Yes, I do. Along with you. The simple truth is any criminal can easily get a gun if he wants one.
And for some strange reason, other countries have so much less problems with gun deaths, and they still have criminals!!! I suppose the incentive structures are different for people breaking the law. But in the black and white world of the NRA faithful... FREEDOM!!!!
Funny that academics don't pin-point race as a risk factor. Sounds like you read that in some alternative media, and now it is your reality -- cause its just such a nice story. Any academic citation to back it up though? Something published that passed peer review?
Oh right... it's the black's who are killing everyone. Poverty is definitely a problem with crime, but I'm sure you've got an equally daft solution for that too...
Regular printers have security mechanisms built into them. Did you know that? Do you know what they are for? I suppose there is nothing to be done about 3d printers, and you wouldn't know anyway, so their is *definitely* nothing to be done.
In South Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union, you had an entire society spying on itself, because the power structures were afraid of every shadow. Spend some time speaking to someone who lived in one of these regimes...
You do realize that you can read and write C interfaces in C++. And you also get all the goodness of C++, which is a lot if you actually know what you are doing. The only real problem with the language is that it takes too long to learn how to use properly. But that also means that C++ developers are generally smart.
Note that US is #1, but that the figures don't include the amount of money spent on private health insurance. Cyprus and Czech are not on the list.
Also, countries like Australia and Canada aren't creating as much government debt.
So the relationship between higher taxes and higher disposable income is definitely there, but not completely straight-forward.
Art Laffer wrote about this in a way that suggested that taxes are too high. But if you take the Laffer Curve seriously, from an intellectual point of view, then you would be open to the idea that paying more taxes will also results in more disposable income.
But you got to be interested in figuring stuff out.
Your "insider" picked the wrong media to spill his guts to if he cared about winning people like me over.
I'm a non-partisan political junkie -- a strongly pro-science slightly libertarian academic. If some democrat apostate published a book about the Dem "cult", then I'd consume it like candy... because it _would_ be candy for me. I just find the madness fascinating.
But people like you cannot be won over. The GOP is accruing a long is of apostates, from Frum, to Bartlett, to Lofgren. You're not interested in what they have to say, because it hurts your delicate ears. So cult seem appropriate enough.
Haha, there is substantive criticism from an insider's perspective, and name-calling has been backed up said criticisms. But you probably didn't get very far did you.
Corporate consolidation destroyed investigative journalism. Why would you run a documentary on one of your eye advertisers... and who are they? All the other major companies. And then there's the threat of expensive law-suits.
The government has nothing to do with those incentive structures.
Serious investigative journalism of the ACA implementation, had it revealed what we know now, is very likely to have further enabled repeal attempts or at least led to significant delays in implementation.
I'm not sure what could have been done differently. You have an entire political party and all the associated partisan news sources trying to sabotage the law as best they can, in the hope that they can give the Dems a black eye and turn the ACAs failure into a win at the polls.
If the problems in implementation were publicly known earlier, we would simply have had more grand-standing.
The administration screwed up with the role out, but I bet the true state of affairs is far better then generally believed, since we have the motivated reasoning of 10-15% of the population spinning this as the worst law _ever_. For every person who has legitimately got a worse deal with the ACA (apparently less than 0.1%), I wonder how many people are better off? Mainstream media aren't interested in that story, and why should they be if it doesn't get click-impressions on their websites? People like to be angry about stuff, and so that is what we're fed, in the hopes that we'll click and be outraged, and then share.
The older I get, the more I realize the deep insanity at the core of our political process.
Every OECD country has better healthcare the the USA. I've lived and worked in Australia, Austria, Canada and the USA, and the USA is _easily_ the worst.
My gf's mom recently had a very serious stroke, and thankfully she is blessed to be Canadian, and has been receiving top-notch care for almost half a year. She is getting _much_ better.
And Canadians, like everyone else, pays _less_ for healthcare.
But you heard all this before and probably dismissed it, so whatever.
Healthcare advocates should recognize that if they want healthcare to work well, having Congress wield the power to control it is a bad solution.
Every other developed country has law making bodies that have passed laws that create better and cheaper healthcare for everyone. The story here is a crisis in the competence of the US government.
Now, consider that one party is doing its best to gum up the works of government, and then has a sales pitch that government doesn't work... and you might understand that the problem is political, and not institutional. Instead of taking 40 odd votes to repeal the law, the GOP could have, you know, worked to fix the problems.
But that was never going to happen.
If you are a conservative, enjoy the sunshine of the moment, but don't think for a second that the political winds will not change again. The biggest risk the GOP has is that the ACA will eventually succeed. Only partisan hacks dismiss the possibility out of hand.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I do. Along with you. The simple truth is any criminal can easily get a gun if he wants one.
And for some strange reason, other countries have so much less problems with gun deaths, and they still have criminals!!! I suppose the incentive structures are different for people breaking the law. But in the black and white world of the NRA faithful... FREEDOM!!!!
Funny that academics don't pin-point race as a risk factor. Sounds like you read that in some alternative media, and now it is your reality -- cause its just such a nice story. Any academic citation to back it up though? Something published that passed peer review?
Oh right... it's the black's who are killing everyone. Poverty is definitely a problem with crime, but I'm sure you've got an equally daft solution for that too...
I'm from abroad. You have no idea what you are talking about. But hey, that's politics for you.
Works over seas.
Regular printers have security mechanisms built into them. Did you know that? Do you know what they are for? I suppose there is nothing to be done about 3d printers, and you wouldn't know anyway, so their is *definitely* nothing to be done.
