Actually, the services/taxing and employment laws cause massive unemployment in the EU, not low income per se. What causes low pay is that Americans work their asses off (average hours for the full time worker is over 40 hours per week) whereas in most of Europe this number is well under 40. Productivity (basically measured by income per hour worked) in Europe is on par with America. In the early 90s it was slightly higher, now it is slightly lower. Thus Europeans pay themselves by not working, and therefore it looks like they are poorer when its really they just get to chill more.
I don't find that particularly amusing. Several million people are dying in Africa each year from complications from AIDS/HIV-1, on the order of a holocaust about every 18 months with expectations of increased death rates for at least the next few years. Life expectancy rose from about 40 to 60 years of age from the 60s to early 90s and is now as low as 35. People are dying, not to mention that the susceptibility of AIDS patients to TB makes them a good vector to be infected and to mutate and be passed on to others to infect many of us.
(the last time I checked) broadcasting has THE highest return-on-investment of ANY industry.
the two aren't mutually exclusive, but I suspect enough money goes into capital for broadcasting to make them contradictory facts. The drug industry (the legal ones, aka pharmaceuticals) have the highest net profits of any industry.
actually, it's the utility of all that. we could care less about the risk (which is generally just the standard deviation) what we care about is the marginal utility of that risk compared to the maginal utility of the benefits, which of course will differ between individuals
i don't disagree with you entirely. the NK gov't is probably the most untrustworthy regime in the world, even pre-Iraq war. However, to think that doing nothing is better than doing something seems a bit odd. Bringing a country into negotiations often proves more effective than isolating them and attempting to punish them (which NK gov't seems to enjoy)
Landfill or that Mountain Place? What if it seeps? Breaks/chips/breaksdown and leeches into the soil substrate? Three eye fish, as cool as they are, will not be the worst of our concerns.
actually, that's exactly the point. this is just an engineering problem that is quite solvable. there are no conceptual aspects of this we don't know how to deal with. hence the lack of radiation in our water supply.
I think you have reactor types mixed up. We promised light-water reactors to North Korea, not graphite-moderated pebble beds. Pebble-beds are perfectly suited for Plutonium production.
well, that is why i said very similar. based on the same concept as the other, but not entirely the same
We (USA in the 90s) promised two of these (or very simiar to these) to North Korea so that they a) could have plenty of power and thus might spend money on economic growth/feeding their people and b) couldn't develop nuclear weapons from the material. but oops, congress wouldn't approve it. Now look where we are with them. big mistake
though many popular activists site environmental reasons as opposition to nuclear energy, disposing of nuclear waste really isn't that difficult. Most scientists (at least those in the field) object to nuclear power because of the potential of the spread and proliferation of weapons. while environmental issues ARE a concern (there's always some governmental dweeb that screws things up), it is something that can fairly easily be isolated given the proper precautions. Part of the reason that these reactors get so much attention is that these same experts have much fewer qualms with them precisely because they are so much more difficult to make weapons-grade uranium/plutonium from. (i cite Howard Margolis, Dealing with Risk as a decent summary of this topic).
I don't understand who "us" is. Not just Americans read/. Why does the hard working American deserve a job more than the hard working European or Indian or . Whatever happened to the American dream that *anyone* who is willing to work hard can get a decent job? Since when does anyone include just Americans?
quote from mookie-blaylock: My girlfriend signed up for something with the ACLU. Before then, very little mail. Now she is DELUGED by stuff. The ACLU sold her info to all kinds of marketers, special interest groups, etc. That's a very annoying brand of weasley.
I can assure you this is not true. The national office of the ACLU will not even give their state offices access to membership information for fear of violations of privacy, you must explicity submit that info to your state office for it to be obtained. correlation does not equal causation.
the argument that the ACLU is attempting to prevent a Catholic organization from not hiring non-Catholics makes sense, EXCEPT FOR (the key issue) that the use of state/federal funds to enforce that decision makes the state involved in seleting employment based on religion, which is what was at issue.
agreed. Probably the most controversial (controversial insofar as it perpetrates the myth that the ACLU is 'Weasly') point brought up is that the ACLU doesn't protect the free exercise of religion. Luckily, it is also the easiest to disspell.
I found this in 30 seconds of searching. This doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of cases where individual's religious preferences have been protected by the ACLU. If you were to go to each state's press archives, you'd find dozens of cases where the ACLU has helped to force schools to allow students to pray. The confusion comes in because most people (and apparently alot of people on Slashdot and school administrators) are entirely incapable of distinguishing between a state actor and an individual actor. When you've learned 4th grade civics, maybe you can speech more intelligibly about civic issues.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the services/taxing and employment laws cause massive unemployment in the EU, not low income per se. What causes low pay is that Americans work their asses off (average hours for the full time worker is over 40 hours per week) whereas in most of Europe this number is well under 40. Productivity (basically measured by income per hour worked) in Europe is on par with America. In the early 90s it was slightly higher, now it is slightly lower. Thus Europeans pay themselves by not working, and therefore it looks like they are poorer when its really they just get to chill more.
