(from the link)"We also used the questionnaire to estimate how frequently illness and medical bills contributed to bankruptcy. We developed two summary measures of medical bankruptcy. Under the rubric "Major Medical Bankruptcy" we included debtors who either (1) cited illness or injury as a specific reason for bankruptcy, or (2) reported uncovered medical bills exceeding $1,000 in the past years, or (3) lost at least two weeks of work-related income because of illness/injury, or (4) mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Our more inclusive category, "Any Medical Bankruptcy," included debtors who cited any of the above, or addiction, or uncontrolled gambling, or birth, or the death of a family member.16"
In other words, their analysis included lost income from illness (not covered under medical insurance), self reporting, and addiction or gambling. So the study didn't show that "medical bills" per se waere the cause, only that there were "medical" factors involved.
1) the rate doesn't pay back the government for the construction costs, and 2) The rate doesn't "pay for" the environmental damage that the dams cause.
#2 is a little crunchy granola, but the first is Econ 101.
California only went free market half way. They deregulated the wholesale side, but kept controls on the consumer side. They figured they could suspend the laws of economics and let the consumers have cheap electricity while the big, bad corporations suffered. Had consumers been subjected to price fluctuations and higher prices earlier, there would have been more incentive to conserve electricity and build more native capacity. As it was, California left themselves open to the predations of unscrupulous energy traders who took advantage of the imbalanced market.
I'm glad Enron is getting hammered over their shenanigans, but that doesn't mean that California's "leaders" weren't incompetant and/or corrupt as well.
"Like giving axes to conviceted ax murderers, heroin to recovering junkies, and having convicted pedophiles running a day care, I believe it's a bad idea to tempt fate."
So rapists used porn to rape their victims? What, they rolled up a Playboy and sodomized someone with it?
You are equating sex and rape. Rape is about violence, not sexual gratification. A rapist uses the sexual act to perform violence. I saw a study once where most rapists don't ejaculate, signifying that, whatever release a rapist is looking for, it isn't a sexual release.
With your analogies, axe murderers should be kept away from trees (axe related), junkies should be kept from hospitals (might be syringes there). I agree with pedophiles and day care, not because the kids are a temptation - a pedophile is going to be attracted to kids whether he is around them or not - but to reduce opportunities for pedophiles to have private time and/or develop trust with potential victims.
After the Democrat leadership cut Lieberman's throat during the primaries and after, it's going to take blow jobs from both Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi to get Lieberman to vote party line for the next 6 years.
I was going to suggest a variation of this, except you NEVER tell them what you did. If you fess up, they won't learn the lesson - after all, OF COURSE you could hack their machine, but no one else could!
The trick would be to hose their machine into unusability without losing important data. For instance, if they only lost pictures that you sent them, tehy will ask you to re-send them - irritating, but no real data loss.
"The Neocon executive leadership in the US are criminals, their actions undermine the tenets of Democracy, and they need to be reigned in, now (as in arraignment)."
When referred to as a concept or process, "democracy" generally uses a lower case "d". Generally an upper case "D" is used when referring to the political party - capitalizing a proper noun. So the proper reading of your statement would be:
"The Neocon executive leadership in the US are criminals, their actions undermine the tenets of Democrats, and they need to be reigned in, now (as in arraignment)."
Which probably better reflects the thinking of the leadership of taht party.
"The real news is that Diebold is so furious over such a vague "expose." What they should be doing is simply ignoring the whole thing, unless questioned specifically. By launching their own campaign against it, they're legitimizing the film -- which may actually be a good thing -- and giving it more attention than it may have otherwise received."
Audi followed that advice when 60 Minutes did their "unintended accelleration" hack job on them - it nearly drove them out of the market due to lost sales.
GM, having learned from the Audi debacle, went after 20/20 tooth and nail and actually got an on-air apology.
Regardless of the merits of the documentary or Diebold's product, which strategy should they follow from a business standpoint? Audi or GM?
You said: "This applies to homeowner's associations, dormitories, and apartment complexes. For example, they're not required to let the cable guy come in and drill holes in your wall. They can ban satellite dishes,...Note that none of these covenant conditions covers anything that is patently illegal--only special conditions placed on your residence at that location. By signing the covenant or the lease agreement, you are contractually obligated to comply with the terms. You've not broken any laws by ignoring the lease, but you are liable civilly and can be enjoined from the behavior and punished financially.
