That may be technically true, some of the older style antennas distort the signal a bit too much to be reliable for digital broadcasts which is why they claim there is a digital antenna. It really means digital compatible and will not suffer the same limitations as some of the older antennas can.
Not only that, I wouldn't rule out a powered antenna. I can only get one station where I live without it (one station but 2 channels for it). I put a set of powered rabbit ears on a TV and all the sudden I had 13 channels (the major networks like Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and CW) which is about normal for my area. I'm about 30 miles from where the stations are broadcast and I live in a valley.
The issue is that NBC is a broadcast corporation originally set up by the government (in part) and have exclusive access to TV channels across the nation specifically to broadcast television and news. Their model has changed a bit, but the entire NBC channel line up that is not preempted by local programming is available over the air free of charge in all cities and states they have a cable line feed in (in the US of course).
This free OTA broadcast is where cord cutters are thinking the winter games should be streamed free as they get all the other content free of charge already. Now while it is true that the US does not fund Olympic athletes and the US Olympic team relies on sponsors, it is operating in the name of the US which also gives the concept of should be free. The biggest issue I think is that the NBC deal is exclusive- meaning that no other company can provide access requiring a lock in to NBC.
So with all that fucking you are going on about, I would be careful before your fingers pick up an STD.
Part of the missile defense research is lasers that will either ignite the fuel propelling the missiles or melt portions of the body making it uncontrollable and therefore failing to reach it's target.
I'm not entirely sure how a hypersonic shock would impact the results of a high intensity laser beam targeted at the missile. But given enough time in flight and the strength of today computing processors, high precision targeting shouldn't be too much of a problem to eventually overcome. The big issue there might be if the missile changes course in the last 30% or so of flight to hit a target not initially expected.
I remember when this happened. The argument was that some countries raised athletes specifically to compete in the Olympics (like the USSR) who would if there was professional events would be considered professional by all means and measures but because the state sponsored them and kept them from competing professionally, they were considered amateur.
anyways, that was the Olympics they had the dream team basketball where the US took all the best players from the NBA teams and put them on the court together as the US Olympic team.
If you ask me, I would say that almost all of the Olympic games are meaningless after the 1936 Berlin games. But it is especially so today as it seems to be a means to inject trivial politics into our living rooms. I guess it is good that Jamaica qualified for the bobsleigh this year. They didn't make the cut the last two games.
I do the same. I guess you can say I'm using the classy classic/..
Anyways, I would like to add to your point by saying that attendance and participation seems to have dropped severely since the last major revision too. It could be coincidence and a couple bus loads of geeks on their way to virgincon bizarrely left the road landing in a bottomless ravine never to be heard from again, or something on the site lost it's appeal to them. Perhaps it is a bit of both- I used to blame the politics section being added for this decline but I think as long as I'm yelling at everyone to get off my lawn, I might as well point to all the stupid things at the same time.
Of course, the whole registry thing is simply to convince suburban housewives that evil is always lurking around the corner, and that they should be perpetually afraid of events with little statistical significance. But we're not talking about terrorism, this time.
I hate to say this but a lot of people on the registered offender lists might be innocent of what you or I would consider a sexual offense. I know of a person who stopped to take a piss on the way walking home from a bar and because it was close to a school (which was empty because it was 3 am), he had to fight charges that would have put him on the list. I think it cost him around $25k in lawyers and fighting the charges in order to not be on the list. I know of another, an 18 year old kid who was dating some chick in his math class (high school). They dated since he was 16 but she was more then 2 years difference in age so when he turned 18, a concerned neighbor turned them in and he went up on statutory gross sexual imposition charges which definitely put him on the list. The neighbor, who after discussing ways to please a man with this 15 year old girl, was appalled to find out her boyfriend of 2 years was 18 years old now and she wouldn't be 16 for another 3 months so she promptly reported the situation to children's protective services. He was a good kid and everyone who knew them went in as character references during the trial but it didn't seem to matter as it was a statutory thing and the judge's hands were tied (so he said).
