I think this concept was explored in the movie "In Time". It's an OK movie, a bit over the top at the end. Still it had some interesting ideas. I would expect that given how increases in productivity had been with held from most of humanity the movies depiction of the poor always being on death's doorstep is likely. It's an interesting thought - how would you decide who gets to live forever? One would hope that some thresh old would be used but who sets that and what criteria are used? Those who can afford it? Those who are pleasant, good looking, athletic, intelligent, etc? Those who have provably contributed something to society? Interesting question.
Ah yes, we greatly fear the Christian terrorist. As close as you can come to a Christian terrorist who attacks for religious reasons are attacks on abortion clinics. That seems like a far cry from shooting into a crowd with an AK47. If you have something more compelling I'd love to hear it.
... after all there are less than 100k H1Bs and on other hand there are 121M citizens 25 years and over with no college degree...
There are many more than 100k H1B visa holders. I looked online and found an article on how both the bad number of ~65k came to be as well as more accurate numbers:
http://cis.org/estimating-h1b-population-2-11
... These issues are caused by moving almost all manufacturing offshore....
"Free trade", which today means move all jobs overseas while not letting us buy cheap drugs overseas and with little to no tariffs on the imports from regions with lower environmental or worker standards, is definitely the nail in the middle class coffin. Remember that only 3 candidates are against this - vote Sanders or Trump or Paul (if Paul can actually stay in and get that far). The other Republican candidates are all for free trade and the Clinton's gave us a huge middle class reduction via NAFTA and giving China MFN status.
I only whine when the Feds do all the work, on our dime, yet we end up with a drug company getting all the profits. If the Feds decided to put a few rules on it that allowed it to make sense for US citizens like manufacture it in the US and sell it at a reasonable cost then I'm fine with it. I suspect many other citizens would be fine with that arrangement too.
Sociopaths are human beings who have what could be considered in a mental illness, in some settings they can be quite dangerous and harmful, in others their illness can even be an asset.
As inequality grows and the prospects for a nice middle class lifestyle get smaller people will get desperate and what formerly would have been inconceivable suddenly looks reasonable. This is not new and is a sign that things are getting seriously out of whack. I'm voting Trump or Sanders solely on the "free trade" issue. I expect that Hillary will ultimately win since the media has been clear about who they expect to get elected and has been manipulating everything in her favor once she started to seriously look like she might be in trouble. After another 8 years at the current rate of decay things will be more dire and Trump will look very reasonable by comparison to who will be the front runners then. This will continue until something changes. Best case the 1% relent a bit to save what they have. Worst case we get a dictator. But something has to give.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Clinton said he hoped the agreement would encourage other nations to work toward a broader world-trade pact.
The US has had a trade deficit with the world for 35 years...
Coincidentally the middle class has been declining for roughly the same time. Also unless you are completely unaware of history you will note that workers now put in *far* more hours than they use to. Why is that? Race to the bottom. If China et al are willing to put in more time than so should we. Ultimately we can have a happier lifestyle via protectionism or we can sink to the lowest standards the planet has to offer.
Regarding economists and free trade, you know full well economists have contrived scenarios where free trade makes sense but in the real world it's a race to the bottom. Free trade works between similar standards of living yes. When you have large imbalances in the standards of living then it settles to the new lower standard. Unless you are someone who has immense schadenfreude in lowering your standards of living then you should be against a race to the bottom.
Remember that only 2 people are against this: Trump and Sanders. The Clinton's gave us NAFTA and fully supported this agreement as the gold standard. The Republicans always push for "free trade". For the sake of yourselves and your children vote either Trump or Sanders. If it weren't for "free trade" we'd all be making approximately double what we are now as shown here:
When the evidence is tainted, the case gets thrown out.
I think that's throwing the baby out with the bath water. Perhaps a more reasonable approach would be to see if the conviction would stand without the fake evidence. For a sample group as large as this there are bound to be many *seriously bad* criminals that it would be a very bad idea to release. Of course, if you're willing to put your money where your mouth is how about we release these people but make you liable for crimes they commit. Kind of like co-signing. Mayhem is all fun and games until it happens in your own neighborhood;-)
The trouble with juries is they are inherently conservative and right wing because only successful people who've never experienced any hardship can really afford to be on them.
I'm not sure where you came up with this line of reasoning. Many (most?) people who have lots of jury time available are government employees. Teachers and the like are not generally known as "inherently conservative and right wing". Certainly as a group less so than the private sector people around them.
We were clearly told by the appointed future president that it was the "gold standard" of agreements. Although for show she suddenly has reservations about it I'm sure once elected it will be fully supported. When it comes to stopping the freight train of "free trade" vote Trump or Sanders.
Between direct deaths (ie people who die immediately in accidents) and indirect deaths (ie people who die of cancer or pollution) I think coal has more deaths than nuclear by quite a bit. Interestingly hydroelectric dominates for direct deaths as shown here:
A phone call is not recorded, it can be ignored or forgotten. Logging the complaint means that it stays on a list and doesn't fall through the cracks. At least in theory. A fair question would have been how many water leaks and such were found before the app to see if the stats actually improved.
