People live in high rise apartments in New York because they're in a desirable area. Blocks of council flats have similar population densities but are little more than first-world slums. This new building would be in the desert in the middle of nowhere.
Sure, why not. It's not like there won't be parks, squares, expedition, lanes, views.. dense cities are essentially one mega building already.
This thing would have over [i]ten[/i] times the population density of today's dense cities. If you lived in the middle you wouldn't see any daylight or have any fresh air at all.
The point then would be whether people would be willing to live in a ratcage for the sake of cheap rent. This thing has a population density greater than the Indian slums, and cheap rent would attract the sort of people you don't want to be living 2m away from.
Looking at that picture, there don't appear to be any trains going in or out. That's going to be fun for a million-plus people with nowhere to park a car.
That would only be a problem if anyone was living there in the first place. A population density of over 1.17 million people per square mile is over ten times that of Manhatten or Hong Kong. The experience would be similar to a rat in a cage. Most people wouldn't even have a window or any fresh air.
Odd that up till a few years ago, you never heard about climate change or instability. All you heard of was 'global warming', the ice-caps would melt, the world would become a desert etc. Then it turns out the world wasn't warming, so 'global warming' went out the window, and it suddenly became 'climate change'. Now it's 'climate instability'. Then in a few years, who knows what else.
If you ask me, it's all just an excuse for governments to tax people and control their behaviour. For instance UK petrol duty. I wouldn't be surprised if every piece of research supporting climate change was funded by the British government.
Since when do conservatives care about the development of alternatives? I haven't heard McCain mention anything more solid than calling for drilling and vague promises about alternative energy.
The convervatives say 'let's have more drilling, we'll invest in alternatives, honest'. So they start drilling and oil prices go down, and they get back in the SUVs. Then after a few years when the extra oil has run out and gas is up to $6 a gallon, they'll start whining again, and say 'let's have more drilling, we'll invest in alternatives, honest'.
The might be interested in alternative energy research if defence contractors got to do it, but otherwise it's just bullshit.
Completely aside from the fact that the implementation is dreadful, the things are designed to do people out of a job, in a town that sorely needs jobs.
Basically, thanks to globalization and the world being 'flat' and all that, our standard of living is going to get reduced to the lowest common denominator worldwide one way or the other. So, we're fucked, because as long as we adhere to a growth-based economy and as long as population worldwide is growing, we're headed inexorably toward a standard of living like India and away from one like, say, Iceland. Viva la globalization!
As the saying goes, live by the sword, die by the sword. America owes its current standard of living to globalisation. Whether it was importing slaves 200 years ago, to exporting Coke and McDonalds in the last century, to using their financial and military power to basically arse-rape the third world.
If this same globalisation allows other nations to catch up with the US, lowering Americans' standards of living in the process, it will be no less than they deserve.
The WHOLE POINT of the H1-B program was so that when the US had a SHORTAGE of skilled workers in an area of expertise the H1-B would be a CYA until our schools caught up with supply and demand.
A country can never have too many skilled workers. Immigration shouldn't be stifled just so a US worker on 100k doesn't have competition for his job which could be done by a million foreigners. If the wage is driven down to 15k, then that leads to lower business costs which help the economy.
There's no reason why certain jobs have to be done by Americans. If it's more economical for an Indian to learn in India, then go and work in America, than for an American to go to a US university, then surely the American could find something else to do to distinguish himself from immigrants.
Remember, the US brain-drained the rest of the world when it suited them, you can't complain that you might actually have a bit of competition in your field. Sounds to be like you just want to take your ball and go home.
The visa holder gets a job that pays better, and with a higher quality of living, then he would have got back home. The US employee gets competition, which is good.
When a petrol tank leaks, it drips out, and is very difficult to ignite. When a hydrogen tank leaks, it fires out at high pressure, and lights very very easily. Hydrogen leaks very easily btw.
A properly done medium-well steak is neither burnt nor red, while being very juicy.
Every second a steak is in your pan, it's losing moisture and tenderness. You can test it yourself with some kitchen scales. Weigh your steak raw, then rare, then medium-well, the difference is the juice you've lost.
The fact that you have to make up the lost flavour with seasoning, butter and sauce just says it all. A rare steak needs none of those.
