I'm not saying your wife does that but that doesn't make it any less true.
Paid in full three months after she graduated from medical school. The advantages of having a husband in the semiconductor industry.
Perhaps your wife wouldn't do it if she had her own practice--your fuzzy estimate on how much her insurance premiums are suggest that she is working in an institution and probably doesn't have access to the amount that is being charged for her services--but that would make her an exception.
She is still in her residency and beginning to formulate a plan for her future. She thought about starting a practice of her own, but the start up costs are way to high, and with the uncertainty of future income (we live in a "poor" city where most of the population is medicaid/medicare, plus with all the talk of a "national healthcare system" and the current pay rate for for people on the government system...) there is no way we can afford that risk (I got laid off last year when my company pulled up the stakes and left town, got another job, but also a 20% pay cut).
How can you way your crap with a straight face with a BMW,Volvo or Audi in your garage attached to yout $300K-$500K home?
Oh yeah, I feel your pain.
She drives a beat up Honda Odyssey. I just finished driving a '98 Civic DX (no power windows, no power locks, manual transmission, AC that can't keep up with the heat around here). The only reason I was able to move up is because I am an engineer and have been able to cover her costs. Oh yeah, our house, try more like $180k, and it damn near killed us, we were only able to get it with substantial help from our parents. Feel my pain you arrogant shit, my wife has only this year been legally limited to work 80 hours a week, prior to that she routinely worked 120 hours a week, and she paid to do it. Talk about pain, I did not see my wife for more than 5 minutes a day for the month of August while she was on a "night float" rotation. Yes bitch, she pulls in a handsome $33k right now. Don't even try and tell me I am bullshitting you prick, I have the god damn W-2 forms to prove it. Go fuck yourself and your blind assumption I am not speaking the truth, I actually live in this world.
I'm sorry for being so rude, but for fuck's sake, this is my life, don't try and tell me I am lying.
And yet why is it that every doctor I know drives a Mercedes and has a 1 million plus home.
They are not pediatricians I bet. They are probably cardiologists that don't work at a community hospital that by law has to give care regardless of ability to pay. You probably don't live in a "poor" city. They probably don't care for a lot of medicaid patients (at the clinic my wife works, they see ~75% medicaid). My wife drives a beat up Honda Odyssey, I only just stopped driving a base '98 Civic, no power anything on that car. Any other questions?
Use real numbers, post the calculations again, and then maybe someone will cry for you.
OK, this is going to be harsh, but hello dumbfuck, I know exactly what the numbers are. My wife is a pediatric resident, she deals with this every day. She is trying to decide what career path to take. She has friends/mentors that are closing up shop because the government has decided to reduce payments. People that propose we need a national healthcare system have no idea just how bad the current system is. Now, go back to your life and realize that maybe you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Sorry for that, but get your head out of your ass and realize that THESE ARE REAL NUMBERS!
Until a president has the balls to say that doctors, hospitals and parms are EXTORTING the American public and make laws to stop them it will not change.
Disclaimer: My wife is a doctor
Okay, let's just take a quick look at some numbers: From the UAW a UAW represented assembler makes $25.63/hour straight time. This translates to over $53k/year assuming no OT. To my knowledge (quite possible wrong) to obtain this job, you need only a high school diploma. They report post inflation annual raises (from '92-'02) of 1.28%. Average college costs ~$20k (average of public and private, exclude out of state) and is rising by 7% each year. In 1999 med school cost ~$18k (again taking a conservative average), I couldn't find numbers for the annual increase, but given the costs we incurred, 7% is a reasonable number again. Books add even more, to the tune of ~$4k across the first two years. Let's look at a doctor's income stream vs. a UAW assembler assuming they are the high school class of 2003:
First year out of high school, -20k vs. $53k second, -21.4k vs. $53.7k third, -22.9k vs. $54.4k forth, -24.5k vs. $55.1k Onto medical school we go! 1st year, -25.6k (no inflation for books) vs. 55.8k 2nd year, -27.2k vs. 56.5k 3rd year, -27k (assume no more books) vs. 57.2k 4th year, -28.9k vs. 58.7k Time for residency, pay based on my wife's: 1st year, 31k vs. 59.5k 2nd year, 31.5k vs. 60.2k 3rd year, 32k vs. 61k
OK, now our doctor is ready to go out and start making real money....where do they stand finacially?