I said: "There was a ruling by the FCC that basically said that agreements banning satellite dishes are null and void, except to the extent that one can be prohibited from placing them on "common areas". Sincce most of the time the roof is a common area, one hasn't seen the muchroom sprouting like wildfire, but planting a pipe in a bucket of concrete and putting it on your balcony is aceptable."
You responded with: "They cannot tell building owners that they must allow tenants to modify the structure of the building or detract from the "aesthetic standards" of the community. For example,..., as may the installation of "unsightly" dishes on street-facing sides of a home. Covenants are a bitch, but that's life--... The FCC can step in when your landlord tells you that you must use Comcast if you want TV, or that you have to use AT&T for phone service, but short of that, it's not within their authority."
The bit about "modifying the physical structure" is a straw man - I specifically said that "one can be prohibited from placing them on "common areas"". The FCC link I used amplifies this. So no, the FCC "doesn't get to decide what private property owners are allowed to do with that physical property. They cannot tell building owners that they must allow tenants to modify the structure of the building" - but then, no one was arguing that but you.
For your second point, about how "They cannot tell building owners that they must allow tenants... detract from the "aesthetic standards" of the community.", , you are hanging your defense on exceptions for "legitimate safety restrictions or restrictions designed to preserve designated or eligible historic or prehistoric properties". Let's see what the FCC says later in the document (which you either skipped or are artfully neglecting to mention).
"Q: Are all restrictions prohibited?
A: No. Clearly-defined, legitimate safety restrictions are permitted even if they impair installation, maintenance or use provided they are necessary to protect public safety and are no more burdensome than necessary to ensure safety. Examples of valid safety restrictions include fire codes preventing people from installing antennas on fire escapes; restrictions requiring that a person not place an antenna within a certain distance from a power line; and installation requirements that describe the proper method to secure an antenna....
Restrictions necessary for historic preservation also may be permitted even if they impair installation, maintenance or use of the antenna. To qualify for this exemption, the property may be any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, restrictions necessary for historic preservation must be no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the historic preservation goal.... "
Not exactly a wide open exception, eh? I don't see a lot of "historic" condos.
So having defeated your assertion about "aesthetic restrictions" in the specific, lets go to the general. In your first response, you state "For example, antennae above certain sizes may be prohibited, as may the installation of "unsightly" dishes on street-facing sides of a home."
Actualy, they can't ban them. There was a ruling by the FCC that basically said that agreements banning satellite dishes are null and void, except to the extent that one can be prohibited from placing them on "common areas". Sincce most of the time the roof is a common area, one hasn't seen the muchroom sprouting like wildfire, but planting a pipe in a bucket of concrete and putting it on your balcony is aceptable.
If you want the cite, ask Google - my wife, the communications law expert, isn't here now.
By this do you mean that Dean has somehow changed all of the rules and will use them to the Democrat party's advantage while the clueless Republicans wither away? The internet stock bubble is calling - they want their paradigm back.
"He was trying to speak over a loud crowd after a long day, of course his voice was hoarse. The thing that Faux and ABC didn't bother telling you is that the mike was right in front of him and somehow able to filter out the crowd noise."
Did you actually watch the video? Yeah, he was hoarse and speaking loudly - no one thought that amiss. Then he SCREAMED INARTICULATELY AT THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS!!! (Text shouting placed for effect). It was interpreted as a loss of control and letting his emotions govern him, and folks decided that maybe he wasn't the best guy for a high pressure job.
But, with the prevalence of videocameras, another tape is bound to surface showing what really happened, much like the real photos of the rally with Kerry and Fonda surfaced.
Or, the "many eyes" on the internet will find and dismantle the tampering, backlashing on the opposing candidate - see Rather andd the tampered memo.
The real risk to politicians is exactly what happened to Allen. When Allen used the word "macaca", he was referring to the political operative who had been following him around to videotape everything he said, in the hopes of getting something to ridicule him with. And Allen stepped right in - racist AND an idiot.