They have changed the law a bit in the years since then, but if it happened that easily, I'm sure there are more people wearing the label that do not deserve it. There are likely a lot of people who do deserve it, but I'm not sure the classifications are rational enough to be concerned over someone who has to register.
When gas prices were skyrocketing a few years back, there was talk that there was a refinery shortage and the claimed reasoning for that had to do with a lengthy permitting process and every environmental group possible trying to sue to stop it. The concept was something along the lines of 10 years just to get through permitting then another 10 to 20 years of court battles before breaking ground and there still wasn't a guarantee that it would be completed. The end result seemed to be that it was much much easier to expand existing refineries then to build new ones.
Of course the refinery problems also had to do with EPA regulation that went into effect in 1995 but held back until settled in 2001-2002 (I think that was the year) which mandated that all gasoline contain an oxidizing agent to ensure a more complete burn and reduced contaminates. This is also where most of our recent issues with Hugo Chavez came from as it pretty much negated the pipelines from Venezuela that had been shipping 128 million gallons of gas a day because they shipped to other countries and the EPA wouldn't allow the gasoline to be reformulated once inside the country. Chavez sued through the WTO twice over this and after losing the last time, began publicly attacking Bush as the great Satan and blaming every single thing that went wrong in his country ever on him.
So it's not only a problem inside our country, but long standing with refineries outside wishing to do business with us too.
I find this interesting as I recently received a few phone calls about a new light bulb that creates Ozone in order to purify my home. All I have to do is turn the lights on. Are these people trying to pollute me?
Well, I guess it wouldn't matter if they were. I already have a few Ozone Generators that I use to keep dust down. So I guess I have been falling for scams that are nothing but ploys to pollute me for a while now.
I think the focus on carbon comes from the carbon base of all the greenhouse gasses. Methane or CH4 is another man made greenhouse gas that also exists in nature and is about 4 times as strong as Co2.
But please keep in mind, the natural sources of green house gases like Co2 are not considered the pollutants. It is the man made/ Man Contrived versions because somehow Man is a scourge on the planet and the Gaia hypothesis which is somewhat of a religious cult has been construed to state that we humans are hurting the soul of the earth known a Gaia. James Lovelock received much criticism for fashioning this theory as a religion but it seems as if it served us well if you are on the side of taking freedoms in favor of reducing everyone to the lowest common denominator.
As for you seeing and understanding that Carbon is not the culprit but compounds of carbon, this doesn't fit the mold of political tendencies. After all, the entire history surrounding global warming or climate change is centered around political initiatives. First it was to redistribute the wealth with the Kyoto protocols and then it was about control of society itself. Scientists have already admitted that we cannot undo global warming- yet instead of dealing with the effects or impacts, we see things like this where the governments are trying to hamper progress in making life easier to live if it doesn't come from them and have the hidden control elements buried within.
Perhaps we should save the sexualization of women for when they not only deep throat a banana as a juvenile but parade it as their significant achievement when they are an adult.
I'm not at all saying you can or should never treat a woman like a whore, I'm saying that we shouldn't be doing it when their actions are the furthest from it. There is a huge difference between discovering a signal buried into an audio channel of a recording and detailing/documenting the attempts to decode it and deep throating a banana wouldn't you think?
You should check out the RG version. RG stands for really good. It was only released in limited quantities but there are working demos all over the place.
Interesting take on it. ARM was originally loved because it effectively ran circles around x86 style processors at a fraction of the power. It's been a while and I'm not sure if this is still the case but I often root for old time favorites of long ago just out of habit.
Judging from the prevalence of ARM technology in today's hardware, I would think it is still better then the Intel and AMD alternatives.
Lets look at this from a woman's perspective. I'm not a woman but I have had many of them and ended up pissing them off quite effectively so I know a bit about it. When a woman does something, extraordinary or not, she shouldn't have to put up with comments or concepts that reduce her to a baby factory. If someone on the outside looks and see that every time some butt ugly girl does something, they will be subjected to this type of harrassment, how many of them will join that field when it is much easier just becoming a stripper or hooker?