-$83k vs. $567.9k
Most of my wife's medical school friends enter residency with school loan payments to the tune of $1,200/month, basically a second mortgage. So now our doctor gets to go to work. Care to guess how much this doctor is going to get paid for seeing a child on medicaid? $7. Yes, that is right, they will get the princely sum of $7 to see that child for a 15 minute visit. That will probably not cover the cost of the people they must hire to file the paperwork to get paid. That works out to $28/hour while our assembler is now earning $29.48/hour (this is an inflation adjusted number, that means the real number will be much higher since 1% inflation is pretty darn low!). Who was it that was extorting whom? Does that auto worker go to work every day knowing that they could get sued and have everything except their house taken from them (my wife was threatened with lawsuits 3 times as a medical student for Pete's sake! Care to guess how much her malpractice insurance premiums are estimated to be? Over $20k/year.)? Yes, doctors can get paid well, but I would say in many respects they have earned it a lot more than others.
I'm sorry for this rant, but people who just spout off like doctors in general are super greedy really irk me (for obvious reasons). The people you need to be more concerned with are the insurance companies (basically profit generating machines from my perspective) and the lawyers (who make my wife live in constant fear that we will have everything taken away from us someday...oh wait, we get to keep the house and its mortgage).
Did you bother to read my reply to that poster??? I HAVE TRIED. HAVE YOU?
I have, and it doesn't address the point of my post, you still indicate you are part of the problem. Sure, you ran, but you ran as an independant, that doesn't help establish the strong third party you indicate we desperately need in your first post, and you still claim to be a republican in the same post you say they are half the problem. How does this go against my original post (saying you are part of the problem you complain about, right now, this day)? How did you try to establish a third party by running as an independant? Even if you had run as a third party candidate, how does that change that today, you claim to be a republican? Why aren't you working towards the solution you desire anymore?
Have I tried, yes, and I continue to try. I darn near never vote for republicans or democrats at any level, so you can stop yelling now.
Last winter I managed to walk into a small tree branch which slightly damaged the epithelium over the cornea.
My mistake, re-reading the original post I realize I mis-read it the first time around, I thought they were saying the retina would be causing the pain. The surface of the eye does have pain receptors. Sorry for the confusion, I will try and read more carefully before posting!
The eye's aqueous humor and lenses are also opaque to 10um light and you would therefore experience heating of the epithelium over the cornea and not damage to the retina; which I while suspect would be very painful you'd probably have enough time to shut your eyelid and prevent further damage.
Except that you don't have pain sensor nerves in your eye.
Anyone who has read my posts can quickly guess I am a republican..... I've said it many times... we have got to get a strong third party in place and soon to push the political mountain or we are going to watch these two parties merge into one uncontrollable monster.
As someone else sort of pointed out, why do you not see that you are in no way helping, but are actually part of the problem! If you are so worried about "these two parties" why in the heck do you start out by saying you are part of one of them?! You have stated you support half of the problem (okay, half, a little less than half, whatever).
Consider it carefully, avoid disingenuity, and then ask yourself: "was this an honest inquiry into AAiP's political leanings, or was there some greater meaning implied in my asking AAiP if he was a communist?"
In all honesty, yes, I was asking if you are a member of the Communist party...I view those who favor "progressive" tax scales as probably leaning that way. Pity that no one recognizes the American Communist Party doesn't want the US to become Soviet Russia (for the most part).
trying to weasel your way around it with your sanctimonious "Easy cheetah".
That comment was intended to express my shock at your offense...now I see why you were offended.
From my original post: I get so sick of hearing politicians (and from you[r] post, it sounds like you as well) complain that the "wealthy" are not taxed enough.