What you're asking for is harder than it seems. To go through walls and other obstacles you transmit at higher power. To make a super short range version you could transmit at lower power or use a higher frequency since higher frequencies (ie shorter wavelengths) don't penetrate walls and other obstacles as well. This is why your old 900MHz cordless phone worked half a block away but wifi struggles with 2 story stucco houses.
Bandwidth is perhaps the most poorly utilized resource. There is tons of spectrum, the vast majority of it locked up for historical reasons. 2.4GHz has been so incredibly useful to humanity. We could do even more with wireless if most of the spectrum wasn't locked up. I work with some ISM and people are generally limited to 151MHz / 433MHz / 915MHz / 2.4GHz in the US with the other frequencies used for special applications and in some cases only certain companies. To make the future better you have to sometimes break from the past and frequency allocation is an excellent example of this.
You meant this as a joke but there are only three candidates who have strongly come out against this: Trump, Sanders, and Paul. Of those only Sanders and Trump are polling strongly. For the economic interests of myself and especially my children I would gladly vote for either Trump or Sanders. Or Paul if by some miracle he gets pass the primaries.
Want more "free trade" - vote Clinton II or Bush III
Still waiting to hear how mass immigration doesn't hurt legal citizens kids, or are we willing to admit that they do? As the article was about someone taking a stand against mass immigration I'm on topic.
Amusingly enough your rant did not address how illegal immigration has hurt education for legal citizens. Both parties sold out the citizens on immigration, it's not a left/right thing.
This is an interesting way to take action. Not politically correct but as political correctness is almost unlimited immigration and anyone who dares say otherwise must be a racist xenophobe. As someone with kids in school I say with complete certainty that illegal immigration, which is one step worse than Europe's bungled current immigration, definitely hurts my family. How you ask? Class size and diverted resources for one. About 20% of the school is either an anchor baby or illegal. Much higher if you go back a generation. Larger classes and funds spent teaching them basic English mean a diminished education for the legal kids.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this concept was explored in the movie "In Time". It's an OK movie, a bit over the top at the end. Still it had some interesting ideas. I would expect that given how increases in productivity had been with held from most of humanity the movies depiction of the poor always being on death's doorstep is likely. It's an interesting thought - how would you decide who gets to live forever? One would hope that some thresh old would be used but who sets that and what criteria are used? Those who can afford it? Those who are pleasant, good looking, athletic, intelligent, etc? Those who have provably contributed something to society? Interesting question.
If you own anything in this world, then you own your body. You should have every right to do whatever you want with your body...
Indeed. Women can terminate infants just for trespassing on their bodies regardless of what the father wants.
Ah yes, we greatly fear the Christian terrorist. As close as you can come to a Christian terrorist who attacks for religious reasons are attacks on abortion clinics. That seems like a far cry from shooting into a crowd with an AK47. If you have something more compelling I'd love to hear it.
... after all there are less than 100k H1Bs and on other hand there are 121M citizens 25 years and over with no college degree...
There are many more than 100k H1B visa holders. I looked online and found an article on how both the bad number of ~65k came to be as well as more accurate numbers:
http://cis.org/estimating-h1b-population-2-11
... These issues are caused by moving almost all manufacturing offshore. ...
"Free trade", which today means move all jobs overseas while not letting us buy cheap drugs overseas and with little to no tariffs on the imports from regions with lower environmental or worker standards, is definitely the nail in the middle class coffin. Remember that only 3 candidates are against this - vote Sanders or Trump or Paul (if Paul can actually stay in and get that far). The other Republican candidates are all for free trade and the Clinton's gave us a huge middle class reduction via NAFTA and giving China MFN status.
Citations: http://www.history.com/this-da...
http://tech.mit.edu/V114/N27/c...
I think that the common factor was their religion, not their nationality. I also think you know this but choose to ignore it.
I only whine when the Feds do all the work, on our dime, yet we end up with a drug company getting all the profits. If the Feds decided to put a few rules on it that allowed it to make sense for US citizens like manufacture it in the US and sell it at a reasonable cost then I'm fine with it. I suspect many other citizens would be fine with that arrangement too.
Sociopaths are human beings who have what could be considered in a mental illness, in some settings they can be quite dangerous and harmful, in others their illness can even be an asset.
Like as CEOs and executioners
As inequality grows and the prospects for a nice middle class lifestyle get smaller people will get desperate and what formerly would have been inconceivable suddenly looks reasonable. This is not new and is a sign that things are getting seriously out of whack. I'm voting Trump or Sanders solely on the "free trade" issue. I expect that Hillary will ultimately win since the media has been clear about who they expect to get elected and has been manipulating everything in her favor once she started to seriously look like she might be in trouble. After another 8 years at the current rate of decay things will be more dire and Trump will look very reasonable by comparison to who will be the front runners then. This will continue until something changes. Best case the 1% relent a bit to save what they have. Worst case we get a dictator. But something has to give.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Clinton said he hoped the agreement would encourage other nations to work toward a broader world-trade pact.