So if a woman has to fend off approaches or put up with sexualized comments every time they accomplish something, how long do you think they will continue to accomplish things? How is this any different then a boss suggesting the only way to get a raise is to show some skin- skin to win aside from it being about money? It's not the actual act but the mentality behind it- objectifying women. It's no different to objectify someone for their body or mind when that single feature is the only thing you know about them or consider.
It wouldn't be as bad if the comment or mentality came from someone who knew her a while and became interested or developed those feelings naturally over time, but we are on the internet and the poster most likely never knew she existed until they found out she could use her brain. That turns the poster into a creepy perv. Just like finding out your daughter's boyfriend only asked her on a date because he saw her doing the splits or eating a banana makes him a lot creepy. There is nothing wrong with desiring a woman's companionship for her impressive work if you know the person, there is when all you know about her is her impressive work or the shape of her boobs or the curve of her ass.
lol.. So a senator is in the house and the house of representatives backs the senate unconditionally despite all the efforts of the democrats who are powerless in the whatever...
I'm not sure you are firing on all cylinders there buddy. The person in question is a senator who is by definition in the senate which is controlled by the democrats. Either way, the senate is a distinctly different portion of the legislative branch of government than the house of representatives are. If you are looking for guilt by association and willing to ignore all opposition in order to make a point in particular, then we can just as easily say the liberal democrats back this too as well as the Chinese, Russians, Iranians, and anyone one else we can find a loose association to. But that doesn't make much sense- and neither does your original assertion.
HE can if he gerrymanders the entire country... Sheese, get with the modern program will ya.
And get used to a lot more of it. An important election is coming up in which some are fearful they will lose the senate so we will see a lot more of the bash'ers coming out and playing. It takes time to repeat something often enough that people believe it is true regardless of any basis in reality.
this is a neo-con, so the house of neo-cons/tea* is backing it
Do you have anything backing this assertion that doesn't solely exist in your mind? Wicker is being targeted by the Tea Party in MS to remove him from office. Seems sort of contrary to your assertion.
Well, if the allocated money doesn't go where it was allocated for, then it shouldn't go anywhere.
That is a problem I see with some people. They think there is some entitlement that if you don't spend X on something, you can spend the rest on something else. Well, not, because the funding wasn't approved or allocated on something else. It would be like you using your corporate credit card to purchase window treatments for you car because they cancelled that trip to a meeting 3 states away. If they do not spend the money on what it was allocated to be spent on, then they need to get permission to spend it in other ways. The money is not theirs to do as they please, it is theirs to do as the government pleases and they demonstrated that intent by allocating it for a specific use.
I don't think it includes SS payments but it will include military expenses for bases and personnel, research and so on which is a significant number of the federal budget.
I can see why you posted this as an AC. I wouldn't want to be associated to it in any way either.
Your problem is that you think the solution to a jobless person without insurance is to give them insurance. I and the rest of the US seem to think the solution is to get them a job so they can buy insurance themselves. The point of the tenn law is to not let you suffer something catastrophic as in you racked up some serious medical bills which is probably why you are not working too. It is not to encourage you to go out and rack up a bunch of medical bills the moment you get fired or your company relocates to India.
So by your own example, it is very difficult to rack up 16k in medical debt without insurance. Do you think it would be easier to find a job instead? Because that would be what the goal of the law seems to be despite your focus on how to get the government to provide medical coverage at any costs.
And this notion that unskilled jobs do not provide medical coverage is rubbish. In a free country, if you want it, you provide it. I'm not sure why you think everyone other then yourself is responsible for your own life but that kind of thinking will not get you far in life. There are many programs in place even before the ACA that would allow someone making a little more then minimum wage to be able to afford medical coverage of some types. The problem is, and this is why the ACA seems to be struggling so much, that most people who are young and not making much money want to spend the money they do make on something other then medical coverage that the might not ever need.
Wow, and we can see why the US is so fucked up. Having medical coverage should have no relationship to if you have a job or not.