I failed to mention the flat tax, but here is where I was expressing my frustration at the words used by politicians to spin their "spending cuts" when they are actually "reduced increases," etc. I didn't do a good job of expressing my point, sorry for that one.
Your first post: An American making $75,000 a year falls into the top 1/4 of Americans, income-wise.
Your latest post: $160k is chump change.
So in your first post, $75k is implied to be quite wealthy, now $160k is nothing???
The lobbyists don't pay Congressional salaries.
Then why does everyone scream about "politicians being in the pocket of the corporations?" I agree, on paper they don't, but whose interests do they work for? They have to cater to these people to afford re-election (a whole other debate).
Again, very sorry to have upset you with the communist comment, it was an honest question, I often forget the word is so touchy to Americans.
I'm interested in using government, a government made by the People, for the People, to actually help the fucking people.
All swearing aside, I don't think the founding fathers intended for the government to "help the people" as much as leave the people alone.
Do you really want to tip the scales to favor frighteningly rich people who are in it to take your money for their own personal gain?
The only "people" I know that can take my money without my approval would be the government. All others I choose to give my money to, but I don't want to get into a debate about that...heck I didn't really want to get into a debate, just point out what you pointed out below....
Do you even understand the statistics you bandy about? Of course the people who make over $50k are going to pay the vast majority of our income tax--they've got the vast majority of the fucking money! You're going to see the same kinds of numbers when you apply a flat tax! Go ahead--try it! Whip out Excel and run some simple scenarios, then scratch your head in wonderment when those same long-suffering rich folks get "stiffed" over and over again!
Again, moving past the name calling...as I said originally, what ticks me off is when it is implied that somehow, someway, a flat tax is not going to continue to have the rich shoulder beyond a majority of the burden.
The more power and wealth we willingly cede to the individuals who already posess most of the power and wealth
And who do you think runs the government? In case you missed it, your congressman "earns" more than $160k! Do you think they are working in our best interests or are they listening to the lobbyists?
I could hardly agree with you more. I only continued the narrow scope of the original poster (who seemed to me to be catagorizing the media as Republican biased).
The more visible component of this [conservative] propaganda machine are the talk radio shows and the cable tv news shows.
Ummm, please name another cable TV network besides FoxNews that you would consider conservative? CNN? Given that two of their commentators (James Carville and Paul Bevala) are official advisers of the Kerry campaign I don't think they quite fit the bill! Given that no news source has talked about this gross violation of journalistic ethics, how can you claim that there is this massive conservative media bias?
As of the 2000 census, the average American makes $57,045. An American making $75,000 a year falls into the top 1/4 of Americans, income-wise.
Thus, a (comparatively well-to-do) American making $75,000 a year would probably be expected to pay a fairly hefty tax rate, say 30-35%. It'd keep you from buying a lot of nifty toys, and you'll probably need to settle on a humbler house than you'd otherwise want, but it's not really not that hard a price to pay.
Echoing the other reply to your post in some respects, but are you a communist? Why should the wealthy pay a higher percentage than anyone else? Do you want to see a situation where no matter what anyone does for a living, they take home $x and that is it? Why would anyone bother to go to school for years on end to learn when they will get no reward besides a pat on the back and "good job" for making sure every high school drop out gets money for menial work?
I get so sick of hearing politicians (and from you post, it sounds like you as well) complain that the "wealthy" are not taxed enough. According to the 2002 statistics (latest available I stumbled across at www.irs.org) people making $50k and over (their breakdowns) paid 86.4% (data from here of the received income tax! Is that not a high enough percentage for you given that by your numbers, that should represent just over 50% of the population. Heck, lets go even further, the people making over $100k (by your numbers we should now be well under 25% of the population) paid 61.7% of the tax burden! Is that not heavy enough? Come on man, look at some numbers, realize we live in a capitalistic society, and lay off the "wealthy need to pay more" crap, by your standards, I (my wife and I make over $57k combined) already am pitching in way more than my fair share.
