I don't have $5000 sitting around either, but if I have an emergency that costs me $5000, I can find a way to come up with it. Sell a car, ask a relative, get a short term loan. I'd say having to stash away $5000 on $15k a year is a darn sight better than paying $800 a month for full coverage (which usually STILL has 20% or so copy, and $500 or higher deductible). The difference in premium alone over one year will pay for your next two years emergencies.
Or alternatively, they could have put out the fire, and a large number of people would have observed that even if you DON'T pay the fee, they still will put out your house if it is on fire. So they don't pay, the fire department goes under, and EVERYBODY whose house catches on fire loses everything.
Requiring insurance is just stupid. We don't have an insurance problem, we have a healthcare problem. By making insurance mandatory, we have a WORSE insurance problem. Look at how the rates went sky high on auto insurance when everyone was required to have it. The same thing will happen in healthcare.
You should buy high deductible insurance. It is much cheaper than you can find at your workplace, and it is the way that all insurance should be anyway, ie, insurance. I have $5,000 deductible, only because that was the highest option they had available. I pay everything up to $5,000 a year, and they cover the rest. They still process the claim and lower the outrageous doctor's fees to a reasonable amount.
I would happily take insurance where I paid absolutely everything with no limit, just so long as I could use the insurance company's contracted rates. I imagine that would be even cheaper bu they don't offer that option.
My fear is that Obamacare will eliminate high deductible policies which is the only insurance policy that can truly call itself an insurance policy. Insurance is for when something happens that is more than you can afford. How come insurance pays out on $100 doctor's visits? If you can't afford that, then maybe you shouldn't be paying $800 a month for insurance, and should just be paying the doctor out of pocket.
I think he should have been able to purchase the services on a one-shot basis, which would clearly have to cover the entire cost of the operation of saving his house. $75 clearly wouldn't cut it. Probably would be at least $30,000. Then again, that is probably more than a house in the rural SE United States is worth..
I value my security and privacy, but I would also like an increase in the targeted advertising. For example, I don't want to buy anything at all right now, so I would like the advertisers to realize this and stop spamming me with ads.
On the contrary, who wouldn't want to get paid for not performing the service they offer? In google's case, performing or not performing the service both cost about the same amount, but as long as they price not performing the service above the ad impression rate, then they make money.
I'm inclined to agree with characterzer0 myself. As much as everybody is interconnected these days, if a product is really great, you will know about it. If they have to try to convince you about it on a commercial, then it must be pretty much like the other guys product, only more expensive because you have to pay for the advertising. And the longer the advertisement (I'm looking at you, informercials), the more crappy the product is. I WILL NOT buy a product that is featured on an infomercial. Why should I pay $10 for miracle putty, when I can get the same stuff at Home Depot for $2, in the same tube, with the same formula, but with a different label and no advertising?
Why should I whip out my credit card to buy your "not available in stores" crap for $30 this week, when in three weeks, I can buy it on the "as seen on TV" aisle at Wal-mart for half that, and then 6 weeks later for $1 in the bargain bin.
Wait until their next patent, it is for a process by which the user is charged $2 even if they DO watch the commercials.
If only I had gotten a patent on the process of charging money for no commercials and then slyly starting to squeeze the commercials in.
The market is unfree at least partly BECAUSE of regulation. Even if you had $10 Billion, you can't just go and start a cell phone company. There are all kinds of regulations which artificially limit the number of cell phone companies that can be in existence.
However, the government is not the biggest culprit in creating the lack of competition. The biggest issue is the consumer. Whereas there are many people like us who think the prices are too high and the limitations too strict, there are many, many millions of sheeple out there who will not make the WISE choice of saying "No, I would rather do without than pay the rate that you ask". These people imagine that they can not live without a data plan and a smart phone, forgetting that just a few short years ago, there was no such thing as a smart phone or a data plan, and that 90% of the use of such now is to download new Fart apps.
If your business model is dependent upon deceiving your customers, then you don't deserve to be in business. Cell Phone companies are a goo example. So are Cable companies, Labor Law Poster companies are a shining example.