Medical coverage does not have any relationship to you having a job or not outside of your ability to provide for it and yourself. There are plenty of people with no jobs and medical coverage. The biggest difference is that they pay for it themselves or someone they know helps them rather then the state taking your money and giving it to their benefit. It creates a situation where an unemployed person has to refuse some levels of jobs in order to maintain that state provided coverage else they take an effective pay cut going to work.
But on that note, medical coverage is not near as important as medical treatment. Coverage simply means someone will eventually pay for a certain amount of medical services or treatment and little more. It doesn't even guarantee that the latest cure all will be used or that the most cost effective treatments will be used.
preventative medicine being the basis of keeping ANY medical system costs down
Hogwash. Preventative medicine can keep some costs down, but there is no direct correlation between lower costs and checkups- just a difference in procedures and when the money is spent. There is however a direct correlation between early detection and survivability rates in so many different situations that it is beneficial if you want to live a long life. OF course having a job and taking care of yourself is beneficial if you want to live a long life too.
Why don't you troll elsewhere. You know damn well what I meant and completely misrepresented it in order to pursuit some sick agenda you have that involves largely your own imagination.
Because we as a species consider ourselves human and we live in a human state while other life forms are in a natural state.
Of course it is semantics. We consider what we do to be a separation from the natural state of things that would exist had we not existed. We even do the same for things that exist because it had to adapt to our existence. It is more or less just a way to distinguish between our efforts and the efforts/results of nature and the production of plants and animals within it.
Now a more proper question might be what makes natural better then artificial. The answer to that can be way more complex then I'm willing to enter.
lol.. I guess I missed the important part about the fallacy. It wasn't in creating unnecessary expenses, it is in thinking that doing so is somehow going to make things better and create employment and growth.
I was concentrating on the concept of you breaking the your own windows being your own cost just as if you decided to watch a movie or eat at an expensive restaurant instead of at home for less. The later does create employment and growth just as replacing your old windows with newer efficient ones or more stylish ones would (which is why normal people might break their own windows).
Slashdot Mirror
That may be technically true, some of the older style antennas distort the signal a bit too much to be reliable for digital broadcasts which is why they claim there is a digital antenna. It really means digital compatible and will not suffer the same limitations as some of the older antennas can.
Not only that, I wouldn't rule out a powered antenna. I can only get one station where I live without it (one station but 2 channels for it). I put a set of powered rabbit ears on a TV and all the sudden I had 13 channels (the major networks like Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS and CW) which is about normal for my area. I'm about 30 miles from where the stations are broadcast and I live in a valley.
The issue is that NBC is a broadcast corporation originally set up by the government (in part) and have exclusive access to TV channels across the nation specifically to broadcast television and news. Their model has changed a bit, but the entire NBC channel line up that is not preempted by local programming is available over the air free of charge in all cities and states they have a cable line feed in (in the US of course).
This free OTA broadcast is where cord cutters are thinking the winter games should be streamed free as they get all the other content free of charge already. Now while it is true that the US does not fund Olympic athletes and the US Olympic team relies on sponsors, it is operating in the name of the US which also gives the concept of should be free. The biggest issue I think is that the NBC deal is exclusive- meaning that no other company can provide access requiring a lock in to NBC.
So with all that fucking you are going on about, I would be careful before your fingers pick up an STD.
Part of the missile defense research is lasers that will either ignite the fuel propelling the missiles or melt portions of the body making it uncontrollable and therefore failing to reach it's target.
I'm not entirely sure how a hypersonic shock would impact the results of a high intensity laser beam targeted at the missile. But given enough time in flight and the strength of today computing processors, high precision targeting shouldn't be too much of a problem to eventually overcome. The big issue there might be if the missile changes course in the last 30% or so of flight to hit a target not initially expected.
I remember when this happened. The argument was that some countries raised athletes specifically to compete in the Olympics (like the USSR) who would if there was professional events would be considered professional by all means and measures but because the state sponsored them and kept them from competing professionally, they were considered amateur.
anyways, that was the Olympics they had the dream team basketball where the US took all the best players from the NBA teams and put them on the court together as the US Olympic team.
