But once it's established once that someone is trying to fraudulently send people to have sex with [name] who lives at [address] and works at [workplace] they have choices.
So, how has it been established?
One guy said "yes", the other said "no". Okay, who's telling the truth? The guy saying "yes" or the guy saying "no"?
Yes, your job might not be automated, but the millions who are about to lose jobs to automation (or already have [ft.com]) aren't just going to go quietly into that good night.
Y'know, they were saying the same thing back a century or so when combines and harvesters and tractors were going to cost all the farmers and farmhands to lose their jobs.
And they were right!!! 80+% of the people used to be farmers. And now it's closer to 5%! It's almost amazing we've been able to hold things together so long with 75%+ unemployment, isn't it?
What's that you say? We don't have 75% unemployment? But how can this be?!? Automation eliminated 75%+ of the jobs back in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. Are you seriously asking me to believe that we found new things for those people to do? Impossible, I say! You, sir or madame, must be lying to make a political point!
...we've already got landfills. Just toss the body into a landfill, and done!
That said, I'm not actually opposed to the idea. But I expect the lawsuits wrapped around the first case where the family can't agree on method of disposal will make this a very unpopular option....
This idea was based on how my wife and I were raised during the 80's and 90's
This could be extended a bit. For instance, your parents could use the same phrase. As could your grandparents. And great-grandparents. Wouldn't it have been great if YOU were educated with only the tools & information available in 1755?
Or are you arguing that YOUR childhood education and development were the zenith of human accomplishment in that regard?
As an outsider (living in Sweden, Europe) I am a bit curious, but mostly alarmed how the US have got such a seemingly malfunctioning health care system.
To make a long story short, it's fallout from WW2.
Wage/Price controls during WW2 made it difficult for businesses to recruit talent - it wasn't like you can pay them more to get them to leave their current job.
So, someone had the bright idea of offering Medical Insurance as part of the pay package. Legal, since Medical Insurance wasn't covered by the Wage/Price controls.
Anyways, by the time the notion of Single-Payer got some momentum, Medical Insurance as a benefit of your job was so embedded in the economy that getting rid of it was next to impossible.
In the long run, Medicare will probably be gradually extended to cover everyone, which will give us Single-Payer by default. But it's hard to deal with the economic disruption (the Insurance Industry is HUUUUGE! and will pretty much vanish with Single Payer) quickly, so it'll be a while.
Doing it indirectly via vouchers just adds a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy
Unnecessary? I beg to differ. Bureaucrats have to do something to justify their salaries and perks. What better way than handing out free money? And not even their money - they get to hand out YOUR money to people who will vote for them next election.
A win-win situation, if you're a politician or government bureaucrat....
This is because the government is employing an insane amount of people now.
- The DOD now has over 2.8 million active or reserve on payroll
Of course, the fact that Active Duty Military (y'know, the kind that get posted to places where shooting is going on) are at about a 60-year low doesn't matter.
Oh, and counting people who work for companies that do business with the government is a bit misleading. After all, we can count McDonalds & Burger King as "employed by the government" that way.
Actually, it's hard to find ANYONE we can't count as "employed by the government" if we count "anyone who works for someone who ever sells things to a government employee" as "employed by the government".
Exploration and colonization. Descendants of Europeans are still milking the exploits of the European explorers who explored North and South America and swindled land from Native American nations.
We didn't "swindle" land from the Native Americans. We (occasionally) bought land from the First Immigrants (or Second, depending on how accurate that current scientific views vis a vis the various immigration waves to the New World are), or beat the crap out of them and took it.
Pretty much the same way the various inhabitants of every other part of the world did, back in the day.
Or is it okay if your ancestors did it 1000+ years ago, and only bad when they did it 500- years ago?
I'm assuming the submitter isn't a native English speaker, but would it be too much for the Editor to convert the title to something that passes for colloquial English?
A woman was the victim of gun violence every 12 minutes
That's a pretty loose definition of "gun violence" you're using there. ALL Firearms deaths in the USA, including suicide, didn't happen that often. Or were you counting "gun violence" to include "someone pointed a gun at someone else"?
So again it is important that firefox gets more usage, only because it is the one free (no hidden agenda) browser still available.
So, we should use Firefox because it's not Google? How about coming up with a positive reason for using it? Like, maybe, it's better? Assuming it is better, of course.
Disclaimer: I use Firefox, and have used it pretty much since its inception....
Slashdot Mirror
Just so. Can't get one till I can justify getting rid of some of the tools already in my garage....
This isn't about warning NYC of the Evils of Amazon. This is about preventing Amazon from establishing a new HQ outside Seattle.
Because if Amazon did that, they'd be in a position to tell Seattle bye-bye....
So, how has it been established?
One guy said "yes", the other said "no". Okay, who's telling the truth? The guy saying "yes" or the guy saying "no"?
Let me know next time you have to do 32C+ for, say, seven months straight. Which is a mild summer for Tampa....