Unfortunately, most companies seem to be moving toward this marketing method. Even big companies like Microsoft and Oracle will sell you lies to get you onto their product at least far enough to where it will be more painful to switch back than to keep plowing forward.
Any cell carrier will argue until they are blue in the face that it is impossible to block data, unwanted text charges, etc., until you mention the correct set of words. The correct set varies by company. Once the block is in place, everything works great until you do something to trigger removing the block, such as changing your phone, modifying your calling plan, or any of a number of other unrelated ( to a reasonable thinking human being) actions. Then, you are back on the list for text spammers to start charging you hundreds of dollars a month in unwanted and unauthorized and in many cases undelivered purchases.
There are literally a billion products and services out there that are offered at more than I value the service or product. However, I don't steal the product or service. I do without. That is the way the market works. You don't get to procure something illegally just because they are charging more than it is worth to you.
The reality is, that even at $2 for that piece of crap app, lots of people have bought it, so it is a valid price point. If you think the app is overpriced, then you can develop your own and offer it at the price which you think it is worth.
If you can "steal" a yacht by making an exact copy of it without harming or taking the original, then yes, go right ahead. I would suspect that the company that made the yacht would object to your making an exact copy, especially if it also bears their name (remember, it is an exact copy). Now, if you didn't put their name on it, they probably would still have a case against you, as they likely have a number of patents that you violated.
Yeah, why not 10,000:1 or even 1,000,000:1. They would get a lot more takers and they still wouldn't have to pay out. I mean the lottery is in some cases over 60 million:1 and people will happily give out a dollar to that. Of course, the lottery is a lot more likely to fall in your favor then aliens landing any time soon.
If it is about safety, then every time they issue a ticket and collect a fine, they should then pull someone over randomly for driving safely and give them the fine they collected from the unsafe driver.
The only irony is the one that ends with a death.
No, that's comedy.
"Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall down an open manhole and die." - Mel Brooks
One might try to claim irony in the person who makes a device being killed by it, but although unexpected, these sorts are things are not actively contrary to expectations, at least when we don't expect the guy to have special knowledge that makes the device safer.
I believe Madame Curie might agree.
Alanis Morissette was, ironically, an English major who does know what "ironic" means and has stated that the only actually ironic thing about that song was its title. Ironically, that is.
With spin like that she would have made a good communications major.
You don't "navigate the Byzantine immigration process", you hire a lawyer.
I navigated the Byzantine immigration process without a lawyer to get my wife to be a naturalized citizen. I did not use a lawyer. The paperwork is trivial, and the lawyers take thousands of dollars for something that you could do yourself.
If you personally had to deal with the Migra, you would probably remain undocumented.
Amazingly no, my wife is now a naturalized citizen, and we did not use a lawayer. It's not trivial. It's also not cheap. It's not cheap if you are a well paid geek; forget about being a normal working stiff like your poor gringo cousins.
It was about $400 back then. It is about $800 now. That is not cheap, but it is not a very high price to pay to become a citizen of another country. The "Leaving the country tax" in some corrupt countries (like Honduras) is higher than that.
Maybe its a neighborhood kid who doesn't know he should be charging at least minimum wage?
I guess you haven't gotten a quote for getting your lawn mowed lately. Let's just say I have considered quitting my job and mowing lawns as I could make more per hour and enjoy the fresh air.
The point is that even on a private plane, even on YOUR private plane, you are subjected to the same rules.
Maybe that is true in Japan, but it is not true in the United States. You can carry weapons onto your plane in the United States. In fact, many people that own a plane will take their plane to their favorite hunting grounds. Often they are inaccessible or difficult to access by car.
Most of us probably don't remember World War II or the Great Depression. My grandparents do though. They always told me that I would never really understand just how good and easy that I have it.