Keep in mind that those were mostly COUNTER-intelligence operations - the Soviets were stealing/aquiring advanced technologies that were illegal to sell to them. The US got tipped off, and so "let" the transfer happen, but poisoned the technology. This was possible because the Soviets had a habit of taking computer technology and implementing it lock, stock, and barrel, even to the point of implementing errors or other quirks. I believe at one point the swiped an IBM computer ship design and duplicated it right down to the initials of the designer hidden on the chip.
What the fear is now isn't counter intelligence, but direct action. But the problem is the same - inadequate checking of the product.
"Utube.com" represents "Universal Tube", which is short for Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation.
Why didn't they just use "Universaltube.com" you ask? Because that URL is held by Universal Tube Inc. a tubing assembly manufacturer and supplier.
Sooo, when will Universal Tube Inc. sue Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation for the added traffic from all the people typing in "UniversalTube.com" and expecting to get the equipment manufacturer?
The article you link to blames the low US score on actions of the US Armed forces outside of the US. But this same organization ranked Denmark low because of threats to journalists from OUTSIDE Denmark. By that same logic, the S ranking should be higher, because, no matter what is happening in Iraq, the military's actions there are NOT threatening reporters in the US.
Or maybe this is an organization with an agenda. Reporters with an agenda? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I say.
Collusion to fix prices is only really possible in the situation you describe: the product is a commodity. If producers can differentiate their product on something other than price - quality, location, etc - and charge more for it than the comparable products, then there is no incentive for that producer to join a price fixing scheme. But when products are a commodity, there is nowher to compete BUT on price. Hence, producers get together and artificially set the price higher than it would otherwise be, so as to increase profits for all producers.
Slashdot Mirror
Careful...
(from the link)"We also used the questionnaire to estimate how frequently illness and medical bills contributed to bankruptcy. We developed two summary measures of medical bankruptcy. Under the rubric "Major Medical Bankruptcy" we included debtors who either (1) cited illness or injury as a specific reason for bankruptcy, or (2) reported uncovered medical bills exceeding $1,000 in the past years, or (3) lost at least two weeks of work-related income because of illness/injury, or (4) mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Our more inclusive category, "Any Medical Bankruptcy," included debtors who cited any of the above, or addiction, or uncontrolled gambling, or birth, or the death of a family member.16"
In other words, their analysis included lost income from illness (not covered under medical insurance), self reporting, and addiction or gambling. So the study didn't show that "medical bills" per se waere the cause, only that there were "medical" factors involved.
The rate is considered subsidized in that:
1) the rate doesn't pay back the government for the construction costs, and
2) The rate doesn't "pay for" the environmental damage that the dams cause.
#2 is a little crunchy granola, but the first is Econ 101.
California only went free market half way. They deregulated the wholesale side, but kept controls on the consumer side. They figured they could suspend the laws of economics and let the consumers have cheap electricity while the big, bad corporations suffered. Had consumers been subjected to price fluctuations and higher prices earlier, there would have been more incentive to conserve electricity and build more native capacity. As it was, California left themselves open to the predations of unscrupulous energy traders who took advantage of the imbalanced market.
I'm glad Enron is getting hammered over their shenanigans, but that doesn't mean that California's "leaders" weren't incompetant and/or corrupt as well.
"I have an rsync now backing up the files I'd cry if I lost every hour."
Every hour? Why?
"Infant mortality just isn't a concern with disk drives, compared to that of worn-out mechanical parts."
2 words:
IBM Deathstar
"Like giving axes to conviceted ax murderers, heroin to recovering junkies, and having convicted pedophiles running a day care, I believe it's a bad idea to tempt fate."
So rapists used porn to rape their victims? What, they rolled up a Playboy and sodomized someone with it?
You are equating sex and rape. Rape is about violence, not sexual gratification. A rapist uses the sexual act to perform violence. I saw a study once where most rapists don't ejaculate, signifying that, whatever release a rapist is looking for, it isn't a sexual release.
With your analogies, axe murderers should be kept away from trees (axe related), junkies should be kept from hospitals (might be syringes there). I agree with pedophiles and day care, not because the kids are a temptation - a pedophile is going to be attracted to kids whether he is around them or not - but to reduce opportunities for pedophiles to have private time and/or develop trust with potential victims.
