A warning of what? National ID cards lead to genocide? Tell that to the British, Koreans, Taiwanese, Russians, Italians, etc. Would you like to buy a tiger-repellent rock?
I would not be that surprised if most countries in the industrial world require such things. Just because a law existed under Nazi Germany does not make it forever suspect.
Of course you are not a strict constitutionalist, you are a selective one who is interpreting the 9th and 10th amendments in a way as to prohibit any federal laws not in support of the constitution. Although this was an original goal of the Constitution, and far more so the Articles of Confederation, it is a goal that was never terribly realistic or adhered to, even by its backers.
April 9, 1865, but that is neither here nor there. Are you telling me that you would not object to security screenings were individual states' port authorities to enact restrictions and conduct searches? Are your problems with the TSA and its restrictions really based on principles of states' rights?
The right to carry liquids in containers above 1oz on an airplane; Locke must be rolling over in his grave. Don't get me started on me feet's constitutional right to privacy.
What is sad is how easy it is for people to believe every word that comes out of Al Gore's mouth, but still be convinced that the Sept 11 terrorist attacks were a carefully orchestrated US government conspiracy.
Personally, my issue with the global warming problem as presented by evangelists is that the correlation between industrialization and increases of year-to-year average temperatures is pretty weak. We see statements similar to, "The water of the Gulf of Mexico have not been this hot in 500 years." If such temperatures were reached 500 years ago, was that a result of increased CO2 due to industrialization as well?
That's right. It's the conspiracy theorists that are responsible for the complete polarization and "fuckup" of politics these days. You keep on believing that. Sounds almost like a conspiracy in itself. (And that's ignoring the fact that you're the only person who's descended into pathetic name-calling and ranting, yet you feel justified in calling other people children).
No kidding. We all know that the Republicans are to blame for the political polarization. It's not like the Democrats have lost a lot of power and are desperate to differentiate themselves and bash the Republicans, while dragging their base along with them while more moderate people have little choice but to vote for Republicans. Of course, it's all Dick Cheney and Karl Rove orchestrating a conspiracy (with a little bit of help from the Catholics).
I don't think the Democratic party is inherently opposed to war (at least when you take into account how many military conflicts we entered into under Democrats in the White House). The issue is more that groups like MoveOn.org and others are gaining more and more power within the party, largely due to the amount of money they bring in. Let's not forget how easily Pres. Clinton's Iraq regime change mantra was forgotten and/or excused away.
Last year, France's real GDP growth rate was 1.4%, the US's was 3.5%.
Per capita labor productivity differences are, as I said before, pointless when comparing the US to France. Of course a country like France that is virtually incapable of a large industrial economy will produce more capital per man hour. In this category, countris like France can beat out any country with a large manufacturing workforce.
And although you are right that eastern European countries have much lower GDPs, remember we were talking about growth rate, where the eastern countries are doing much better than the western ones.
I said western Europe. Former USSR states and others in eastern Europe are doing phenomenally well and propping up the rest of the continent to show high aggregate economic growth. Also, remember that crude oil is not the only world resource.
Comparing the worker productivity between the US and France is pretty ridiculous given how different our economies are. (I think you meant labor productivity.)
It is fair to say that the US economy is stagnated, much in the same way any large company in a specific industry is stagnated.
No, efficiency is still above average. As already stated here, goods != resources. The only countries that produce a percentage of the world's goods that is higher than their percentage of world resource consumption are ones like China that are very poor with very low standards of living, but are still industrious. How efficient do you think the western European countries with stagnated economies and high standards of living do?
Congrats are your +5 though, wp is truly a karma whore's best friend.
Ironically, the US population would be *decreasing* if it were not for immigration from Mexico. Then again, I am not terribly confident in the Census Bureau's ability to account for the homeless and illegal aliens. Maybe tacos are somehow to blame?
The irresponsibility of focusing research on far-fetched solutions instead of more practical ones notwithstanding, the 'embryonic' version of stem cells do not have the desired affect either.
Though I can not find a proper link, I believe that placental stem cells are believed to be largely identical to embryonic stem cells, while being in much greater supply and therefor lower cost.
More research in the vein of Methylprednisolone with respect to spinal cord injuries would also be nice.
Then why don't you shut up or enlighten me? What, may I ask are your qualifications? I make no attempt to claim my expertise in the field, I am only responding to the lack of credible evidence to support large-scale federal government funding of embryonic stem cell research. If there is some evidence you are privy to that is withheld from the public, then let's hear it. Then again, you can just keep professing my ignorance.
I am just in favor of erring on the side of capitalism. In an area with a well established and lucrative industry, government research subsidies should hardly be necessary.
My ignorance? Perhaps you can enlighten me and show me some examples of human embryonic stem cells being shown successful in these uses. I am not sure if I can agree that fighting Parkinson's in rodents should be a priority. You know just as well as I do that if ebryonic stem cells will ever be used to treat humans, there will need to be tremendous advances in many parallel areas of biotechnology. Were Hwang's research not shown to be fraudulent, there would be a good case for researching human embryonic stem cells. But as it stands, there are much more promising areas of research.
Slashdot Mirror
A warning of what? National ID cards lead to genocide? Tell that to the British, Koreans, Taiwanese, Russians, Italians, etc. Would you like to buy a tiger-repellent rock?
I would not be that surprised if most countries in the industrial world require such things. Just because a law existed under Nazi Germany does not make it forever suspect.
