Hypothetically... Suppose her husband spent the last 8 months in afghanistan and was still there now, her car broke down, and her neighbor who always had a secret crush on her rescued her, then invited her over for coffee she felt obligated due to the rescue, he was charming, then dinners what reason could she decline without being rude --
She's not a normal imperfect human who made a mistake; she's just a whore.
She didn't make "a mistake", she made a series of choices.
What do you think makes a woman a whore? If she wants to have sex and does, or if she doesn't want to have sex but can can be manipulated into it through the slightest threat to her pathologically fragile self esteem? I vote the latter.
"She felt obligated." If she wants to thank him, she should bake him a pie. She shouldn't be "coming over" for coffee, dinner, or wine to a neighbor's house - and certainly not one that she knows is interested in her. If she'd rather pave the road to infidelity than be thought rude, she's got a problem.
What is wrong with it is that when it was done before, it led to all sorts of bad things. Hitler's master race ambitions were working under the premise of eugenics which was science somewhat at it's worst. It led to forced sterilizations and even deaths of people deemed inferior or a pollutant to the gene pool (even in the USA- California has the record for forced sterilizations). The differences in race is insignificant enough that delineation often does not serve a purpose.
"You must deny the truth, or you will become HItler."
Forms? Not a lot is required. On the sales receipt that the junkyard keeps anyway, just record driver's license number and/or social security number of whoever sold the "scrap" to you.
Only social security numbers and drivers license numbers? What could possibly go wrong there?
If somebody buying scrap demands your social security number, surely Radio Shack will move on to taking DNA samples.
Preventing theft and fraud, though, is a vital part of a free market and an entirely legitimate role of government. There is a cost, certainly, but the cost of crime* is invariably far higher than the cost of policing.
The government never spends more to fix a problem, than the economic costs of the problem in the first place? Yes, indeed, central planning invariably turns a profit for society as a whole. Whatever was I thinking?
Yeah, because regulatory compliance and associated paperwork, government inspections, lawsuits, and penalties impose 0 costs on businesses.
And since everyone wants to be recorded in government registries, because everyone wants to fill in forms, because everyone is literate enough to fill in forms, it won't deter anyone from recycling either.
The typical and ubiquitous rent seeking is the obvious answer, but there is another possible explanation, equally ubiquitous - regulators make regulations.
From the article: " It urges us—researcher and layperson alike—to take the veiled bigotry of absolute genetic differences among races, genders, and nations off the table."
Researchers should take a possible explanation "off the table" for ideological reasons?
Hearing aids that are regulated as medical devices are expensive. Electronic gizmos that help you hear are a tenth the cost. Search for "cheap hearing aids".
Of course they could be cheaper and better without the FDA enabling corporate rent seeking. Same with medical care. Same with medicine. Government regulations give the government power, and corporations money. That's what they're there for.
Lots of people consider a respect for the truth in intellectual matters to be arrogance.
They interpret any disagreement as an arrogant disregard to their power, authority, or status, or an attack against their self esteem. How dare you disagree with me?
What nerds do is trust their own minds, and assert the truths they believe, regardless of power, authority, status, or feelings.
Nerds aren't arrogant. They are the least arrogant people you're likely to meet. When do nerds assert privilege over other people? They honestly assert what they believe, as opposed to others who will profess agreement they don't believe for social advantage.
People don't like to be told they're wrong. They like it even less when they are *shown* that they are wrong. They are arrogant. Nerds are about the only people who will admit to being wrong, and thank your for correcting them. The word for that is humility.
S/R. The coolest thing is that people who flunk out on the first day are still welcome to use the condo for the rest of the week. I'd be tempted even if I thought I had zero chance of actually being hired.
Even if? How about, especially if? Bomb your first day, get a week's vacation.
The capitalist health care system, as implemented in the U.S.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...he said "capitalist" and then "as implemented in the U.S. Oh shit, he made a goddamned funny
You can't buy what you want without government permission, corporations can't sell what they want without government permission, and they can't even *speak* about their products without government permission.
