That isn't the question, the question is does the US healthcare system do better or worse in treating illness in general (so for an average person) and the answer is it does better.
First, that's a fairly meaningless metric since few people are 'average'. Second, it was for only four (out of several hundred) types of cancer.
So, if it makes you happy that the US is, on average, better than average (but not markedly so) for treating four common cancers, then I'm glad - happy people live longer.
Interesting pictures, thanks. The bottom portion of that hull is just packed with equipment. That's a pretty graphic example of why the ping-pong ball method isn't going to work.
And by doing so, screwed up the complex system of stabilization that is built into cruise ships so they will sink WITHOUT capsizing.
The capsize is what killed people and made it difficult to evacuate the ship. You can't put the lifeboats out on davits when the ship is rolled on it's side and it's hard to enter a lifeboat it's leaning six feet away from the deck on the opposite side.
So, on top of making the first stupid decision (going close to shore), he gets into trouble, makes ANOTHER stupid decision (failing to abandon ship at that point) then makes ANOTHER stupid decision (hard port turn), capsizes the boat, makes evacuation difficult. Then makes ANOTHER stupid decision (falling into the lifeboat).
As John Kenneth Galbraith once said "Immortality can always be assured by spectacular error".
The metrics that actually matter to the people making use of the system, how more/less likely you are to die of ailment x in country y, shows quite the opposite. If you are diagnosed with any form of Cancer in the US you are more likely to still be alive after 5 years than anywhere else in the world (in some places, such as the UK, the survival rate is half of what it is in the US) and the numbers for almost every other medical problem shows the same pattern with the US being first or top three.
Total bullshit. US cancer death rates are in the middle of the pack on aggregate statistics. Yes, the US does pretty good for some cancers (for some people, most notably those with insurance), but not for all.
Nice of you not to buy insurance when you don't need it. Or don't think you need it. Most people I know don't plan on getting ill. It's not something that is on the calendar for "next year". But keep rolling the dice if you like.
Furthermore, the ER is not the be all and end all of medical care. Treating chronic medical conditions from the ER isn't very useful nor satisfying to either the ER or patient. US FEDERAL LAW STATES ONLY THAT HOSPITALS HAVE TO TREAT PATIENTS FOR EMERGENCY CONDITIONS. Once the "emergency" is over, they don't have to treat you although it is often illegal to just dump a patient out in the street (those tend to be state laws).
And to continue - just because the ER has to treat you doesn't mean the hospital won't bill you. And try to collect on the bill.
So the stupid meme of the US has a health care for all is valid only for a very narrow definition of health care.
And yes, Virginia, there is a crisis in the US healthcare system. Not only do we NOT cover a significant portion of the population, we DO pay more to do so without any measurable benefit whatsoever.
Infrared blocking properties of chocolate - an unexplored phenomenon. My point is that it is not emitting ionizing radiation, not that it's a good idea.
Besides, if you're hogging the chocolate, you're a bad guy.
I keep wondering why the TSA doesn't take this advice....they'd be much cheaper and less of a radiation risk than all the scanners they currently have and are using....
Because pretty soon somebody would figure out that you can cut the personnel count at the TSA by 90% if you pick up a bunch of strays at the pound and have them sniff around looking for treats. Then who would run the expensive equipment that was sole sourced by Micheal Chertioff's friends?
Don't start thinking outside the box. They hate that.
If you are worried about home safety and your are not willing to practice with a pistol on a regular basis, then you should use a shotgun. Very impressive results at close range, won't go through walls like a pistol bullet, less recoil.
That said, for the vast majority of folks, your are going to be more of a danger to yourself and family than any home invader. I can teach someone how to use a fire extinguisher in a couple of minutes, a gun takes a bit longer.
... The number of crimes stopped, prevented, or deterred is astonishingly high....
Got any data to support that argument? I've never seen anything other than anecdotes - and we know how accurate those are. It would be damned hard to actually get reasonable statistical data for that contention.
I've never been burglarized, threatened or raped and I have a number of guns. I also have a pair of Labrador Retrievers. And a couple of rocks. Oh, and an iPad.
My point precisely. The problem, IMHO, is that for every reasonable human being carrying a concealed weapon, there are a dozen loose cannons / bozos and mental defectives doing same. In general, they're more a harm to themselves than the surrounding community, but it's still scary.
TSA can only make suggestions to local governments about train security. They don't control it. What is your support for them trying to "get to highways"?
