Because if you can't afford healthcare, taking a flight to foreign country and taking days or weeks off your job is obviously within your means!
Yes, in fact the combined costs of foreign travel and a medical procedure are far less than cost of receiving the identical procedure here in the U.S.
Furthermore, employers provide for sick days, medical leave and extended medical leave, the terms of which are either formally stipulated in an employee handbook or, when not, available informally as requested. Like "Hey boss, I am dying and need to fly to Mexico for new kidney, can I go?" Often the answer is "Yes" instead of "Hmm... No. I want you to stay here and die working instead."
Oh, crazy right wingers... One wonders if you ever even talked to someone who is a member of the working poor.
The majority of the working poor ARE right-wingers. You know, those people who live in the "fly-over states" and "cling to their guns and religion" while listening to Rush Limbaugh on talk radio. I am sure you are familiar with the type. Or should we say stereotype?
So $461.1 million is, in your own words, "so little state funding". Let me go out on a limb here; You are not one of those Libertarian, responsible government types, are you?
According to this article appearing in The Capital Times of Madison Wisconsin:
...the federal government provided $657.1 million, or 28.8 percent, of UW-Madison's $2.28 billion budget for the 2007-08 school year.
...while the state provided $461.1 million, or 20.2 percent, of UW-Madison's budget...
So you omitted the federal funding and misstated the level of state funding. The actual level of state funding is about twice the figure you gave. The actual total level of government funding is 49% of the university budget, whereas you said 10%.
If the facts are not on your side then just make stuff up. The moderators will still rate that "Informative."
The University of Wisconsin is a state-funded school, and as such is essentially a branch of government. When you are told that massive increases in government spending are necessary investments in the future of America, keep in mind that this is the kind of return which you will receive on that investment.
Ya. All that. Or they could have purchased an off-the-shelf system and adapted to that by conforming to modern business and accounting practices. And purchased custom data migration from India through a U.S. contractor cheaply.
Because the cost of computer systems decreases with time, the expense of the new system should be lower than that of the one which it replaces. The University of Wisconsin was capable of either implementing or purchasing a functional payroll system in 1975 running on hardware of that era. According to Moore's law, simply replacing the existing 1975-vintage hardware with an equally powerful system in 2009 hardware should cost 1/2^17 as much as the 1975 system, that is.0000076 as much.
The article does not state what was the purchase price of the 1975 system. Assume that it was less than 2^17 * 28.4 million, that is, $3,722,444,800,000.00. Then the exponentially decreasing expense of computer hardware is not decreasing fast enough to offset the increasing incompetence of the University of Wisconsin.
I've explained my situation on slashdot before.. and people refused to believe me, insisting that I must have somehow done something wrong.
Not having witnessed the event you describe, I can not say that I believe you. Nonetheless, it is quite similar to actual events which I have witnessed, and therefore highly plausible.
Not so good for medical emergencies, like when someone has been bitten by any of Australia's great many venomous critters and has to be transported to the hospital rapidly.
Rail systems are absolutely superb in European countries (very often it's FASTER to take a train then fly by plane).
Quality alone is an incomplete measure of social benefit; Costs must be considered as well. Consider the Moscow subway system, the most beautiful in the the world, beyond all comparison. With the exception of Communist Party apparatchiks, by western standards the Soviet people at the time of its construction were impoverished. Some could argue that trading off a less-glorious subway system for greater individual material wealth would have resulted in a better quality of life for Soviet citizens. Yet others, such as yourself, would object, claiming that only the quality of public works should be considered, with no accounting for their costs or the hardships those impose on society.
Brad Templeton looked into the subject of mass transit and wrote about it here. He has a fascinating graph there.
An excerpt from that page:
What I learned about public transit in the USA shocked me. I've been a fan of public transit, taking it where it's practical for me, and feeling green about it. That transit is a significantly greener way to get around than private car travel almost goes without saying in our thoughts and discussions. Disturbingly, this simply isn't true.
prima donna - noun 1. the chief female singer in an opera or opera company 2. a very temperamental person with an inflated view of their own talent or importance.
You begin by misattributing bad economic outcomes to a deliberate investment strategy which seeks high short-term financial gains and accepts long-term financial failure. Alternatively, bad economic outcomes result from efforts to achieve economic stability and long-term success together with failures to correctly assess the financial risks of investments, specifically subprime mortgages.
According to liberal belief systems, wall-street CEOs possess secret magic crystal balls with which they foresee the infinite future with perfect clarity. Looking like Michael Douglas and driven by insatiable greed, they use this power to wreak havoc and suffering upon the earth, driving their own companies into bankruptcy in order enrich themselves.
Paranoid belief system are self-confirming, so it is unlikely that you could ever be persuaded of the actual facts: Financial failures almost always result from limited ability to accurately predict outcomes and assess risks in attempting to avoid failure, not from the choice to seek failure. In the fashion of a zealous creationist, liberals set forth a watchmaker argument; Bad outcomes imply the existence of beings who design bad outcomes. Liberals do not believe in God, but they do believe in the devil, and he works on Wall Street.