So CO2 costs only added to the movement of steel manufacturing in Europe to China at the margins, at best, and would not come back if China instituted CO2 taxes.
Most international treaties have countries going along with the program without a central global power coercing their submission. I don't think it's unrealistic that the main producers of CO2 can get on board for a treaty "pledging" to locally tax CO2 emissions.
Are CO2 costs really be the main cost driver between European Steel and Chinese steel now? I'd doubt it. And I think it will be harder to get the US on board than China.
Geoengineering? I'd rather we spent more money on fundamental energy R&D. That way we avoid the CO2 problems and get cheaper energy.
Since we also price most pollution at $0, the argument applies there as well. The difficulty of assessing total cost accurately should not be an excuse to pretend the total cost is $0, just as the failure to charge you for each exhalation should not be an excuse to charge a coal plant $0.
Or you could simply fix the original market failure by adding the cost of emissions (a negative externality) into the price of energy.
It's bizarre to claim you can "add the cost of emissions" to a product. How would you honestly come by such a figure, when there are myriad sources that can cause health issues (including people who smoke!)?
The fact that you can't price perfectly (particularly since there is no market here) doesn't mean you can't price at all. Right now, we price CO2 emissions at 0. For those who agree on the basic premise that CO2 emissions are a problem, 0 is obviously too low a price.
If you agree that CO2 is a problem, pricing CO2 emissions is the right answer.
Slashdot Mirror
Hypothetically... Suppose her husband spent the last 8 months in afghanistan and was still there now, her car broke down, and her neighbor who always had a secret crush on her rescued her, then invited her over for coffee she felt obligated due to the rescue, he was charming, then dinners what reason could she decline without being rude --
She's not a normal imperfect human who made a mistake; she's just a whore.
She didn't make "a mistake", she made a series of choices.
What do you think makes a woman a whore? If she wants to have sex and does, or if she doesn't want to have sex but can can be manipulated into it through the slightest threat to her pathologically fragile self esteem? I vote the latter.
"She felt obligated." If she wants to thank him, she should bake him a pie. She shouldn't be "coming over" for coffee, dinner, or wine to a neighbor's house - and certainly not one that she knows is interested in her. If she'd rather pave the road to infidelity than be thought rude, she's got a problem.
"Had to wait"?
IANAL, but the great and wonderful Wiki says the US has no-fault divorce in all states and DC.
What obligated him to stay? What prevented him from leaving? Why did he need cops to *leave*?
What is wrong with it is that when it was done before, it led to all sorts of bad things. Hitler's master race ambitions were working under the premise of eugenics which was science somewhat at it's worst. It led to forced sterilizations and even deaths of people deemed inferior or a pollutant to the gene pool (even in the USA- California has the record for forced sterilizations). The differences in race is insignificant enough that delineation often does not serve a purpose.
"You must deny the truth, or you will become HItler."
23andme says I have Neanderthal DNA.
> And, you're willing to take his scrap with absolutely NO IDENTIFICATION?
Yes, we should all be duly deputized enforcers of the government's will, and anyone who doesn't like it should be sent to the reeducation camps.
Forms? Not a lot is required. On the sales receipt that the junkyard keeps anyway, just record driver's license number and/or social security number of whoever sold the "scrap" to you.
Only social security numbers and drivers license numbers? What could possibly go wrong there?
If somebody buying scrap demands your social security number, surely Radio Shack will move on to taking DNA samples.
At first, I thought you meant the band Rush.
If you don't want to participate in society, then you aren't getting the benefits of society.
Bow to our every command, or be outcast!
Preventing theft and fraud, though, is a vital part of a free market and an entirely legitimate role of government. There is a cost, certainly, but the cost of crime* is invariably far higher than the cost of policing.
The government never spends more to fix a problem, than the economic costs of the problem in the first place? Yes, indeed, central planning invariably turns a profit for society as a whole. Whatever was I thinking?
Yeah, because regulatory compliance and associated paperwork, government inspections, lawsuits, and penalties impose 0 costs on businesses.