Im off to Vegas next month and that is one of my "must-do" items. Are there any really good spots not too far away (as in 2hrs)?
Head out on the freeway (doesn't matter which one). Keep going until you find a overpass with no signs suggesting civilizations (food / gas / hotel, etc).
Turn left or right, doesn't matter as long as you are going at right angles to the highway.
Drive 15 - 30 minutes or until it gets scary or you run into a fence (stop there).
Unfortunately, it's a bit more complicated that that. I live in fairly rural Alaska, people have guns all of the time. It's not all that uncommon to see a couple of guys walking down the main road, rifles in hand, going off deer hunting. If we go out into the backwoods, I typically carry a 12 gauge for bear defense (first rounds are the shotgun equivalent of an M-80, designed to scare the bear off). I don't carry a pistol around because there is really no need to - the human animals are fairly tame compared to the batshit insanity found in a bigger city.
But in the batshit insanity of a big city, feral humans are a big problem. Especially if you are law enforcement. It's useful to know that the hophead idiot wired up on six different drugs has a pistol (although those people tend to remind me of the scene in '5th Element' where Bruce Willis disarms the guy). It's useful to know that the stoner is unarmed.
If you are carrying a gun and a policeman stops you, you'd best put your hands where they can see them and tell them slowly and carefully that you're armed. Be professional. It saves lives.
Slashdot Mirror
That isn't the question, the question is does the US healthcare system do better or worse in treating illness in general (so for an average person) and the answer is it does better.
First, that's a fairly meaningless metric since few people are 'average'. Second, it was for only four (out of several hundred) types of cancer.
So, if it makes you happy that the US is, on average, better than average (but not markedly so) for treating four common cancers, then I'm glad - happy people live longer.
Hope you're happy with the bill....
Yes! I want the engineer who designed the SATA connector bolted tied down to a table with old SCSI one cables - the heavy, strong kind.
Then I want to take 10 SATA connectors and slowly, slowly push them up his fingernails until he passes out.
Death will be too kind to him.
Miserable little things.
From your nic, I presume that you're not much up on the leading edge of computer hardware. In fact, I'll bet you have computers that have DB-25 ports.
Perhaps you could hook up those monitors to your Hercules card?
Look at the pictures that Bearded Chimp found.
You're not getting many ping pong balls in that mess.
Interesting pictures, thanks. The bottom portion of that hull is just packed with equipment. That's a pretty graphic example of why the ping-pong ball method isn't going to work.
And by doing so, screwed up the complex system of stabilization that is built into cruise ships so they will sink WITHOUT capsizing.
The capsize is what killed people and made it difficult to evacuate the ship. You can't put the lifeboats out on davits when the ship is rolled on it's side and it's hard to enter a lifeboat it's leaning six feet away from the deck on the opposite side.
So, on top of making the first stupid decision (going close to shore), he gets into trouble, makes ANOTHER stupid decision (failing to abandon ship at that point) then makes ANOTHER stupid decision (hard port turn), capsizes the boat, makes evacuation difficult. Then makes ANOTHER stupid decision (falling into the lifeboat).
As John Kenneth Galbraith once said "Immortality can always be assured by spectacular error".
In his defense, he was very scared...and also drunk.
Ah, the Joe Hazelwood defense...
The metrics that actually matter to the people making use of the system, how more/less likely you are to die of ailment x in country y, shows quite the opposite. If you are diagnosed with any form of Cancer in the US you are more likely to still be alive after 5 years than anywhere else in the world (in some places, such as the UK, the survival rate is half of what it is in the US) and the numbers for almost every other medical problem shows the same pattern with the US being first or top three.
Total bullshit. US cancer death rates are in the middle of the pack on aggregate statistics. Yes, the US does pretty good for some cancers (for some people, most notably those with insurance), but not for all.
Nice of you not to buy insurance when you don't need it. Or don't think you need it. Most people I know don't plan on getting ill. It's not something that is on the calendar for "next year". But keep rolling the dice if you like.
Furthermore, the ER is not the be all and end all of medical care. Treating chronic medical conditions from the ER isn't very useful nor satisfying to either the ER or patient. US FEDERAL LAW STATES ONLY THAT HOSPITALS HAVE TO TREAT PATIENTS FOR EMERGENCY CONDITIONS. Once the "emergency" is over, they don't have to treat you although it is often illegal to just dump a patient out in the street (those tend to be state laws).
And to continue - just because the ER has to treat you doesn't mean the hospital won't bill you. And try to collect on the bill.