Of course you are not a strict constitutionalist, you are a selective one who is interpreting the 9th and 10th amendments in a way as to prohibit any federal laws not in support of the constitution. Although this was an original goal of the Constitution, and far more so the Articles of Confederation, it is a goal that was never terribly realistic or adhered to, even by its backers.
April 9, 1865, but that is neither here nor there. Are you telling me that you would not object to security screenings were individual states' port authorities to enact restrictions and conduct searches? Are your problems with the TSA and its restrictions really based on principles of states' rights?
Now do your homework on what those amendments are actually for and not for. (Hint: Do I have a right to commit murder?)
The right to carry liquids in containers above 1oz on an airplane; Locke must be rolling over in his grave. Don't get me started on me feet's constitutional right to privacy.
Limiting the scope of the 2nd amendment is a goal of the current liberal political party.
What is sad is how easy it is for people to believe every word that comes out of Al Gore's mouth, but still be convinced that the Sept 11 terrorist attacks were a carefully orchestrated US government conspiracy.
Personally, my issue with the global warming problem as presented by evangelists is that the correlation between industrialization and increases of year-to-year average temperatures is pretty weak. We see statements similar to, "The water of the Gulf of Mexico have not been this hot in 500 years." If such temperatures were reached 500 years ago, was that a result of increased CO2 due to industrialization as well?
So is MS a privacy advocate and the open source movement a privacy opponent?
What do you call it?
That's right. It's the conspiracy theorists that are responsible for the complete polarization and "fuckup" of politics these days. You keep on believing that. Sounds almost like a conspiracy in itself. (And that's ignoring the fact that you're the only person who's descended into pathetic name-calling and ranting, yet you feel justified in calling other people children).
No kidding. We all know that the Republicans are to blame for the political polarization. It's not like the Democrats have lost a lot of power and are desperate to differentiate themselves and bash the Republicans, while dragging their base along with them while more moderate people have little choice but to vote for Republicans. Of course, it's all Dick Cheney and Karl Rove orchestrating a conspiracy (with a little bit of help from the Catholics).
I don't think the Democratic party is inherently opposed to war (at least when you take into account how many military conflicts we entered into under Democrats in the White House). The issue is more that groups like MoveOn.org and others are gaining more and more power within the party, largely due to the amount of money they bring in. Let's not forget how easily Pres. Clinton's Iraq regime change mantra was forgotten and/or excused away.
Then there are the dolts on slashdot who get their history lessons from other dolts on slashdot.
Viva la revolution!
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.
Take it up with the CIA, I got rid of my econ textbook a long time ago.
Last year, France's real GDP growth rate was 1.4%, the US's was 3.5%.
Per capita labor productivity differences are, as I said before, pointless when comparing the US to France. Of course a country like France that is virtually incapable of a large industrial economy will produce more capital per man hour. In this category, countris like France can beat out any country with a large manufacturing workforce.
And although you are right that eastern European countries have much lower GDPs, remember we were talking about growth rate, where the eastern countries are doing much better than the western ones.
I said western Europe. Former USSR states and others in eastern Europe are doing phenomenally well and propping up the rest of the continent to show high aggregate economic growth. Also, remember that crude oil is not the only world resource.
Comparing the worker productivity between the US and France is pretty ridiculous given how different our economies are. (I think you meant labor productivity.)
It is fair to say that the US economy is stagnated, much in the same way any large company in a specific industry is stagnated.
No, efficiency is still above average. As already stated here, goods != resources. The only countries that produce a percentage of the world's goods that is higher than their percentage of world resource consumption are ones like China that are very poor with very low standards of living, but are still industrious. How efficient do you think the western European countries with stagnated economies and high standards of living do?
Congrats are your +5 though, wp is truly a karma whore's best friend.
Ironically, the US population would be *decreasing* if it were not for immigration from Mexico. Then again, I am not terribly confident in the Census Bureau's ability to account for the homeless and illegal aliens. Maybe tacos are somehow to blame?
The vast right wing conspiracy strikes yet again. Will the noble Democrats every have a chance?
I hope you stay out of major cities and never eat tomatoes. That combination of increased carbon monoxide and nicotine far outpaces a smokey bar.
The irresponsibility of focusing research on far-fetched solutions instead of more practical ones notwithstanding, the 'embryonic' version of stem cells do not have the desired affect either.
Though I can not find a proper link, I believe that placental stem cells are believed to be largely identical to embryonic stem cells, while being in much greater supply and therefor lower cost.
More research in the vein of Methylprednisolone with respect to spinal cord injuries would also be nice.
Then why don't you shut up or enlighten me? What, may I ask are your qualifications? I make no attempt to claim my expertise in the field, I am only responding to the lack of credible evidence to support large-scale federal government funding of embryonic stem cell research. If there is some evidence you are privy to that is withheld from the public, then let's hear it. Then again, you can just keep professing my ignorance.
Yes, it was. And no, they are not all bad.
I am just in favor of erring on the side of capitalism. In an area with a well established and lucrative industry, government research subsidies should hardly be necessary.
My ignorance? Perhaps you can enlighten me and show me some examples of human embryonic stem cells being shown successful in these uses. I am not sure if I can agree that fighting Parkinson's in rodents should be a priority. You know just as well as I do that if ebryonic stem cells will ever be used to treat humans, there will need to be tremendous advances in many parallel areas of biotechnology. Were Hwang's research not shown to be fraudulent, there would be a good case for researching human embryonic stem cells. But as it stands, there are much more promising areas of research.