I didn't think Windows supported true "thin clients." I thought the Windows clients were still full blown Windows installations where they simply fetched the code from the server, in which case you could install the patched code for the client's XP. Of course, I happily haven't had to deal with Windows servers first hand in over 4 years.
The article mentions nothing about servers... Does this mean that Windows 2000 Server users will have to upgrade to Windows Server 2003?
Am I the only one wondering why you are worried about patching a web browser on a Windows server? Windows servers have been designed as (poor IMHO) mail servers, file servers, etc. not application running servers. This should not concern you for your servers (since the title of the story mentions only IE patches).
Why aren't they using conventional storage standards, RAM, and disk space are all in megabytes (1024 vs 1000 debating aside) saying something is *bit (giga,mega,kilo) implies a rate connectivity doesn't it?
This is one thing that drives me nuts in the "IT" world. People get so lazy. When speaking, people (myself included I admit) will mention "100 megabit connections," but in order to talk about a rate, time must be involved. It is assumed that the rate is the given quantity per second. When reading any article, if there is discussion of a rate and the units are given without a time, move on to the next article, that one is not well written and probably not worth your time.
Sorry to be a bunghole, but just wanted to point out you meant FAA case. It took me a minute to realize that as I thought I missed another issue involving the FCC.
We're going to fix this Firefox bug, and it doesn't matter if it wipes your preferences and breaks your extensions. Your loss for using beta software.
We're going to fix this IE bug and try to make sure it doesn't break existing installs.
I use Firefox, but haven't upgraded from 0.8. I got tired of having to reset my preferences and extensions with each update. I'll take the time to upgrade when it gets to 1.0.
I just upgraded, it offered to import my preferences and settings for me. I think you need to consider it time to upgrade....
I take it you've never read the book, because aside from an alien invasion, there isn't much similar between these and WotW.
Now that you mention it, no I don't think I ever read the book, but I remember fondly listening to tapes of the original broadcast as a kid. As others have pointed out on as basic a level as I was looking, there really isn't much room for a new plot. I remember watching Monsters Inc. and thinking it was a new idea...but if I viewed it as basically as I related the above, I am sure I could come up with other movies along the same lines.
Hasn't War of the Worlds already been remade about 50,000 times? Independence Day? Signs? Heck, even the old 'V' mini-series was basically the same story. I am sure I am forgetting another million movies that were basically the same plot line.
Ah...well, the Mavericks haven't really done anything except lose every year in the playoffs - but that's another issue. He's sort of seen as a real loose cannon in the sports circles who just has a lot of money and likes to make a scene of himself.
Well, I am far from a Dallas Mavericks fan (actually, I am often very embarrassed for their owner), but you are (IMHO) grossly underestimating the impact Mark Cuban has had on that franchise. They were an absolute doormat before he bought them. There was talk of the team folding or moving (that's why they were for sale). Now, they win a majority of their games, they advance in the playoffs (heck, they make the playoffs), people want to see them play (vs. say the Hawks, that's how bad the Mavs used to be), and the team may actually be turning a profit (it is hard to say in sports, there are so many contracts and deals, I don't even want to get into the stadium issues, that really gets me upset). The fact that they haven't won a championship is not that damning, considering only six teams (Boston, LA Lakers, Detroit, Chicago, Houston, and San Antonio) have done that in the last 20 years! Looks to me like you are not much of a basketball fan (which isn't necessarily a bad thing), so as a basketball fan I wouldn't discount Mark Cuban's success with the Mavericks so easily.
Re:The press don't read what's said, really.
on
Ballmer on Linux
·
· Score: 1
What I don't understand is why are they doing this in Austin? Last I heard Fab25 was down to just producing flash on a 0.18 um process. Why are they not doing this in Dresden or Sunnyvale?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying your wife does that but that doesn't make it any less true.
Paid in full three months after she graduated from medical school. The advantages of having a husband in the semiconductor industry.