So the stupid meme of the US has a health care for all is valid only for a very narrow definition of health care.
And yes, Virginia, there is a crisis in the US healthcare system. Not only do we NOT cover a significant portion of the population, we DO pay more to do so without any measurable benefit whatsoever.
Infrared blocking properties of chocolate - an unexplored phenomenon. My point is that it is not emitting ionizing radiation, not that it's a good idea.
Besides, if you're hogging the chocolate, you're a bad guy.
I hope this scanner gives the cops who use it TESTICULAR CANCER.
You know, it it gave AC's a few more brain cells, then I'd be all for it.
Jesus, people are dumb today.
Calm down. It's infrared. Safe. The police are just trying to find out if you're hot or not.
I keep wondering why the TSA doesn't take this advice....they'd be much cheaper and less of a radiation risk than all the scanners they currently have and are using....
Because pretty soon somebody would figure out that you can cut the personnel count at the TSA by 90% if you pick up a bunch of strays at the pound and have them sniff around looking for treats. Then who would run the expensive equipment that was sole sourced by Micheal Chertioff's friends?
Don't start thinking outside the box. They hate that.
If you are worried about home safety and your are not willing to practice with a pistol on a regular basis, then you should use a shotgun. Very impressive results at close range, won't go through walls like a pistol bullet, less recoil.
That said, for the vast majority of folks, your are going to be more of a danger to yourself and family than any home invader. I can teach someone how to use a fire extinguisher in a couple of minutes, a gun takes a bit longer.
... The number of crimes stopped, prevented, or deterred is astonishingly high. ...
Got any data to support that argument? I've never seen anything other than anecdotes - and we know how accurate those are. It would be damned hard to actually get reasonable statistical data for that contention.
I've never been burglarized, threatened or raped and I have a number of guns. I also have a pair of Labrador Retrievers. And a couple of rocks. Oh, and an iPad.
Who (or what) is keeping me safe?
Never actually seen a concealed circular saw....
My point precisely. The problem, IMHO, is that for every reasonable human being carrying a concealed weapon, there are a dozen loose cannons / bozos and mental defectives doing same. In general, they're more a harm to themselves than the surrounding community, but it's still scary.
In all seriousness, they belong to the bears.
In general, I would more trust a random bear to hold a gun than a random human. Bears aren't typically drunk and / or coked out.
TSA can only make suggestions to local governments about train security. They don't control it. What is your support for them trying to "get to highways"?
Sigh. You thought you were safe on the road, eh.
What have you got to hide, citizen?
Rocks. Lots of rocks at high velocities.
Streetlights prevent meteorites?
Who knew?
Im off to Vegas next month and that is one of my "must-do" items. Are there any really good spots not too far away (as in 2hrs)?
Head out on the freeway (doesn't matter which one). Keep going until you find a overpass with no signs suggesting civilizations (food / gas / hotel, etc).
Turn left or right, doesn't matter as long as you are going at right angles to the highway.
Drive 15 - 30 minutes or until it gets scary or you run into a fence (stop there).
Turn off car.
Wait 10 minutes.
Look up.
Unfortunately, it's a bit more complicated that that. I live in fairly rural Alaska, people have guns all of the time. It's not all that uncommon to see a couple of guys walking down the main road, rifles in hand, going off deer hunting. If we go out into the backwoods, I typically carry a 12 gauge for bear defense (first rounds are the shotgun equivalent of an M-80, designed to scare the bear off). I don't carry a pistol around because there is really no need to - the human animals are fairly tame compared to the batshit insanity found in a bigger city.
But in the batshit insanity of a big city, feral humans are a big problem. Especially if you are law enforcement. It's useful to know that the hophead idiot wired up on six different drugs has a pistol (although those people tend to remind me of the scene in '5th Element' where Bruce Willis disarms the guy). It's useful to know that the stoner is unarmed.
If you are carrying a gun and a policeman stops you, you'd best put your hands where they can see them and tell them slowly and carefully that you're armed. Be professional. It saves lives.
That's one big gun you've got there buddy.
Hurray for humor impairment! May I give you a free WHOOSH or two? I got plenty of my own.
The problem there is you just posited a perfectly reasonable adult argument.
Teenager brains don't (typically) work that way. There still viewing the world through a flood of hormones and lack of experience.
In the perfect world, we would come up with a system to allow the teenager brain to interact with the real world without too many bad outcomes.