If you ask me, I would say that almost all of the Olympic games are meaningless after the 1936 Berlin games. But it is especially so today as it seems to be a means to inject trivial politics into our living rooms. I guess it is good that Jamaica qualified for the bobsleigh this year. They didn't make the cut the last two games.
I do the same. I guess you can say I'm using the classy classic /..
Anyways, I would like to add to your point by saying that attendance and participation seems to have dropped severely since the last major revision too. It could be coincidence and a couple bus loads of geeks on their way to virgincon bizarrely left the road landing in a bottomless ravine never to be heard from again, or something on the site lost it's appeal to them. Perhaps it is a bit of both- I used to blame the politics section being added for this decline but I think as long as I'm yelling at everyone to get off my lawn, I might as well point to all the stupid things at the same time.
I hate to say this but a lot of people on the registered offender lists might be innocent of what you or I would consider a sexual offense. I know of a person who stopped to take a piss on the way walking home from a bar and because it was close to a school (which was empty because it was 3 am), he had to fight charges that would have put him on the list. I think it cost him around $25k in lawyers and fighting the charges in order to not be on the list. I know of another, an 18 year old kid who was dating some chick in his math class (high school). They dated since he was 16 but she was more then 2 years difference in age so when he turned 18, a concerned neighbor turned them in and he went up on statutory gross sexual imposition charges which definitely put him on the list. The neighbor, who after discussing ways to please a man with this 15 year old girl, was appalled to find out her boyfriend of 2 years was 18 years old now and she wouldn't be 16 for another 3 months so she promptly reported the situation to children's protective services. He was a good kid and everyone who knew them went in as character references during the trial but it didn't seem to matter as it was a statutory thing and the judge's hands were tied (so he said).
They have changed the law a bit in the years since then, but if it happened that easily, I'm sure there are more people wearing the label that do not deserve it. There are likely a lot of people who do deserve it, but I'm not sure the classifications are rational enough to be concerned over someone who has to register.
When gas prices were skyrocketing a few years back, there was talk that there was a refinery shortage and the claimed reasoning for that had to do with a lengthy permitting process and every environmental group possible trying to sue to stop it. The concept was something along the lines of 10 years just to get through permitting then another 10 to 20 years of court battles before breaking ground and there still wasn't a guarantee that it would be completed. The end result seemed to be that it was much much easier to expand existing refineries then to build new ones.
Of course the refinery problems also had to do with EPA regulation that went into effect in 1995 but held back until settled in 2001-2002 (I think that was the year) which mandated that all gasoline contain an oxidizing agent to ensure a more complete burn and reduced contaminates. This is also where most of our recent issues with Hugo Chavez came from as it pretty much negated the pipelines from Venezuela that had been shipping 128 million gallons of gas a day because they shipped to other countries and the EPA wouldn't allow the gasoline to be reformulated once inside the country. Chavez sued through the WTO twice over this and after losing the last time, began publicly attacking Bush as the great Satan and blaming every single thing that went wrong in his country ever on him.
So it's not only a problem inside our country, but long standing with refineries outside wishing to do business with us too.
I find this interesting as I recently received a few phone calls about a new light bulb that creates Ozone in order to purify my home. All I have to do is turn the lights on. Are these people trying to pollute me?
Well, I guess it wouldn't matter if they were. I already have a few Ozone Generators that I use to keep dust down. So I guess I have been falling for scams that are nothing but ploys to pollute me for a while now.
I think the focus on carbon comes from the carbon base of all the greenhouse gasses. Methane or CH4 is another man made greenhouse gas that also exists in nature and is about 4 times as strong as Co2.