Perhaps your wife wouldn't do it if she had her own practice--your fuzzy estimate on how much her insurance premiums are suggest that she is working in an institution and probably doesn't have access to the amount that is being charged for her services--but that would make her an exception.
She is still in her residency and beginning to formulate a plan for her future. She thought about starting a practice of her own, but the start up costs are way to high, and with the uncertainty of future income (we live in a "poor" city where most of the population is medicaid/medicare, plus with all the talk of a "national healthcare system" and the current pay rate for for people on the government system...) there is no way we can afford that risk (I got laid off last year when my company pulled up the stakes and left town, got another job, but also a 20% pay cut).
so she drives an old ford like the auto worker??
didn't think so.
How can you way your crap with a straight face with a BMW,Volvo or Audi in your garage attached to yout $300K-$500K home?
Oh yeah, I feel your pain.
She drives a beat up Honda Odyssey. I just finished driving a '98 Civic DX (no power windows, no power locks, manual transmission, AC that can't keep up with the heat around here). The only reason I was able to move up is because I am an engineer and have been able to cover her costs. Oh yeah, our house, try more like $180k, and it damn near killed us, we were only able to get it with substantial help from our parents. Feel my pain you arrogant shit, my wife has only this year been legally limited to work 80 hours a week, prior to that she routinely worked 120 hours a week, and she paid to do it. Talk about pain, I did not see my wife for more than 5 minutes a day for the month of August while she was on a "night float" rotation. Yes bitch, she pulls in a handsome $33k right now. Don't even try and tell me I am bullshitting you prick, I have the god damn W-2 forms to prove it. Go fuck yourself and your blind assumption I am not speaking the truth, I actually live in this world.
I'm sorry for being so rude, but for fuck's sake, this is my life, don't try and tell me I am lying.
And yet why is it that every doctor I know drives a Mercedes and has a 1 million plus home.
They are not pediatricians I bet. They are probably cardiologists that don't work at a community hospital that by law has to give care regardless of ability to pay. You probably don't live in a "poor" city. They probably don't care for a lot of medicaid patients (at the clinic my wife works, they see ~75% medicaid). My wife drives a beat up Honda Odyssey, I only just stopped driving a base '98 Civic, no power anything on that car. Any other questions?
Use real numbers, post the calculations again, and then maybe someone will cry for you.
OK, this is going to be harsh, but hello dumbfuck, I know exactly what the numbers are. My wife is a pediatric resident, she deals with this every day. She is trying to decide what career path to take. She has friends/mentors that are closing up shop because the government has decided to reduce payments. People that propose we need a national healthcare system have no idea just how bad the current system is. Now, go back to your life and realize that maybe you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Sorry for that, but get your head out of your ass and realize that THESE ARE REAL NUMBERS!
Until a president has the balls to say that doctors, hospitals and parms are EXTORTING the American public and make laws to stop them it will not change.
Disclaimer: My wife is a doctor
Okay, let's just take a quick look at some numbers:
From the UAW a UAW represented assembler makes $25.63/hour straight time. This translates to over $53k/year assuming no OT. To my knowledge (quite possible wrong) to obtain this job, you need only a high school diploma. They report post inflation annual raises (from '92-'02) of 1.28%. Average college costs ~$20k (average of public and private, exclude out of state) and is rising by 7% each year. In 1999 med school cost ~$18k (again taking a conservative average), I couldn't find numbers for the annual increase, but given the costs we incurred, 7% is a reasonable number again. Books add even more, to the tune of ~$4k across the first two years. Let's look at a doctor's income stream vs. a UAW assembler assuming they are the high school class of 2003:
First year out of high school, -20k vs. $53k
second, -21.4k vs. $53.7k
third, -22.9k vs. $54.4k
forth, -24.5k vs. $55.1k
Onto medical school we go!