I don't find that particularly amusing. Several million people are dying in Africa each year from complications from AIDS/HIV-1, on the order of a holocaust about every 18 months with expectations of increased death rates for at least the next few years. Life expectancy rose from about 40 to 60 years of age from the 60s to early 90s and is now as low as 35. People are dying, not to mention that the susceptibility of AIDS patients to TB makes them a good vector to be infected and to mutate and be passed on to others to infect many of us.
(the last time I checked) broadcasting has THE highest return-on-investment of ANY industry. the two aren't mutually exclusive, but I suspect enough money goes into capital for broadcasting to make them contradictory facts. The drug industry (the legal ones, aka pharmaceuticals) have the highest net profits of any industry.
actually, it's the utility of all that. we could care less about the risk (which is generally just the standard deviation) what we care about is the marginal utility of that risk compared to the maginal utility of the benefits, which of course will differ between individuals
i don't disagree with you entirely. the NK gov't is probably the most untrustworthy regime in the world, even pre-Iraq war. However, to think that doing nothing is better than doing something seems a bit odd. Bringing a country into negotiations often proves more effective than isolating them and attempting to punish them (which NK gov't seems to enjoy)
Landfill or that Mountain Place? What if it seeps? Breaks/chips/breaksdown and leeches into the soil substrate? Three eye fish, as cool as they are, will not be the worst of our concerns.
actually, that's exactly the point. this is just an engineering problem that is quite solvable. there are no conceptual aspects of this we don't know how to deal with. hence the lack of radiation in our water supply.
I think you have reactor types mixed up. We promised light-water reactors to North Korea, not graphite-moderated pebble beds. Pebble-beds are perfectly suited for Plutonium production.
well, that is why i said very similar. based on the same concept as the other, but not entirely the same
We (USA in the 90s) promised two of these (or very simiar to these) to North Korea so that they a) could have plenty of power and thus might spend money on economic growth/feeding their people and b) couldn't develop nuclear weapons from the material. but oops, congress wouldn't approve it. Now look where we are with them. big mistake
though many popular activists site environmental reasons as opposition to nuclear energy, disposing of nuclear waste really isn't that difficult. Most scientists (at least those in the field) object to nuclear power because of the potential of the spread and proliferation of weapons. while environmental issues ARE a concern (there's always some governmental dweeb that screws things up), it is something that can fairly easily be isolated given the proper precautions. Part of the reason that these reactors get so much attention is that these same experts have much fewer qualms with them precisely because they are so much more difficult to make weapons-grade uranium/plutonium from. (i cite Howard Margolis, Dealing with Risk as a decent summary of this topic).
I don't understand who "us" is. Not just Americans read /. Why does the hard working American deserve a job more than the hard working European or Indian or . Whatever happened to the American dream that *anyone* who is willing to work hard can get a decent job? Since when does anyone include just Americans?
quote from mookie-blaylock: My girlfriend signed up for something with the ACLU. Before then, very little mail. Now she is DELUGED by stuff. The ACLU sold her info to all kinds of marketers, special interest groups, etc. That's a very annoying brand of weasley. I can assure you this is not true. The national office of the ACLU will not even give their state offices access to membership information for fear of violations of privacy, you must explicity submit that info to your state office for it to be obtained. correlation does not equal causation.
the argument that the ACLU is attempting to prevent a Catholic organization from not hiring non-Catholics makes sense, EXCEPT FOR (the key issue) that the use of state/federal funds to enforce that decision makes the state involved in seleting employment based on religion, which is what was at issue.
agreed. Probably the most controversial (controversial insofar as it perpetrates the myth that the ACLU is 'Weasly') point brought up is that the ACLU doesn't protect the free exercise of religion. Luckily, it is also the easiest to disspell.
1) Freedom of Religion Bill supported by the ACLU to protect the exercise of religion by individuals.
2) ACLU helps Falwell in VA I'm sure you'll never hear about that on FOX news or Christian press. The ACLU helped the Rev. establish a church with all the rights of normal corporations, ending that form or religious discrimination.
3) The infamous veiled photo for driver's license case The most pressed argument is of course national security. But as is easily seen if anyone bothers to RTFA, 800,000 ID's have been given without a photo, so why worry about this one with an 'incomplete' photo.
4) The ACLU's efforts to keep government influence out of churches and in the hands of the peoples of the respective faiths
5) Keeping religious discrimination out of Head start
I found this in 30 seconds of searching. This doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of cases where individual's religious preferences have been protected by the ACLU. If you were to go to each state's press archives, you'd find dozens of cases where the ACLU has helped to force schools to allow students to pray. The confusion comes in because most people (and apparently alot of people on Slashdot and school administrators) are entirely incapable of distinguishing between a state actor and an individual actor. When you've learned 4th grade civics, maybe you can speech more intelligibly about civic issues.