But please keep in mind, the natural sources of green house gases like Co2 are not considered the pollutants. It is the man made/ Man Contrived versions because somehow Man is a scourge on the planet and the Gaia hypothesis which is somewhat of a religious cult has been construed to state that we humans are hurting the soul of the earth known a Gaia. James Lovelock received much criticism for fashioning this theory as a religion but it seems as if it served us well if you are on the side of taking freedoms in favor of reducing everyone to the lowest common denominator.
As for you seeing and understanding that Carbon is not the culprit but compounds of carbon, this doesn't fit the mold of political tendencies. After all, the entire history surrounding global warming or climate change is centered around political initiatives. First it was to redistribute the wealth with the Kyoto protocols and then it was about control of society itself. Scientists have already admitted that we cannot undo global warming- yet instead of dealing with the effects or impacts, we see things like this where the governments are trying to hamper progress in making life easier to live if it doesn't come from them and have the hidden control elements buried within.
Perhaps we should save the sexualization of women for when they not only deep throat a banana as a juvenile but parade it as their significant achievement when they are an adult.
I'm not at all saying you can or should never treat a woman like a whore, I'm saying that we shouldn't be doing it when their actions are the furthest from it. There is a huge difference between discovering a signal buried into an audio channel of a recording and detailing/documenting the attempts to decode it and deep throating a banana wouldn't you think?
And all that has what to do with the Tea Party supporting this behavior that I said was incorrect?
Please, go ahead and translate something on topic to what I said since you obviously think you can.
win9x?
You should check out the RG version. RG stands for really good. It was only released in limited quantities but there are working demos all over the place.
http://www.deanliou.com/winrg/
Just select the flash demo and take the tour.. Can't get much more classic then that.
Interesting take on it. ARM was originally loved because it effectively ran circles around x86 style processors at a fraction of the power. It's been a while and I'm not sure if this is still the case but I often root for old time favorites of long ago just out of habit.
Judging from the prevalence of ARM technology in today's hardware, I would think it is still better then the Intel and AMD alternatives.
Lets look at this from a woman's perspective. I'm not a woman but I have had many of them and ended up pissing them off quite effectively so I know a bit about it. When a woman does something, extraordinary or not, she shouldn't have to put up with comments or concepts that reduce her to a baby factory. If someone on the outside looks and see that every time some butt ugly girl does something, they will be subjected to this type of harrassment, how many of them will join that field when it is much easier just becoming a stripper or hooker?
So if a woman has to fend off approaches or put up with sexualized comments every time they accomplish something, how long do you think they will continue to accomplish things? How is this any different then a boss suggesting the only way to get a raise is to show some skin- skin to win aside from it being about money? It's not the actual act but the mentality behind it- objectifying women. It's no different to objectify someone for their body or mind when that single feature is the only thing you know about them or consider.
It wouldn't be as bad if the comment or mentality came from someone who knew her a while and became interested or developed those feelings naturally over time, but we are on the internet and the poster most likely never knew she existed until they found out she could use her brain. That turns the poster into a creepy perv. Just like finding out your daughter's boyfriend only asked her on a date because he saw her doing the splits or eating a banana makes him a lot creepy. There is nothing wrong with desiring a woman's companionship for her impressive work if you know the person, there is when all you know about her is her impressive work or the shape of her boobs or the curve of her ass.
lol.. So a senator is in the house and the house of representatives backs the senate unconditionally despite all the efforts of the democrats who are powerless in the whatever...
I'm not sure you are firing on all cylinders there buddy. The person in question is a senator who is by definition in the senate which is controlled by the democrats. Either way, the senate is a distinctly different portion of the legislative branch of government than the house of representatives are. If you are looking for guilt by association and willing to ignore all opposition in order to make a point in particular, then we can just as easily say the liberal democrats back this too as well as the Chinese, Russians, Iranians, and anyone one else we can find a loose association to. But that doesn't make much sense- and neither does your original assertion.
HE can if he gerrymanders the entire country... Sheese, get with the modern program will ya.
And get used to a lot more of it. An important election is coming up in which some are fearful they will lose the senate so we will see a lot more of the bash'ers coming out and playing. It takes time to repeat something often enough that people believe it is true regardless of any basis in reality.