1st year, -25.6k (no inflation for books) vs. 55.8k
2nd year, -27.2k vs. 56.5k
3rd year, -27k (assume no more books) vs. 57.2k
4th year, -28.9k vs. 58.7k
Time for residency, pay based on my wife's:
1st year, 31k vs. 59.5k
2nd year, 31.5k vs. 60.2k
3rd year, 32k vs. 61k
OK, now our doctor is ready to go out and start making real money....where do they stand finacially?
-$83k vs. $567.9k
Most of my wife's medical school friends enter residency with school loan payments to the tune of $1,200/month, basically a second mortgage. So now our doctor gets to go to work. Care to guess how much this doctor is going to get paid for seeing a child on medicaid? $7. Yes, that is right, they will get the princely sum of $7 to see that child for a 15 minute visit. That will probably not cover the cost of the people they must hire to file the paperwork to get paid. That works out to $28/hour while our assembler is now earning $29.48/hour (this is an inflation adjusted number, that means the real number will be much higher since 1% inflation is pretty darn low!). Who was it that was extorting whom? Does that auto worker go to work every day knowing that they could get sued and have everything except their house taken from them (my wife was threatened with lawsuits 3 times as a medical student for Pete's sake! Care to guess how much her malpractice insurance premiums are estimated to be? Over $20k/year.)? Yes, doctors can get paid well, but I would say in many respects they have earned it a lot more than others.
I'm sorry for this rant, but people who just spout off like doctors in general are super greedy really irk me (for obvious reasons). The people you need to be more concerned with are the insurance companies (basically profit generating machines from my perspective) and the lawyers (who make my wife live in constant fear that we will have everything taken away from us someday...oh wait, we get to keep the house and its mortgage).
Did you bother to read my reply to that poster??? I HAVE TRIED. HAVE YOU?
I have, and it doesn't address the point of my post, you still indicate you are part of the problem. Sure, you ran, but you ran as an independant, that doesn't help establish the strong third party you indicate we desperately need in your first post, and you still claim to be a republican in the same post you say they are half the problem. How does this go against my original post (saying you are part of the problem you complain about, right now, this day)? How did you try to establish a third party by running as an independant? Even if you had run as a third party candidate, how does that change that today, you claim to be a republican? Why aren't you working towards the solution you desire anymore?
Have I tried, yes, and I continue to try. I darn near never vote for republicans or democrats at any level, so you can stop yelling now.
Last winter I managed to walk into a small tree branch which slightly damaged the epithelium over the cornea.
My mistake, re-reading the original post I realize I mis-read it the first time around, I thought they were saying the retina would be causing the pain. The surface of the eye does have pain receptors. Sorry for the confusion, I will try and read more carefully before posting!
The eye's aqueous humor and lenses are also opaque to 10um light and you would therefore experience heating of the epithelium over the cornea and not damage to the retina; which I while suspect would be very painful you'd probably have enough time to shut your eyelid and prevent further damage.
Except that you don't have pain sensor nerves in your eye.
Anyone who has read my posts can quickly guess I am a republican ..... ... we have got to get a strong third party in place and soon to push the political mountain or we are going to watch these two parties merge into one uncontrollable monster.
I've said it many times
As someone else sort of pointed out, why do you not see that you are in no way helping, but are actually part of the problem! If you are so worried about "these two parties" why in the heck do you start out by saying you are part of one of them?! You have stated you support half of the problem (okay, half, a little less than half, whatever).
Consider it carefully, avoid disingenuity, and then ask yourself: "was this an honest inquiry into AAiP's political leanings, or was there some greater meaning implied in my asking AAiP if he was a communist?"
In all honesty, yes, I was asking if you are a member of the Communist party...I view those who favor "progressive" tax scales as probably leaning that way. Pity that no one recognizes the American Communist Party doesn't want the US to become Soviet Russia (for the most part).
trying to weasel your way around it with your sanctimonious "Easy cheetah".
That comment was intended to express my shock at your offense...now I see why you were offended.
From my original post:
I get so sick of hearing politicians (and from you[r] post, it sounds like you as well) complain that the "wealthy" are not taxed enough.