I'm not sure how eating cows increases the methane they produces, or how land has to be cleared for grazing, cows live on land that is already grass. No point are all terrible.
What environmental issues are casued by eating cattle? The transport, slaughter and cooking can't be any worse than for other food. Maybe a bull charged you in a previous life.
When you think about it: 1 hour to the airport, 2 hours security, 1 hour flight time to anywhere (assuming they're actually on time), and then another hour to where you want to be.
Or maybe, half an hour to the airport, an half hour in the airport, an hour in the air, and an hour at the other side. Three hours total, and you can read, use your laptop etc rather than concentrating on the road. You can just get up and go for a piss without stopping, and you can drink.
And this is why Eve will forever remain a niche MMO.
You say that as if it's a bad thing. Personally I can see the appeal in a game not aimed at whining illiterate kids who want everything handed to them on a plate. I'm not into MMOs, but if I was, I'd rather play a difficult dangerous game with a few thousand dedicated players, than a giant mass-marketed game where everyone who can turn on a computer is max level.
But then I'm someone who grew up on text-based MUDs where you had to decipher a screen full of combat text every second and respond instantly and accurately in order to stay alive, maybe this gives me a different perspective to you modern players with your cartoon graphics and your PVE safety net.
Texas also has only about 58% California's Gross State Product, 56% of its population.
Which by my calculations, makes Texas 3.5% richer than California, even though the latter is full of Hollywood millionaires. Seems like the part-time government thing actually works.
What conservatives argue against are social programs such as social security, Medicare, etc. Those weren't a part of the federal government envisioned by the founding fathers even though poverty was arguably *worse* back then than it is now.
So the mega-rich slave-owning founding fathers didn't give a shit about the poor, so in the 21st century, we shouldn't either? Nice, I can see why you libertarians have such wide support.
And if you got rid of the nonsensical and massively expensive social spending, the state and federal governments could still do their constitutionally-mandated jobs AND we could pay a lot less in taxes which would lead to a more productive economy
So, you abolish Medicare. Instantly, tens of millions become ill or die. You abolish social security, millions of pensioners starve or freeze to death, the unemployed and poor are forced into crime to survive. You abolish schools, and within a generation, there are a hundred million who can't read or write, and can't find work. How does any of this help the economy?
Oh wait, a few Ron Paul supporters will save a bit more on taxes, of which they'll have to spend about 500% on high walls, electrified razor-wire and 24/7 security in order to stay alive and safe, so all is well. America may descend into a third-world, Mad-Max style hellhole, but at least those liberals in Congress won't be stealing your wages at gun-point, eh?
Slashdot Mirror
People live in high rise apartments in New York because they're in a desirable area. Blocks of council flats have similar population densities but are little more than first-world slums. This new building would be in the desert in the middle of nowhere.
This thing would have over [i]ten[/i] times the population density of today's dense cities. If you lived in the middle you wouldn't see any daylight or have any fresh air at all.
The point then would be whether people would be willing to live in a ratcage for the sake of cheap rent. This thing has a population density greater than the Indian slums, and cheap rent would attract the sort of people you don't want to be living 2m away from.
Looking at that picture, there don't appear to be any trains going in or out. That's going to be fun for a million-plus people with nowhere to park a car.
That would only be a problem if anyone was living there in the first place. A population density of over 1.17 million people per square mile is over ten times that of Manhatten or Hong Kong. The experience would be similar to a rat in a cage. Most people wouldn't even have a window or any fresh air.
Assuming you work five days a week and have two weeks off per year, that works out at $32 a day. Do you weigh 400 pounds or was it lobster every day?
On the other hand, they're playing computer games for a job whilst we slave away to make money to come home and do the same.
It's a perfect match. An over-rated, has-been sitcom actor advertising an over-rated, has-been operating system.
Odd that up till a few years ago, you never heard about climate change or instability. All you heard of was 'global warming', the ice-caps would melt, the world would become a desert etc. Then it turns out the world wasn't warming, so 'global warming' went out the window, and it suddenly became 'climate change'. Now it's 'climate instability'. Then in a few years, who knows what else.
If you ask me, it's all just an excuse for governments to tax people and control their behaviour. For instance UK petrol duty. I wouldn't be surprised if every piece of research supporting climate change was funded by the British government.