In the great depression, people had to do without things that two generations before people hadn't even invented yet. Your grandparents don't know how good and easy they had it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't have $5000 sitting around either, but if I have an emergency that costs me $5000, I can find a way to come up with it. Sell a car, ask a relative, get a short term loan. I'd say having to stash away $5000 on $15k a year is a darn sight better than paying $800 a month for full coverage (which usually STILL has 20% or so copy, and $500 or higher deductible). The difference in premium alone over one year will pay for your next two years emergencies.
Or alternatively, they could have put out the fire, and a large number of people would have observed that even if you DON'T pay the fee, they still will put out your house if it is on fire. So they don't pay, the fire department goes under, and EVERYBODY whose house catches on fire loses everything.
Requiring insurance is just stupid. We don't have an insurance problem, we have a healthcare problem. By making insurance mandatory, we have a WORSE insurance problem. Look at how the rates went sky high on auto insurance when everyone was required to have it. The same thing will happen in healthcare.
You should buy high deductible insurance. It is much cheaper than you can find at your workplace, and it is the way that all insurance should be anyway, ie, insurance. I have $5,000 deductible, only because that was the highest option they had available. I pay everything up to $5,000 a year, and they cover the rest. They still process the claim and lower the outrageous doctor's fees to a reasonable amount.
I would happily take insurance where I paid absolutely everything with no limit, just so long as I could use the insurance company's contracted rates. I imagine that would be even cheaper bu they don't offer that option.
My fear is that Obamacare will eliminate high deductible policies which is the only insurance policy that can truly call itself an insurance policy. Insurance is for when something happens that is more than you can afford. How come insurance pays out on $100 doctor's visits? If you can't afford that, then maybe you shouldn't be paying $800 a month for insurance, and should just be paying the doctor out of pocket.
I think he should have been able to purchase the services on a one-shot basis, which would clearly have to cover the entire cost of the operation of saving his house. $75 clearly wouldn't cut it. Probably would be at least $30,000. Then again, that is probably more than a house in the rural SE United States is worth..
I value my security and privacy, but I would also like an increase in the targeted advertising. For example, I don't want to buy anything at all right now, so I would like the advertisers to realize this and stop spamming me with ads.
On the contrary, who wouldn't want to get paid for not performing the service they offer? In google's case, performing or not performing the service both cost about the same amount, but as long as they price not performing the service above the ad impression rate, then they make money.
I'm inclined to agree with characterzer0 myself. As much as everybody is interconnected these days, if a product is really great, you will know about it. If they have to try to convince you about it on a commercial, then it must be pretty much like the other guys product, only more expensive because you have to pay for the advertising. And the longer the advertisement (I'm looking at you, informercials), the more crappy the product is. I WILL NOT buy a product that is featured on an infomercial. Why should I pay $10 for miracle putty, when I can get the same stuff at Home Depot for $2, in the same tube, with the same formula, but with a different label and no advertising?
Why should I whip out my credit card to buy your "not available in stores" crap for $30 this week, when in three weeks, I can buy it on the "as seen on TV" aisle at Wal-mart for half that, and then 6 weeks later for $1 in the bargain bin.
Wait until their next patent, it is for a process by which the user is charged $2 even if they DO watch the commercials.
If only I had gotten a patent on the process of charging money for no commercials and then slyly starting to squeeze the commercials in.
The market is unfree at least partly BECAUSE of regulation. Even if you had $10 Billion, you can't just go and start a cell phone company. There are all kinds of regulations which artificially limit the number of cell phone companies that can be in existence.
However, the government is not the biggest culprit in creating the lack of competition. The biggest issue is the consumer. Whereas there are many people like us who think the prices are too high and the limitations too strict, there are many, many millions of sheeple out there who will not make the WISE choice of saying "No, I would rather do without than pay the rate that you ask". These people imagine that they can not live without a data plan and a smart phone, forgetting that just a few short years ago, there was no such thing as a smart phone or a data plan, and that 90% of the use of such now is to download new Fart apps.
If your business model is dependent upon deceiving your customers, then you don't deserve to be in business. Cell Phone companies are a goo example. So are Cable companies, Labor Law Poster companies are a shining example.