I failed to mention the flat tax, but here is where I was expressing my frustration at the words used by politicians to spin their "spending cuts" when they are actually "reduced increases," etc. I didn't do a good job of expressing my point, sorry for that one.
Your first post:
An American making $75,000 a year falls into the top 1/4 of Americans, income-wise.
Your latest post:
$160k is chump change.
So in your first post, $75k is implied to be quite wealthy, now $160k is nothing???
The lobbyists don't pay Congressional salaries.
Then why does everyone scream about "politicians being in the pocket of the corporations?" I agree, on paper they don't, but whose interests do they work for? They have to cater to these people to afford re-election (a whole other debate).
Again, very sorry to have upset you with the communist comment, it was an honest question, I often forget the word is so touchy to Americans.
Easy cheetah.....
I'm interested in using government, a government made by the People, for the People, to actually help the fucking people.
All swearing aside, I don't think the founding fathers intended for the government to "help the people" as much as leave the people alone.
Do you really want to tip the scales to favor frighteningly rich people who are in it to take your money for their own personal gain?
The only "people" I know that can take my money without my approval would be the government. All others I choose to give my money to, but I don't want to get into a debate about that...heck I didn't really want to get into a debate, just point out what you pointed out below....
Do you even understand the statistics you bandy about? Of course the people who make over $50k are going to pay the vast majority of our income tax--they've got the vast majority of the fucking money! You're going to see the same kinds of numbers when you apply a flat tax! Go ahead--try it! Whip out Excel and run some simple scenarios, then scratch your head in wonderment when those same long-suffering rich folks get "stiffed" over and over again!
Again, moving past the name calling...as I said originally, what ticks me off is when it is implied that somehow, someway, a flat tax is not going to continue to have the rich shoulder beyond a majority of the burden.
The more power and wealth we willingly cede to the individuals who already posess most of the power and wealth
And who do you think runs the government? In case you missed it, your congressman "earns" more than $160k! Do you think they are working in our best interests or are they listening to the lobbyists?
I could hardly agree with you more. I only continued the narrow scope of the original poster (who seemed to me to be catagorizing the media as Republican biased).
The more visible component of this [conservative] propaganda machine are the talk radio shows and the cable tv news shows.
Ummm, please name another cable TV network besides FoxNews that you would consider conservative? CNN? Given that two of their commentators (James Carville and Paul Bevala) are official advisers of the Kerry campaign I don't think they quite fit the bill! Given that no news source has talked about this gross violation of journalistic ethics, how can you claim that there is this massive conservative media bias?
As of the 2000 census, the average American makes $57,045. An American making $75,000 a year falls into the top 1/4 of Americans, income-wise.
Thus, a (comparatively well-to-do) American making $75,000 a year would probably be expected to pay a fairly hefty tax rate, say 30-35%. It'd keep you from buying a lot of nifty toys, and you'll probably need to settle on a humbler house than you'd otherwise want, but it's not really not that hard a price to pay.
Echoing the other reply to your post in some respects, but are you a communist? Why should the wealthy pay a higher percentage than anyone else? Do you want to see a situation where no matter what anyone does for a living, they take home $x and that is it? Why would anyone bother to go to school for years on end to learn when they will get no reward besides a pat on the back and "good job" for making sure every high school drop out gets money for menial work?
I get so sick of hearing politicians (and from you post, it sounds like you as well) complain that the "wealthy" are not taxed enough. According to the 2002 statistics (latest available I stumbled across at www.irs.org) people making $50k and over (their breakdowns) paid 86.4% (data from here of the received income tax! Is that not a high enough percentage for you given that by your numbers, that should represent just over 50% of the population. Heck, lets go even further, the people making over $100k (by your numbers we should now be well under 25% of the population) paid 61.7% of the tax burden! Is that not heavy enough? Come on man, look at some numbers, realize we live in a capitalistic society, and lay off the "wealthy need to pay more" crap, by your standards, I (my wife and I make over $57k combined) already am pitching in way more than my fair share.