Y'know, they were saying the same thing back a century or so when combines and harvesters and tractors were going to cost all the farmers and farmhands to lose their jobs.
And they were right!!! 80+% of the people used to be farmers. And now it's closer to 5%! It's almost amazing we've been able to hold things together so long with 75%+ unemployment, isn't it?
What's that you say? We don't have 75% unemployment? But how can this be?!? Automation eliminated 75%+ of the jobs back in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. Are you seriously asking me to believe that we found new things for those people to do? Impossible, I say! You, sir or madame, must be lying to make a political point!
...we've already got landfills. Just toss the body into a landfill, and done!
That said, I'm not actually opposed to the idea. But I expect the lawsuits wrapped around the first case where the family can't agree on method of disposal will make this a very unpopular option....
Of course, Fukushima, TMI, and Chernobyl combined didn't kill thousands. More like hundreds.
Of those, ONE (1) was killed by Fukushima. He died this past year.
TMI didn't kill anyone.
Chernobyl killed a couple hundred firefighters (and if Chernobyl were non-nuclear, it would probably have killed the same number of firefighters....).
Which subsidies are those? I can't seem to find them in the Federal Budget....
I'm curious...
Assuming you were alive in 1861, would you have the same opinion about, say, just where the United States ended and the Confederate States began?
Umm, no. The telephone didn't work during Camille, for instance.
This could be extended a bit. For instance, your parents could use the same phrase. As could your grandparents. And great-grandparents. Wouldn't it have been great if YOU were educated with only the tools & information available in 1755?
Or are you arguing that YOUR childhood education and development were the zenith of human accomplishment in that regard?
To make a long story short, it's fallout from WW2.
Wage/Price controls during WW2 made it difficult for businesses to recruit talent - it wasn't like you can pay them more to get them to leave their current job.
So, someone had the bright idea of offering Medical Insurance as part of the pay package. Legal, since Medical Insurance wasn't covered by the Wage/Price controls.
Anyways, by the time the notion of Single-Payer got some momentum, Medical Insurance as a benefit of your job was so embedded in the economy that getting rid of it was next to impossible.
In the long run, Medicare will probably be gradually extended to cover everyone, which will give us Single-Payer by default. But it's hard to deal with the economic disruption (the Insurance Industry is HUUUUGE! and will pretty much vanish with Single Payer) quickly, so it'll be a while.
Unnecessary? I beg to differ. Bureaucrats have to do something to justify their salaries and perks. What better way than handing out free money? And not even their money - they get to hand out YOUR money to people who will vote for them next election.
A win-win situation, if you're a politician or government bureaucrat....
If you can't spell "through" yet, they obviously shouldn't have stopped telling you that in Grad School....
Last Stand of the Tin-Can Sailors by James D Hornfischer
The Night Land (again!) by William Hope Hodgson
The Lord of the Rings (for the umpteenth time) by J.R.R. Tolkien
The Sackett Brand by Louis L'Amour
The First World War by A.J.P. Taylor
The Swiss Family Robinson by Johann David Wyss
The Greatest Knight by Thomas Asbridge
Of course, the fact that Active Duty Military (y'know, the kind that get posted to places where shooting is going on) are at about a 60-year low doesn't matter.
Oh, and counting people who work for companies that do business with the government is a bit misleading. After all, we can count McDonalds & Burger King as "employed by the government" that way.
Actually, it's hard to find ANYONE we can't count as "employed by the government" if we count "anyone who works for someone who ever sells things to a government employee" as "employed by the government".
Bad joke! Bad! No cookie for you!
We didn't "swindle" land from the Native Americans. We (occasionally) bought land from the First Immigrants (or Second, depending on how accurate that current scientific views vis a vis the various immigration waves to the New World are), or beat the crap out of them and took it.
Pretty much the same way the various inhabitants of every other part of the world did, back in the day.
Or is it okay if your ancestors did it 1000+ years ago, and only bad when they did it 500- years ago?
Buckets to the threat???
Oh! You meant "pales"....
I'm assuming the submitter isn't a native English speaker, but would it be too much for the Editor to convert the title to something that passes for colloquial English?
Oh, look! You were wrong about that too!
Yeah, the US Military budget is only a small part of total Federal spending, never mind total government spending....
Interesting theory you have there.
Let's see...Federal Budget 2018: $4.094 trillion.
Military budget 2018: $574 billion.
Oh, look! The military budget (all of it), is less than 1/6 the Federal budget....
That's a pretty loose definition of "gun violence" you're using there. ALL Firearms deaths in the USA, including suicide, didn't happen that often. Or were you counting "gun violence" to include "someone pointed a gun at someone else"?
So, we should use Firefox because it's not Google? How about coming up with a positive reason for using it? Like, maybe, it's better? Assuming it is better, of course.
Disclaimer: I use Firefox, and have used it pretty much since its inception....