You are clearly missing the point. Let me simplify for you:
US=BAD
Everyone Else=Good
Once you learn to accept that, everything will go a lot smoother
Didn't the record labels try to "alter the deal" the last time their contracts were up?
Didn't Jobs spank them back into submission?
Can't see it any different this time.
After the Democrat leadership cut Lieberman's throat during the primaries and after, it's going to take blow jobs from both Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi to get Lieberman to vote party line for the next 6 years.
I was going to suggest a variation of this, except you NEVER tell them what you did. If you fess up, they won't learn the lesson - after all, OF COURSE you could hack their machine, but no one else could!
The trick would be to hose their machine into unusability without losing important data. For instance, if they only lost pictures that you sent them, tehy will ask you to re-send them - irritating, but no real data loss.
"The Neocon executive leadership in the US are criminals, their actions undermine the tenets of Democracy, and they need to be reigned in, now (as in arraignment)."
When referred to as a concept or process, "democracy" generally uses a lower case "d". Generally an upper case "D" is used when referring to the political party - capitalizing a proper noun. So the proper reading of your statement would be:
"The Neocon executive leadership in the US are criminals, their actions undermine the tenets of Democrats, and they need to be reigned in, now (as in arraignment)."
Which probably better reflects the thinking of the leadership of taht party.
"The real news is that Diebold is so furious over such a vague "expose." What they should be doing is simply ignoring the whole thing, unless questioned specifically. By launching their own campaign against it, they're legitimizing the film -- which may actually be a good thing -- and giving it more attention than it may have otherwise received."
Audi followed that advice when 60 Minutes did their "unintended accelleration" hack job on them - it nearly drove them out of the market due to lost sales.
GM, having learned from the Audi debacle, went after 20/20 tooth and nail and actually got an on-air apology.
Regardless of the merits of the documentary or Diebold's product, which strategy should they follow from a business standpoint? Audi or GM?
OK, from the top.
...Note that none of these covenant conditions covers anything that is patently illegal--only special conditions placed on your residence at that location. By signing the covenant or the lease agreement, you are contractually obligated to comply with the terms. You've not broken any laws by ignoring the lease, but you are liable civilly and can be enjoined from the behavior and punished financially.
..., as may the installation of "unsightly" dishes on street-facing sides of a home. Covenants are a bitch, but that's life--... The FCC can step in when your landlord tells you that you must use Comcast if you want TV, or that you have to use AT&T for phone service, but short of that, it's not within their authority."
... detract from the "aesthetic standards" of the community.", , you are hanging your defense on exceptions for "legitimate safety restrictions or restrictions designed to preserve designated or eligible historic or prehistoric properties". Let's see what the FCC says later in the document (which you either skipped or are artfully neglecting to mention).
...
... "
You said:
"This applies to homeowner's associations, dormitories, and apartment complexes. For example, they're not required to let the cable guy come in and drill holes in your wall. They can ban satellite dishes,
I said:
"There was a ruling by the FCC that basically said that agreements banning satellite dishes are null and void, except to the extent that one can be prohibited from placing them on "common areas". Sincce most of the time the roof is a common area, one hasn't seen the muchroom sprouting like wildfire, but planting a pipe in a bucket of concrete and putting it on your balcony is aceptable."
You responded with:
"They cannot tell building owners that they must allow tenants to modify the structure of the building or detract from the "aesthetic standards" of the community. For example,
The bit about "modifying the physical structure" is a straw man - I specifically said that "one can be prohibited from placing them on "common areas"". The FCC link I used amplifies this. So no, the FCC "doesn't get to decide what private property owners are allowed to do with that physical property. They cannot tell building owners that they must allow tenants to modify the structure of the building" - but then, no one was arguing that but you.
For your second point, about how "They cannot tell building owners that they must allow tenants
"Q: Are all restrictions prohibited?
A: No. Clearly-defined, legitimate safety restrictions are permitted even if they impair installation, maintenance or use provided they are necessary to protect public safety and are no more burdensome than necessary to ensure safety. Examples of valid safety restrictions include fire codes preventing people from installing antennas on fire escapes; restrictions requiring that a person not place an antenna within a certain distance from a power line; and installation requirements that describe the proper method to secure an antenna.