The US has had a trade deficit with the world for 35 years...
Coincidentally the middle class has been declining for roughly the same time. Also unless you are completely unaware of history you will note that workers now put in *far* more hours than they use to. Why is that? Race to the bottom. If China et al are willing to put in more time than so should we. Ultimately we can have a happier lifestyle via protectionism or we can sink to the lowest standards the planet has to offer. Regarding economists and free trade, you know full well economists have contrived scenarios where free trade makes sense but in the real world it's a race to the bottom. Free trade works between similar standards of living yes. When you have large imbalances in the standards of living then it settles to the new lower standard. Unless you are someone who has immense schadenfreude in lowering your standards of living then you should be against a race to the bottom.
http://www.theatlantic.com/bus...
or here:
http://www.epi.org/blog/inequa...
Wrong, you turn every single person free.
When the evidence is tainted, the case gets thrown out.
I think that's throwing the baby out with the bath water. Perhaps a more reasonable approach would be to see if the conviction would stand without the fake evidence. For a sample group as large as this there are bound to be many *seriously bad* criminals that it would be a very bad idea to release. Of course, if you're willing to put your money where your mouth is how about we release these people but make you liable for crimes they commit. Kind of like co-signing. Mayhem is all fun and games until it happens in your own neighborhood ;-)
The trouble with juries is they are inherently conservative and right wing because only successful people who've never experienced any hardship can really afford to be on them.
I'm not sure where you came up with this line of reasoning. Many (most?) people who have lots of jury time available are government employees. Teachers and the like are not generally known as "inherently conservative and right wing". Certainly as a group less so than the private sector people around them.
Everyone knows that votes must be bought fairly and squarely. None of this recommendation of good character for free stuff.
We were clearly told by the appointed future president that it was the "gold standard" of agreements. Although for show she suddenly has reservations about it I'm sure once elected it will be fully supported. When it comes to stopping the freight train of "free trade" vote Trump or Sanders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia,_Pennsylvania
Between direct deaths (ie people who die immediately in accidents) and indirect deaths (ie people who die of cancer or pollution) I think coal has more deaths than nuclear by quite a bit. Interestingly hydroelectric dominates for direct deaths as shown here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents
See it's people like you who are the problem, not feminists.
It's not an XOR, both are part of the problem.
A phone call is not recorded, it can be ignored or forgotten. Logging the complaint means that it stays on a list and doesn't fall through the cracks. At least in theory. A fair question would have been how many water leaks and such were found before the app to see if the stats actually improved.
People in Chicago are laughing at you.
They definitely aren't laughing all the way to the bank. Both Illinois and Chicago have a long list of financial woes.
What you're asking for is harder than it seems. To go through walls and other obstacles you transmit at higher power. To make a super short range version you could transmit at lower power or use a higher frequency since higher frequencies (ie shorter wavelengths) don't penetrate walls and other obstacles as well. This is why your old 900MHz cordless phone worked half a block away but wifi struggles with 2 story stucco houses.
Bandwidth is perhaps the most poorly utilized resource. There is tons of spectrum, the vast majority of it locked up for historical reasons. 2.4GHz has been so incredibly useful to humanity. We could do even more with wireless if most of the spectrum wasn't locked up. I work with some ISM and people are generally limited to 151MHz / 433MHz / 915MHz / 2.4GHz in the US with the other frequencies used for special applications and in some cases only certain companies. To make the future better you have to sometimes break from the past and frequency allocation is an excellent example of this.
You meant this as a joke but there are only three candidates who have strongly come out against this: Trump, Sanders, and Paul. Of those only Sanders and Trump are polling strongly. For the economic interests of myself and especially my children I would gladly vote for either Trump or Sanders. Or Paul if by some miracle he gets pass the primaries. Want more "free trade" - vote Clinton II or Bush III
Still waiting to hear how mass immigration doesn't hurt legal citizens kids, or are we willing to admit that they do? As the article was about someone taking a stand against mass immigration I'm on topic.
Amusingly enough your rant did not address how illegal immigration has hurt education for legal citizens. Both parties sold out the citizens on immigration, it's not a left/right thing.
This is an interesting way to take action. Not politically correct but as political correctness is almost unlimited immigration and anyone who dares say otherwise must be a racist xenophobe. As someone with kids in school I say with complete certainty that illegal immigration, which is one step worse than Europe's bungled current immigration, definitely hurts my family. How you ask? Class size and diverted resources for one. About 20% of the school is either an anchor baby or illegal. Much higher if you go back a generation. Larger classes and funds spent teaching them basic English mean a diminished education for the legal kids.