In South Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union, you had an entire society spying on itself, because the power structures were afraid of every shadow. Spend some time speaking to someone who lived in one of these regimes...
That's not, how it works, dear. You make a statement, you provide proof.
I don't care what you think. It's up to you if you want to learn something. I already did my intro economics course.
That most of the academics are erring on the side of the bigger government is a known fact
Yep, all that learning and study, and trying to figures stuff out leads to a well known liberal bias.
Heard of google?
Or you could just take a 1st year course on macro-economics.
You're right. We should all eschew C++ for C, because the bindings to foreign-function interfaces don't require you to write extern "c" {}.
You do realize that you can read and write C interfaces in C++. And you also get all the goodness of C++, which is a lot if you actually know what you are doing. The only real problem with the language is that it takes too long to learn how to use properly. But that also means that C++ developers are generally smart.
This is not a "partisan" statement — it is a widely accepted wisdom
An acadmic would be open to exploring the possibility that this is wrong. Most economists disagree with your economics, but what do they know...
Then you might be more interested in adjusted mean/median household income after tax, by country.
Note that US is #1, but that the figures don't include the amount of money spent on private health insurance. Cyprus and Czech are not on the list.
Also, countries like Australia and Canada aren't creating as much government debt.
So the relationship between higher taxes and higher disposable income is definitely there, but not completely straight-forward.
Art Laffer wrote about this in a way that suggested that taxes are too high. But if you take the Laffer Curve seriously, from an intellectual point of view, then you would be open to the idea that paying more taxes will also results in more disposable income.
But you got to be interested in figuring stuff out.
The simple formula applies everywhere: the higher the taxes, the less freedom.
Go look at wikipedia's list of countries by tax rate, and find all the countries where you have significant freedoms, and then look at their tax rates.
Expecting them to pay the costs and provide the venue for us to do it is a bit much.
This isn't lords and ladies. The politicians don't pay out of pocket. That's YOUR money they are spending.
apostates don't interest me that much,
Then you're missing one of the most interesting aspect of how groups construct beliefs... and their relationship to society and politics.
Your "insider" picked the wrong media to spill his guts to if he cared about winning people like me over.
I'm a non-partisan political junkie -- a strongly pro-science slightly libertarian academic. If some democrat apostate published a book about the Dem "cult", then I'd consume it like candy... because it _would_ be candy for me. I just find the madness fascinating.
But people like you cannot be won over. The GOP is accruing a long is of apostates, from Frum, to Bartlett, to Lofgren. You're not interested in what they have to say, because it hurts your delicate ears. So cult seem appropriate enough.
Haha, there is substantive criticism from an insider's perspective, and name-calling has been backed up said criticisms. But you probably didn't get very far did you.
read the article.
Thank you, for providing the MSNBC point of view, which has immeasurably enhanced the dialogue, and for completely missing the point....
read the article. It is not an MSNBC view. It is the view of a 30 year senior GOP insider.
Corporate consolidation destroyed investigative journalism. Why would you run a documentary on one of your eye advertisers... and who are they? All the other major companies. And then there's the threat of expensive law-suits.
The government has nothing to do with those incentive structures.
Serious investigative journalism of the ACA implementation, had it revealed what we know now, is very likely to have further enabled repeal attempts or at least led to significant delays in implementation.
I'm not sure what could have been done differently. You have an entire political party and all the associated partisan news sources trying to sabotage the law as best they can, in the hope that they can give the Dems a black eye and turn the ACAs failure into a win at the polls.
If the problems in implementation were publicly known earlier, we would simply have had more grand-standing.
The administration screwed up with the role out, but I bet the true state of affairs is far better then generally believed, since we have the motivated reasoning of 10-15% of the population spinning this as the worst law _ever_. For every person who has legitimately got a worse deal with the ACA (apparently less than 0.1%), I wonder how many people are better off? Mainstream media aren't interested in that story, and why should they be if it doesn't get click-impressions on their websites? People like to be angry about stuff, and so that is what we're fed, in the hopes that we'll click and be outraged, and then share.
The older I get, the more I realize the deep insanity at the core of our political process.
I'm not blaming the GOP, the exact same thing happens in gerrymandered blue districts.
You should. It is a stated goal of GOP leadership to destroy government and then claim it doesn't work. It is a deeply cynical move. The source is a senior 30 year GOP insider who started during the Reagan years.
Every OECD country has better healthcare the the USA. I've lived and worked in Australia, Austria, Canada and the USA, and the USA is _easily_ the worst.
My gf's mom recently had a very serious stroke, and thankfully she is blessed to be Canadian, and has been receiving top-notch care for almost half a year. She is getting _much_ better.
And Canadians, like everyone else, pays _less_ for healthcare.
But you heard all this before and probably dismissed it, so whatever.
Healthcare advocates should recognize that if they want healthcare to work well, having Congress wield the power to control it is a bad solution.
Every other developed country has law making bodies that have passed laws that create better and cheaper healthcare for everyone. The story here is a crisis in the competence of the US government.
Now, consider that one party is doing its best to gum up the works of government, and then has a sales pitch that government doesn't work... and you might understand that the problem is political, and not institutional. Instead of taking 40 odd votes to repeal the law, the GOP could have, you know, worked to fix the problems.
But that was never going to happen.
If you are a conservative, enjoy the sunshine of the moment, but don't think for a second that the political winds will not change again. The biggest risk the GOP has is that the ACA will eventually succeed. Only partisan hacks dismiss the possibility out of hand.