal. It's the same in my province and they actually enforce it.
Big lawyers? Microsoft also had big lawyers and they lost.
https://www.oiq.qc.ca/en/media...
They updated their web site and now use the term Microsoft Certified Solutions Expert (MCSE) instead of Engineer.
https://www.microsoft.com/fr-c...
instead of adding useless features such as a 3D paint
Just like entering a subway station and yelling "I have a bomb" has nothing to do with free speech. You will and SHOULD be arrested.
In both cases, you are committing something illegal (although only one is criminal). Oregon is free to reserve the title engineer to licensed engineers. This is not a free speech violation.
who would have tought
which will drive more people out and will make the housing market more affordable
And that risk is worth quintupling the cost of your phone line to you?
To me it sounds like you don't have very good friends if you don't trust them to pay you the $15-20 they owe you every month or if you fear they will cancel your phone line without asking.
honest question from someone who lives in a country where these kind of cheap ($10) additional lines do not exist. What is stopping group of friends from subscribing together and splitting the bill? One must be an idiot to get one line for $50 when you can get 8 for an average of $17.50/line before tax and your international calling add-on.
carbon tax and cap and trade systems are both valid, free market solutions to the CO2 problem
what is NOT a free market solution is incentives such as electric cars subsidies.
Please, please tell me why Google Play Music should be free while Bob's Music Shop down the street would cost to stream the exact same songs?
That's not even the main problem. Why would streaming music be free while reading slashdot isn't?
Strip windows to the minimum and move applications (Paint, Edge, ...) to the Windows store or whatever they use as a replacement for apt-get.
And also cleanup the mess that is c:\windows\winsxs (often dozens of gigabytes for no reason)
I just realized they used the last letter of the alphabet
just as Western democracies (especially the United States) have grown increasingly skeptical of the value of intellectual property and have weakened protection and enforcement
What? The author must have been living under a rock for the past 20 years. DMCA, EUCD, software patents, western democracies have gone way to far in the protection and enforcement of intellectual property.
You can't even legally rip a DVD to watch it on your PC/tablet/phone/whatever in many western democracies.
In real world, any gain in battery life made by using Edge is more than lost for not having an ad blocker.
Ticket scalping is already happening, only, the airline is the scalper. Try to find two people in the same plane who paid the same price.
Airlines shouldn't be allowed to ask for name/ID. You read that right. I should be able to anonymously buy plane tickets. It's none of their business where I go and if I actually take the plane myself or give the ticket to someone else. There are security concerns, but the government/airport security handle this part. I have no problem with the government knowing that I am flying (so they can check I am not a terrorist/whatever) but I should never have to present an ID to an airline employee.
So since the ticket should be mine, there would be no overbooking since I could sell the ticket on eBay myself if I can't board the flight.
Because they can pay them less.