Your inference amounts to this: There was widespread failure among financial experts to correctly estimate the financial risk of subprime mortgages, therefore the the interests of some internet service providers to limit net neutrality will overwhelm the broader interests in neutrality.
Wow, you completely beat the shit out of that straw man.
Nobody is arguing that companies will "police themselves" as you so disingenuously put it. The argument is instead that competing consumer interests and broader corporate interests will serve as an effective check on the narrow corporate interest of reduced neutrality.
Not to be confused with the old liberal scam: When people exercise their freedom to take financial risks which do not succeed, cite that failure as reason to revoke more personal freedoms. When people exercise their freedom to take financial risks which do work to their own advantage, then denigrate them as the greedy rich and revoke more personal freedoms.
The liberal gameplan for self-enrichment is to take control of the government and to use excuses such as your own to increase their own wealth and coercive power, that of government. It is a brazen grab for self-enrichment embodying unsurpassable greed.
The second major point of the original article which is not mentioned in the summary above is that any government agency created to regulate net neutrality would be subject to regulatory capture.
It would be interesting to hear a rebuttal of that point here by any advocates of net neutrality.
I liked the quotes blaming the fact that "we haven't communicated the value of Vista."
Yes, I wish I had included that in my original post. It buttresses the point that there is a persistent misbelief at Microsoft in a problem with marketing Vista and not with the quality of the product itself.
"A premium experience as defined by Walt = Apple. This is why we need to address [the column]."
That suggests that when Microsoft received reports of a competitor offering a superior product that executives regarded the reports themselves as the problem and not Microsoft's deficient offerings; Warrier writes of addressing Mossberg's column, not of addressing the problems with Microsoft's planning and development processes which led them to an inferior market position.
Blaming someone outside the organization is smart corporate politics because it does not make enemies inside your own organization who might retaliate against you. But then maybe that is the problem with Microsoft management, that it is full of shrewd corporate ladder-climbing types instead of inspired artists and engineers.
Infared eyes work better if you are cold blooded, like pit vipers. Otherwise, infrared emissions from warm tissue surrounding the detector swamp the signal
Slashdot Mirror
Because if you can't afford healthcare, taking a flight to foreign country and taking days or weeks off your job is obviously within your means!
Yes, in fact the combined costs of foreign travel and a medical procedure are far less than cost of receiving the identical procedure here in the U.S.
Furthermore, employers provide for sick days, medical leave and extended medical leave, the terms of which are either formally stipulated in an employee handbook or, when not, available informally as requested. Like "Hey boss, I am dying and need to fly to Mexico for new kidney, can I go?" Often the answer is "Yes" instead of "Hmm... No. I want you to stay here and die working instead."
Oh, crazy right wingers... One wonders if you ever even talked to someone who is a member of the working poor.
The majority of the working poor ARE right-wingers. You know, those people who live in the "fly-over states" and "cling to their guns and religion" while listening to Rush Limbaugh on talk radio. I am sure you are familiar with the type. Or should we say stereotype?
Canada has a completely-free universal national healthcare system.
It is not free. For medical services in Canada the government collects payment in the form of taxes.
Only about 90% of Canadians express satisfaction with their system!
That is a good example of sample bias; The ones who it killed were not included in the survey.
So $461.1 million is, in your own words, "so little state funding". Let me go out on a limb here; You are not one of those Libertarian, responsible government types, are you?
According to this article appearing in The Capital Times of Madison Wisconsin:
So you omitted the federal funding and misstated the level of state funding. The actual level of state funding is about twice the figure you gave. The actual total level of government funding is 49% of the university budget, whereas you said 10%.
If the facts are not on your side then just make stuff up. The moderators will still rate that "Informative."
Bingo.
Conform to modern accounting and business practices, purchase COTS and you have solved not one problem but two.
The University of Wisconsin is a state-funded school, and as such is essentially a branch of government. When you are told that massive increases in government spending are necessary investments in the future of America, keep in mind that this is the kind of return which you will receive on that investment.
Ya. All that. Or they could have purchased an off-the-shelf system and adapted to that by conforming to modern business and accounting practices. And purchased custom data migration from India through a U.S. contractor cheaply.
Because the cost of computer systems decreases with time, the expense of the new system should be lower than that of the one which it replaces. The University of Wisconsin was capable of either implementing or purchasing a functional payroll system in 1975 running on hardware of that era. According to Moore's law, simply replacing the existing 1975-vintage hardware with an equally powerful system in 2009 hardware should cost 1/2^17 as much as the 1975 system, that is .0000076 as much.
The article does not state what was the purchase price of the 1975 system. Assume that it was less than 2^17 * 28.4 million, that is, $3,722,444,800,000.00. Then the exponentially decreasing expense of computer hardware is not decreasing fast enough to offset the increasing incompetence of the University of Wisconsin.
I've explained my situation on slashdot before.. and people refused to believe me, insisting that I must have somehow done something wrong.