Thin client
I didn't think Windows supported true "thin clients." I thought the Windows clients were still full blown Windows installations where they simply fetched the code from the server, in which case you could install the patched code for the client's XP. Of course, I happily haven't had to deal with Windows servers first hand in over 4 years.
The article mentions nothing about servers... Does this mean that Windows 2000 Server users will have to upgrade to Windows Server 2003?
Am I the only one wondering why you are worried about patching a web browser on a Windows server? Windows servers have been designed as (poor IMHO) mail servers, file servers, etc. not application running servers. This should not concern you for your servers (since the title of the story mentions only IE patches).
Why aren't they using conventional storage standards, RAM, and disk space are all in megabytes (1024 vs 1000 debating aside) saying something is *bit (giga,mega,kilo) implies a rate connectivity doesn't it?
This is one thing that drives me nuts in the "IT" world. People get so lazy. When speaking, people (myself included I admit) will mention "100 megabit connections," but in order to talk about a rate, time must be involved. It is assumed that the rate is the given quantity per second. When reading any article, if there is discussion of a rate and the units are given without a time, move on to the next article, that one is not well written and probably not worth your time.
And to be more specific in the FCC case
Sorry to be a bunghole, but just wanted to point out you meant FAA case. It took me a minute to realize that as I thought I missed another issue involving the FCC.
We're going to fix this Firefox bug, and it doesn't matter if it wipes your preferences and breaks your extensions. Your loss for using beta software.
We're going to fix this IE bug and try to make sure it doesn't break existing installs.
I use Firefox, but haven't upgraded from 0.8. I got tired of having to reset my preferences and extensions with each update. I'll take the time to upgrade when it gets to 1.0.
I just upgraded, it offered to import my preferences and settings for me. I think you need to consider it time to upgrade....
I take it you've never read the book, because aside from an alien invasion, there isn't much similar between these and WotW.
Now that you mention it, no I don't think I ever read the book, but I remember fondly listening to tapes of the original broadcast as a kid. As others have pointed out on as basic a level as I was looking, there really isn't much room for a new plot. I remember watching Monsters Inc. and thinking it was a new idea...but if I viewed it as basically as I related the above, I am sure I could come up with other movies along the same lines.
Hasn't War of the Worlds already been remade about 50,000 times? Independence Day? Signs? Heck, even the old 'V' mini-series was basically the same story. I am sure I am forgetting another million movies that were basically the same plot line.
Ah...well, the Mavericks haven't really done anything except lose every year in the playoffs - but that's another issue. He's sort of seen as a real loose cannon in the sports circles who just has a lot of money and likes to make a scene of himself.
Well, I am far from a Dallas Mavericks fan (actually, I am often very embarrassed for their owner), but you are (IMHO) grossly underestimating the impact Mark Cuban has had on that franchise. They were an absolute doormat before he bought them. There was talk of the team folding or moving (that's why they were for sale). Now, they win a majority of their games, they advance in the playoffs (heck, they make the playoffs), people want to see them play (vs. say the Hawks, that's how bad the Mavs used to be), and the team may actually be turning a profit (it is hard to say in sports, there are so many contracts and deals, I don't even want to get into the stadium issues, that really gets me upset). The fact that they haven't won a championship is not that damning, considering only six teams (Boston, LA Lakers, Detroit, Chicago, Houston, and San Antonio) have done that in the last 20 years! Looks to me like you are not much of a basketball fan (which isn't necessarily a bad thing), so as a basketball fan I wouldn't discount Mark Cuban's success with the Mavericks so easily.
Dang it, I have to put out my flamethrower now.
From the article:
but AMD will be have four of the parts running inside a usually four-way HP ProLiant DL585 server at its Austin plant later today.
That certainly sounds like it is AMD's plant since they are the subject for the sentence.
What I don't understand is why are they doing this in Austin? Last I heard Fab25 was down to just producing flash on a 0.18 um process. Why are they not doing this in Dresden or Sunnyvale?