2) Who says that gasoline will be a primary source of energy in 2100, let alone transportation? One would figure that by the time prices for gas rises to $10/gal (in 2010 dollars), the market itself would find a way to either create hyper-efficient engines, or folks will just replace their gas-powered cars with electric-powered ones.
Gas is already close to those prices in some parts of the world and electric cars are still not viable. And they're still reliant on oil for fertilisers and power generation.
Yet these same aggressive young men are the ones that start new businesses, thinking they've got what it takes to make it big, even though realistically the odds are against them. These same young men manage to convince investors and shareholders that they have got what it takes.
No, they're talking about CEOs, people who run existing businesses, not people who start them.
Interesting how many people here have no idea how normal people actually live. Maybe this is how upper-class Teabaggers can go to demonstrations claiming to represent the average working American whilst espousing policies that only benefit the wealthy. They actually think they're normal, maybe because they're surrounded by other wealthy people and think that because their Lexus is older than the neighbour's Ferrari they're part of the oppressed underclass.
How do normal people handle a car accident and paying medical bills with no job? Here's a hint: they don't! Medical bills are the biggest cause of bankruptcies in America.
What I don't get is if these new world wines are so great, why they don't have any pride in their own regions and have to name them after places in Europe.
The actual measure is pollution per output. China consumes more energy than the US now, produces much more Greenhouse pollution, and vastly more pollution that isn't Greenhouse emissions. Yet China produces only 1/3 the output of the US. China therefore pollutes a lot more than 6x the amount the US pollutes per output.
That's an odd argument, that's it's ok to pollute, as long as you're making stuff. It also doesn't take into account industries. The heavy industry in China will pollute more than the American service industry, it doesn't make America more environmentally friendly.
What do we have to learn? How to use family connections and luck to amass an obscene amount of wealth at the expense of the global IT industry and consumers? Or how to sponsor failed education projects?
I think you overrate complexity. If WoW had hundreds of skills and required four keyboards to operate, it would be much more complicated, but it wouldn't make it more sophisticated or enjoyable. Most of these skills are pretty much the same thing anyway, they only exist to give the player a sense of progression so they keep paying subs. My warlock must have about half a dozen damage over time spells, and I don't think the game would lose anything if I only had one.
Most classes could be boiled down to three or four abilities which would be easily played on a controller without losing any element of tactics and skill. As for the auction spam, it's easier to press a macro to spam five lines every four seconds than it is to speak constantly.
A bonus? Interesting how housing is the one area in which people actually appreciate a rise in their cost of living. And I'm not sure it'd be much use for elite young swimmers who can no longer afford to live there.
What does it say about our society if a group we need to integrate is so isolated it's developing an incompatible dialect?
Need to integrate? On the contrary, the main population don't want them to integrate. They build far-flung suburbs and gated communities at great cost to get away from having to integrate with them.
False dichotomy. Without a car-biased culture, most of your transport needs are reduced or eliminated as there is no suburban sprawl.
In many parts of America, you have to have a car. This is not independence, this is a burden. You're burdened with the purchasing, maintenance, storage, licensing and insurance of a liability which declines in value every time you use it.
Interesting to see the American perspective on drink driving, where driving is basically a divine right. You complain about limits that are higher than most of Europe. I wouldn't describe Europe as prohibitionist compared to the US, quite the opposite in fact.
You're saying that the economy is more important than the environment? You must be American. It seems that Portugal with its investments is better set up for the future than the USA which is heavily reliant on depleting resources.
According to your other post, Portugal should be energy insecure and polluting so they can give tax breaks to business? As if they don't have enough problems with a mega-rich overclass.
But wikipedia articles on things like this are completely unintelligible, written by people who may understand it but don't know how to communicate it.
So what you're saying, is that civilisation and the taxes and justice system needed to maintain said civilisation = rape and death? I'm sure anarchy would be so much better, where do I sign up to the teabagger party?
Correct me if I'm wrong from my non-American perspective, but isn't the MLB a cartel organisation where every member is guaranteed massive revenues, and the main qualification for getting to run a franchise is being really rich? And isn't the Governor of Texas pretty much a non job?
So the Concorde was uneconomical when fuel was much cheaper, so all we have to do is make fuel half a cheap as it is now, even though it's only going to get more expensive in the future? American guidelines have nothing to do with it, the point of supersonic travel is transoceanic.
Most kids who go into basketball are probably poor and would end up in poverty anyway. Most kids who go to business school are set for life in daddy's company anyway. A black from the ghetto probably has more chance of making it as an athlete than a Wall-Street big-shot.
And now, our buddies in the UK are decentralizing their healthcare because the quality of their socialized healthcare sucks
The British government is doing that because they're right-wing ideologues opposed to poor people getting decent health care. They've been trying to destroy Britain's public services for decades, it's what they do.
And yeah, Obama should focus on health over mere economics. A job's not much use if you're dead.