Not having witnessed the event you describe, I can not say that I believe you. Nonetheless, it is quite similar to actual events which I have witnessed, and therefore highly plausible.
Not so good for medical emergencies, like when someone has been bitten by any of Australia's great many venomous critters and has to be transported to the hospital rapidly.
Rail systems are absolutely superb in European countries (very often it's FASTER to take a train then fly by plane).
Quality alone is an incomplete measure of social benefit; Costs must be considered as well. Consider the Moscow subway system, the most beautiful in the the world, beyond all comparison. With the exception of Communist Party apparatchiks, by western standards the Soviet people at the time of its construction were impoverished. Some could argue that trading off a less-glorious subway system for greater individual material wealth would have resulted in a better quality of life for Soviet citizens. Yet others, such as yourself, would object, claiming that only the quality of public works should be considered, with no accounting for their costs or the hardships those impose on society.
Brad Templeton looked into the subject of mass transit and wrote about it here. He has a fascinating graph there.
An excerpt from that page:
What I learned about public transit in the USA shocked me. I've been a fan of public transit, taking it where it's practical for me, and feeling green about it. That transit is a significantly greener way to get around than private car travel almost goes without saying in our thoughts and discussions. Disturbingly, this simply isn't true.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
That's probably the most profound thought I've read this year...
You must not have thought about it.
prima donna - noun 1. the chief female singer in an opera or opera company 2. a very temperamental person with an inflated view of their own talent or importance.
people who are "functionally disabled by obesity" deserve to have two seats for one fare.
Do people who are functionally disabled by alcoholism deserve two drinks for the price of one?
You begin by misattributing bad economic outcomes to a deliberate investment strategy which seeks high short-term financial gains and accepts long-term financial failure. Alternatively, bad economic outcomes result from efforts to achieve economic stability and long-term success together with failures to correctly assess the financial risks of investments, specifically subprime mortgages.
According to liberal belief systems, wall-street CEOs possess secret magic crystal balls with which they foresee the infinite future with perfect clarity. Looking like Michael Douglas and driven by insatiable greed, they use this power to wreak havoc and suffering upon the earth, driving their own companies into bankruptcy in order enrich themselves.
Paranoid belief system are self-confirming, so it is unlikely that you could ever be persuaded of the actual facts: Financial failures almost always result from limited ability to accurately predict outcomes and assess risks in attempting to avoid failure, not from the choice to seek failure. In the fashion of a zealous creationist, liberals set forth a watchmaker argument; Bad outcomes imply the existence of beings who design bad outcomes. Liberals do not believe in God, but they do believe in the devil, and he works on Wall Street.
Your inference amounts to this: There was widespread failure among financial experts to correctly estimate the financial risk of subprime mortgages, therefore the the interests of some internet service providers to limit net neutrality will overwhelm the broader interests in neutrality.
Wow, you completely beat the shit out of that straw man.
Nobody is arguing that companies will "police themselves" as you so disingenuously put it. The argument is instead that competing consumer interests and broader corporate interests will serve as an effective check on the narrow corporate interest of reduced neutrality.
Not to be confused with the old liberal scam: When people exercise their freedom to take financial risks which do not succeed, cite that failure as reason to revoke more personal freedoms. When people exercise their freedom to take financial risks which do work to their own advantage, then denigrate them as the greedy rich and revoke more personal freedoms.
The liberal gameplan for self-enrichment is to take control of the government and to use excuses such as your own to increase their own wealth and coercive power, that of government. It is a brazen grab for self-enrichment embodying unsurpassable greed.
The second major point of the original article which is not mentioned in the summary above is that any government agency created to regulate net neutrality would be subject to regulatory capture.
It would be interesting to hear a rebuttal of that point here by any advocates of net neutrality.
I liked the quotes blaming the fact that "we haven't communicated the value of Vista."
Yes, I wish I had included that in my original post. It buttresses the point that there is a persistent misbelief at Microsoft in a problem with marketing Vista and not with the quality of the product itself.
"A premium experience as defined by Walt = Apple. This is why we need to address [the column]."
That suggests that when Microsoft received reports of a competitor offering a superior product that executives regarded the reports themselves as the problem and not Microsoft's deficient offerings; Warrier writes of addressing Mossberg's column, not of addressing the problems with Microsoft's planning and development processes which led them to an inferior market position.
Blaming someone outside the organization is smart corporate politics because it does not make enemies inside your own organization who might retaliate against you. But then maybe that is the problem with Microsoft management, that it is full of shrewd corporate ladder-climbing types instead of inspired artists and engineers.
Infrared and rangefinder is good
Infared eyes work better if you are cold blooded, like pit vipers. Otherwise, infrared emissions from warm tissue surrounding the detector swamp the signal
I have young children, one boy and one girl, and my experience is exactly the same.
Today, I was playing with the thought again to purchase an AIX workstation one day when I can afford them...
Is that how you spend your time? Why don't you learn to program and get a job instead of posting your spending fantasies to Slashdot.
Someone needs to get a life.