Since when do conservatives care about the development of alternatives? I haven't heard McCain mention anything more solid than calling for drilling and vague promises about alternative energy.
The convervatives say 'let's have more drilling, we'll invest in alternatives, honest'. So they start drilling and oil prices go down, and they get back in the SUVs. Then after a few years when the extra oil has run out and gas is up to $6 a gallon, they'll start whining again, and say 'let's have more drilling, we'll invest in alternatives, honest'.
The might be interested in alternative energy research if defence contractors got to do it, but otherwise it's just bullshit.
Damn right, let's smash the spinning jennies!
Because Europeans don't want a drop in their living standards.
As the saying goes, live by the sword, die by the sword. America owes its current standard of living to globalisation. Whether it was importing slaves 200 years ago, to exporting Coke and McDonalds in the last century, to using their financial and military power to basically arse-rape the third world.
If this same globalisation allows other nations to catch up with the US, lowering Americans' standards of living in the process, it will be no less than they deserve.
A country can never have too many skilled workers. Immigration shouldn't be stifled just so a US worker on 100k doesn't have competition for his job which could be done by a million foreigners. If the wage is driven down to 15k, then that leads to lower business costs which help the economy.
There's no reason why certain jobs have to be done by Americans. If it's more economical for an Indian to learn in India, then go and work in America, than for an American to go to a US university, then surely the American could find something else to do to distinguish himself from immigrants.
Remember, the US brain-drained the rest of the world when it suited them, you can't complain that you might actually have a bit of competition in your field. Sounds to be like you just want to take your ball and go home.
The visa holder gets a job that pays better, and with a higher quality of living, then he would have got back home. The US employee gets competition, which is good.
When a petrol tank leaks, it drips out, and is very difficult to ignite. When a hydrogen tank leaks, it fires out at high pressure, and lights very very easily. Hydrogen leaks very easily btw.
Every second a steak is in your pan, it's losing moisture and tenderness. You can test it yourself with some kitchen scales. Weigh your steak raw, then rare, then medium-well, the difference is the juice you've lost.
The fact that you have to make up the lost flavour with seasoning, butter and sauce just says it all. A rare steak needs none of those.
I'm not sure how eating cows increases the methane they produces, or how land has to be cleared for grazing, cows live on land that is already grass. No point are all terrible.
What environmental issues are casued by eating cattle? The transport, slaughter and cooking can't be any worse than for other food. Maybe a bull charged you in a previous life.
Yeah, destroying all that precious grass...
If everyone's an officer, who the hell are they going to command?
Or maybe, half an hour to the airport, an half hour in the airport, an hour in the air, and an hour at the other side. Three hours total, and you can read, use your laptop etc rather than concentrating on the road. You can just get up and go for a piss without stopping, and you can drink.
You say that as if it's a bad thing. Personally I can see the appeal in a game not aimed at whining illiterate kids who want everything handed to them on a plate. I'm not into MMOs, but if I was, I'd rather play a difficult dangerous game with a few thousand dedicated players, than a giant mass-marketed game where everyone who can turn on a computer is max level.
But then I'm someone who grew up on text-based MUDs where you had to decipher a screen full of combat text every second and respond instantly and accurately in order to stay alive, maybe this gives me a different perspective to you modern players with your cartoon graphics and your PVE safety net.
Which by my calculations, makes Texas 3.5% richer than California, even though the latter is full of Hollywood millionaires. Seems like the part-time government thing actually works.
So the mega-rich slave-owning founding fathers didn't give a shit about the poor, so in the 21st century, we shouldn't either? Nice, I can see why you libertarians have such wide support.
So, you abolish Medicare. Instantly, tens of millions become ill or die. You abolish social security, millions of pensioners starve or freeze to death, the unemployed and poor are forced into crime to survive. You abolish schools, and within a generation, there are a hundred million who can't read or write, and can't find work. How does any of this help the economy?
Oh wait, a few Ron Paul supporters will save a bit more on taxes, of which they'll have to spend about 500% on high walls, electrified razor-wire and 24/7 security in order to stay alive and safe, so all is well. America may descend into a third-world, Mad-Max style hellhole, but at least those liberals in Congress won't be stealing your wages at gun-point, eh?