And since everyone wants to be recorded in government registries, because everyone wants to fill in forms, because everyone is literate enough to fill in forms, it won't deter anyone from recycling either.
I agree and disagree.
The typical and ubiquitous rent seeking is the obvious answer, but there is another possible explanation, equally ubiquitous - regulators make regulations.
From the article:
" It urges us—researcher and layperson alike—to take the veiled bigotry of absolute genetic differences among races, genders, and nations off the table."
Researchers should take a possible explanation "off the table" for ideological reasons?
Hearing aids that are regulated as medical devices are expensive. Electronic gizmos that help you hear are a tenth the cost. Search for "cheap hearing aids".
Of course they could be cheaper and better without the FDA enabling corporate rent seeking. Same with medical care. Same with medicine. Government regulations give the government power, and corporations money. That's what they're there for.
Lots of people consider a respect for the truth in intellectual matters to be arrogance.
They interpret any disagreement as an arrogant disregard to their power, authority, or status, or an attack against their self esteem. How dare you disagree with me?
What nerds do is trust their own minds, and assert the truths they believe, regardless of power, authority, status, or feelings.
Nerds aren't arrogant. They are the least arrogant people you're likely to meet. When do nerds assert privilege over other people? They honestly assert what they believe, as opposed to others who will profess agreement they don't believe for social advantage.
People don't like to be told they're wrong. They like it even less when they are *shown* that they are wrong. They are arrogant. Nerds are about the only people who will admit to being wrong, and thank your for correcting them. The word for that is humility.
Same here. You can also download it to make a bootable cd to run without booting your system.
S/R. The coolest thing is that people who flunk out on the first day are still welcome to use the condo for the rest of the week. I'd be tempted even if I thought I had zero chance of actually being hired.
Even if? How about, especially if? Bomb your first day, get a week's vacation.
Not every limit to capitalism is censorship. And there are many countries where advertisement of medical drugs is illegal.
Not every limit to capitalism is censorship - just the ones that are censorship.
Censorship is not just a limit to the right of a speaker to speaker, but a limit to the right of a listener to *hear*.
Advertisement is not communication.
Those who advocate censor never have trouble finding a rationalization for it.
Because what's more wasteful than communication?
The free market leads to that when enough people support making it an unfree market.
The capitalist health care system, as implemented in the U.S.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...he said "capitalist" and then "as implemented in the U.S. Oh shit, he made a goddamned funny
You can't buy what you want without government permission, corporations can't sell what they want without government permission, and they can't even *speak* about their products without government permission.
Yessir, that's one "free" market.
So CO2 costs only added to the movement of steel manufacturing in Europe to China at the margins, at best, and would not come back if China instituted CO2 taxes.
There's coercion, and there's coercion.
Most international treaties have countries going along with the program without a central global power coercing their submission. I don't think it's unrealistic that the main producers of CO2 can get on board for a treaty "pledging" to locally tax CO2 emissions.
Are CO2 costs really be the main cost driver between European Steel and Chinese steel now? I'd doubt it. And I think it will be harder to get the US on board than China.
Geoengineering? I'd rather we spent more money on fundamental energy R&D. That way we avoid the CO2 problems and get cheaper energy.
Since we also price most pollution at $0, the argument applies there as well. The difficulty of assessing total cost accurately should not be an excuse to pretend the total cost is $0, just as the failure to charge you for each exhalation should not be an excuse to charge a coal plant $0.
Or you could simply fix the original market failure by adding the cost of emissions (a negative externality) into the price of energy.
It's bizarre to claim you can "add the cost of emissions" to a product. How would you honestly come by such a figure, when there are myriad sources that can cause health issues (including people who smoke!)?
The fact that you can't price perfectly (particularly since there is no market here) doesn't mean you can't price at all. Right now, we price CO2 emissions at 0. For those who agree on the basic premise that CO2 emissions are a problem, 0 is obviously too low a price.
If you agree that CO2 is a problem, pricing CO2 emissions is the right answer.