Most people, when times are tough, tighten their belts and lower their expenses to save money until things get better. Why Obama chose to expand government and increase spending in a recession is disappointing but not surprising.
Oh right, I didn't realise I was replying to someone who was totally economically illiterate. You are aware that government cutting spending in a recession makes it worse?
Slashdot Mirror
Gas is already close to those prices in some parts of the world and electric cars are still not viable. And they're still reliant on oil for fertilisers and power generation.
No, they're talking about CEOs, people who run existing businesses, not people who start them.
Sounds like a massive loophole for drug smuggling, no?
If taxes cause inequality, which is there more equality in countries with higher taxes?
Interesting how many people here have no idea how normal people actually live. Maybe this is how upper-class Teabaggers can go to demonstrations claiming to represent the average working American whilst espousing policies that only benefit the wealthy. They actually think they're normal, maybe because they're surrounded by other wealthy people and think that because their Lexus is older than the neighbour's Ferrari they're part of the oppressed underclass.
How do normal people handle a car accident and paying medical bills with no job? Here's a hint: they don't! Medical bills are the biggest cause of bankruptcies in America.
What I don't get is if these new world wines are so great, why they don't have any pride in their own regions and have to name them after places in Europe.
It's a sad comment on modern capitalism that four years is considered long-term thinking.
Unfortunately the judge would throw the case out as soon as he samples the product.
That's an odd argument, that's it's ok to pollute, as long as you're making stuff. It also doesn't take into account industries. The heavy industry in China will pollute more than the American service industry, it doesn't make America more environmentally friendly.
What do we have to learn? How to use family connections and luck to amass an obscene amount of wealth at the expense of the global IT industry and consumers? Or how to sponsor failed education projects?
Chess must really be an easy game then if my bishop can only go in four directions.
I think you overrate complexity. If WoW had hundreds of skills and required four keyboards to operate, it would be much more complicated, but it wouldn't make it more sophisticated or enjoyable. Most of these skills are pretty much the same thing anyway, they only exist to give the player a sense of progression so they keep paying subs. My warlock must have about half a dozen damage over time spells, and I don't think the game would lose anything if I only had one.
Most classes could be boiled down to three or four abilities which would be easily played on a controller without losing any element of tactics and skill. As for the auction spam, it's easier to press a macro to spam five lines every four seconds than it is to speak constantly.
A bonus? Interesting how housing is the one area in which people actually appreciate a rise in their cost of living. And I'm not sure it'd be much use for elite young swimmers who can no longer afford to live there.
Need to integrate? On the contrary, the main population don't want them to integrate. They build far-flung suburbs and gated communities at great cost to get away from having to integrate with them.
False dichotomy. Without a car-biased culture, most of your transport needs are reduced or eliminated as there is no suburban sprawl.
In many parts of America, you have to have a car. This is not independence, this is a burden. You're burdened with the purchasing, maintenance, storage, licensing and insurance of a liability which declines in value every time you use it.
Interesting to see the American perspective on drink driving, where driving is basically a divine right. You complain about limits that are higher than most of Europe. I wouldn't describe Europe as prohibitionist compared to the US, quite the opposite in fact.
Since when does lower contact area with the same weight mean less friction? That wasn't what I learnt at school.
You're saying that the economy is more important than the environment? You must be American. It seems that Portugal with its investments is better set up for the future than the USA which is heavily reliant on depleting resources.
According to your other post, Portugal should be energy insecure and polluting so they can give tax breaks to business? As if they don't have enough problems with a mega-rich overclass.
Surely an ideal market would take into account the cost of externalities?
But wikipedia articles on things like this are completely unintelligible, written by people who may understand it but don't know how to communicate it.
So what you're saying, is that civilisation and the taxes and justice system needed to maintain said civilisation = rape and death? I'm sure anarchy would be so much better, where do I sign up to the teabagger party?
Correct me if I'm wrong from my non-American perspective, but isn't the MLB a cartel organisation where every member is guaranteed massive revenues, and the main qualification for getting to run a franchise is being really rich? And isn't the Governor of Texas pretty much a non job?
So the Concorde was uneconomical when fuel was much cheaper, so all we have to do is make fuel half a cheap as it is now, even though it's only going to get more expensive in the future? American guidelines have nothing to do with it, the point of supersonic travel is transoceanic.
Most kids who go into basketball are probably poor and would end up in poverty anyway. Most kids who go to business school are set for life in daddy's company anyway. A black from the ghetto probably has more chance of making it as an athlete than a Wall-Street big-shot.
The British government is doing that because they're right-wing ideologues opposed to poor people getting decent health care. They've been trying to destroy Britain's public services for decades, it's what they do.
And yeah, Obama should focus on health over mere economics. A job's not much use if you're dead.
Oh right, I didn't realise I was replying to someone who was totally economically illiterate. You are aware that government cutting spending in a recession makes it worse?