Restrictions necessary for historic preservation also may be permitted even if they impair installation, maintenance or use of the antenna. To qualify for this exemption, the property may be any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, restrictions necessary for historic preservation must be no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the historic preservation goal.
Not exactly a wide open exception, eh? I don't see a lot of "historic" condos.
So having defeated your assertion about "aesthetic restrictions" in the specific, lets go to the general. In your first response, you state "For example, antennae above certain sizes may be prohibited, as may the installation of "unsightly" dishes on street-facing sides of a home."
But the
Wrong
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html
"satellite dishes"
Actualy, they can't ban them. There was a ruling by the FCC that basically said that agreements banning satellite dishes are null and void, except to the extent that one can be prohibited from placing them on "common areas". Sincce most of the time the roof is a common area, one hasn't seen the muchroom sprouting like wildfire, but planting a pipe in a bucket of concrete and putting it on your balcony is aceptable.
If you want the cite, ask Google - my wife, the communications law expert, isn't here now.
"The world has changed. Get used to it."
By this do you mean that Dean has somehow changed all of the rules and will use them to the Democrat party's advantage while the clueless Republicans wither away? The internet stock bubble is calling - they want their paradigm back.
"He was trying to speak over a loud crowd after a long day, of course his voice was hoarse. The thing that Faux and ABC didn't bother telling you is that the mike was right in front of him and somehow able to filter out the crowd noise."
Did you actually watch the video? Yeah, he was hoarse and speaking loudly - no one thought that amiss. Then he SCREAMED INARTICULATELY AT THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS!!! (Text shouting placed for effect). It was interpreted as a loss of control and letting his emotions govern him, and folks decided that maybe he wasn't the best guy for a high pressure job.
But, with the prevalence of videocameras, another tape is bound to surface showing what really happened, much like the real photos of the rally with Kerry and Fonda surfaced.
Or, the "many eyes" on the internet will find and dismantle the tampering, backlashing on the opposing candidate - see Rather andd the tampered memo.
The real risk to politicians is exactly what happened to Allen. When Allen used the word "macaca", he was referring to the political operative who had been following him around to videotape everything he said, in the hopes of getting something to ridicule him with. And Allen stepped right in - racist AND an idiot.
Perhaps they intend to pull out only to later shoot it in China's face
"monopoly is sined"
I though all their math majors went to Google.
"800 lb. guerilla "
Che! Is that you? You've gained weight!
International survey Published!
US Sucks!
Film at 11:00!
next!
Keep in mind that those were mostly COUNTER-intelligence operations - the Soviets were stealing/aquiring advanced technologies that were illegal to sell to them. The US got tipped off, and so "let" the transfer happen, but poisoned the technology. This was possible because the Soviets had a habit of taking computer technology and implementing it lock, stock, and barrel, even to the point of implementing errors or other quirks. I believe at one point the swiped an IBM computer ship design and duplicated it right down to the initials of the designer hidden on the chip.
What the fear is now isn't counter intelligence, but direct action. But the problem is the same - inadequate checking of the product.
and why didn't someone tell me my ass was so big?!
"Utube.com" represents "Universal Tube", which is short for Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation.
Why didn't they just use "Universaltube.com" you ask? Because that URL is held by Universal Tube Inc. a tubing assembly manufacturer and supplier.
Sooo, when will Universal Tube Inc. sue Universal Tube & Rollform Equipment Corporation for the added traffic from all the people typing in "UniversalTube.com" and expecting to get the equipment manufacturer?
The article you link to blames the low US score on actions of the US Armed forces outside of the US. But this same organization ranked Denmark low because of threats to journalists from OUTSIDE Denmark. By that same logic, the S ranking should be higher, because, no matter what is happening in Iraq, the military's actions there are NOT threatening reporters in the US.
Or maybe this is an organization with an agenda. Reporters with an agenda? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I say.
Collusion to fix prices is only really possible in the situation you describe: the product is a commodity. If producers can differentiate their product on something other than price - quality, location, etc - and charge more for it than the comparable products, then there is no incentive for that producer to join a price fixing scheme. But when products are a commodity, there is nowher to compete BUT on price. Hence, producers get together and artificially set the price higher than it would otherwise be, so as to increase profits for all producers.
See the DeBeers cartel for an example.