Do you have anything backing this assertion that doesn't solely exist in your mind? Wicker is being targeted by the Tea Party in MS to remove him from office. Seems sort of contrary to your assertion.
Well, if the allocated money doesn't go where it was allocated for, then it shouldn't go anywhere.
That is a problem I see with some people. They think there is some entitlement that if you don't spend X on something, you can spend the rest on something else. Well, not, because the funding wasn't approved or allocated on something else. It would be like you using your corporate credit card to purchase window treatments for you car because they cancelled that trip to a meeting 3 states away. If they do not spend the money on what it was allocated to be spent on, then they need to get permission to spend it in other ways. The money is not theirs to do as they please, it is theirs to do as the government pleases and they demonstrated that intent by allocating it for a specific use.
I don't think it includes SS payments but it will include military expenses for bases and personnel, research and so on which is a significant number of the federal budget.
I can see why you posted this as an AC. I wouldn't want to be associated to it in any way either.
Your problem is that you think the solution to a jobless person without insurance is to give them insurance. I and the rest of the US seem to think the solution is to get them a job so they can buy insurance themselves. The point of the tenn law is to not let you suffer something catastrophic as in you racked up some serious medical bills which is probably why you are not working too. It is not to encourage you to go out and rack up a bunch of medical bills the moment you get fired or your company relocates to India.
So by your own example, it is very difficult to rack up 16k in medical debt without insurance. Do you think it would be easier to find a job instead? Because that would be what the goal of the law seems to be despite your focus on how to get the government to provide medical coverage at any costs.
And this notion that unskilled jobs do not provide medical coverage is rubbish. In a free country, if you want it, you provide it. I'm not sure why you think everyone other then yourself is responsible for your own life but that kind of thinking will not get you far in life. There are many programs in place even before the ACA that would allow someone making a little more then minimum wage to be able to afford medical coverage of some types. The problem is, and this is why the ACA seems to be struggling so much, that most people who are young and not making much money want to spend the money they do make on something other then medical coverage that the might not ever need.
Medical coverage does not have any relationship to you having a job or not outside of your ability to provide for it and yourself. There are plenty of people with no jobs and medical coverage. The biggest difference is that they pay for it themselves or someone they know helps them rather then the state taking your money and giving it to their benefit. It creates a situation where an unemployed person has to refuse some levels of jobs in order to maintain that state provided coverage else they take an effective pay cut going to work.
But on that note, medical coverage is not near as important as medical treatment. Coverage simply means someone will eventually pay for a certain amount of medical services or treatment and little more. It doesn't even guarantee that the latest cure all will be used or that the most cost effective treatments will be used.
Hogwash. Preventative medicine can keep some costs down, but there is no direct correlation between lower costs and checkups- just a difference in procedures and when the money is spent. There is however a direct correlation between early detection and survivability rates in so many different situations that it is beneficial if you want to live a long life. OF course having a job and taking care of yourself is beneficial if you want to live a long life too.
Why don't you troll elsewhere. You know damn well what I meant and completely misrepresented it in order to pursuit some sick agenda you have that involves largely your own imagination.
Because we as a species consider ourselves human and we live in a human state while other life forms are in a natural state.
Of course it is semantics. We consider what we do to be a separation from the natural state of things that would exist had we not existed. We even do the same for things that exist because it had to adapt to our existence. It is more or less just a way to distinguish between our efforts and the efforts/results of nature and the production of plants and animals within it.
Now a more proper question might be what makes natural better then artificial. The answer to that can be way more complex then I'm willing to enter.
lol.. I guess I missed the important part about the fallacy. It wasn't in creating unnecessary expenses, it is in thinking that doing so is somehow going to make things better and create employment and growth.
I was concentrating on the concept of you breaking the your own windows being your own cost just as if you decided to watch a movie or eat at an expensive restaurant instead of at home for less. The later does create employment and growth just as replacing your old windows with newer efficient ones or more stylish ones would (which is why normal people might break their own windows).