Unfortunately, most companies seem to be moving toward this marketing method. Even big companies like Microsoft and Oracle will sell you lies to get you onto their product at least far enough to where it will be more painful to switch back than to keep plowing forward.
Any cell carrier will argue until they are blue in the face that it is impossible to block data, unwanted text charges, etc., until you mention the correct set of words. The correct set varies by company. Once the block is in place, everything works great until you do something to trigger removing the block, such as changing your phone, modifying your calling plan, or any of a number of other unrelated ( to a reasonable thinking human being) actions. Then, you are back on the list for text spammers to start charging you hundreds of dollars a month in unwanted and unauthorized and in many cases undelivered purchases.
There are literally a billion products and services out there that are offered at more than I value the service or product. However, I don't steal the product or service. I do without. That is the way the market works. You don't get to procure something illegally just because they are charging more than it is worth to you.
The reality is, that even at $2 for that piece of crap app, lots of people have bought it, so it is a valid price point. If you think the app is overpriced, then you can develop your own and offer it at the price which you think it is worth.
I propose a new slashdot survey:
In the future would you rather have:
1. All software be free
2. A white-collar job
Probably needs something about cmdrtaco, too.
If you can "steal" a yacht by making an exact copy of it without harming or taking the original, then yes, go right ahead.
I would suspect that the company that made the yacht would object to your making an exact copy, especially if it also bears their name (remember, it is an exact copy). Now, if you didn't put their name on it, they probably would still have a case against you, as they likely have a number of patents that you violated.
Yeah, why not 10,000:1 or even 1,000,000:1. They would get a lot more takers and they still wouldn't have to pay out. I mean the lottery is in some cases over 60 million:1 and people will happily give out a dollar to that. Of course, the lottery is a lot more likely to fall in your favor then aliens landing any time soon.
If it is about safety, then every time they issue a ticket and collect a fine, they should then pull someone over randomly for driving safely and give them the fine they collected from the unsafe driver.
The only irony is the one that ends with a death.
No, that's comedy.
"Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall down an open manhole and die." - Mel Brooks
One might try to claim irony in the person who makes a device being killed by it, but although unexpected, these sorts are things are not actively contrary to expectations, at least when we don't expect the guy to have special knowledge that makes the device safer.
I believe Madame Curie might agree.
Alanis Morissette was, ironically, an English major who does know what "ironic" means and has stated that the only actually ironic thing about that song was its title. Ironically, that is.
With spin like that she would have made a good communications major.
As an employer in Illinois, I can throw in that the withholding for state tax caps out at around 3%.
You don't "navigate the Byzantine immigration process", you hire a lawyer.
I navigated the Byzantine immigration process without a lawyer to get my wife to be a naturalized citizen. I did not use a lawyer. The paperwork is trivial, and the lawyers take thousands of dollars for something that you could do yourself.
If you personally had to deal with the Migra, you would probably remain undocumented.
Amazingly no, my wife is now a naturalized citizen, and we did not use a lawayer.
It's not trivial. It's also not cheap. It's not cheap if you are a well paid geek; forget about being a normal working stiff like your poor gringo cousins.
It was about $400 back then. It is about $800 now. That is not cheap, but it is not a very high price to pay to become a citizen of another country. The "Leaving the country tax" in some corrupt countries (like Honduras) is higher than that.
Maybe its a neighborhood kid who doesn't know he should be charging at least minimum wage?
I guess you haven't gotten a quote for getting your lawn mowed lately. Let's just say I have considered quitting my job and mowing lawns as I could make more per hour and enjoy the fresh air.
The point is that even on a private plane, even on YOUR private plane, you are subjected to the same rules.
Maybe that is true in Japan, but it is not true in the United States. You can carry weapons onto your plane in the United States. In fact, many people that own a plane will take their plane to their favorite hunting grounds. Often they are inaccessible or difficult to access by car.
Most of us probably don't remember World War II or the Great Depression. My grandparents do though. They always told me that I would never really understand just how good and easy that I have it.
In the great depression, people had to do without things that two generations before people hadn't even invented yet. Your grandparents don't know how good and easy they had it.