Bullshit. Most of the last decades terrorism attempts (including mass shootings) have been by insane people. A small minority have an identifiable ideology, and most of those have been left wing (If they are pro-socialism, whatever else their beliefs, they are closer to the left than to the right). Chris Dorner, Andrew Joseph Stack, James von Brunn. I'm sure there are others out there. However, I recognize that it's not valid to judge other members of a vast swath of people by the actions of an insane minority.
Do you really want someone to list all the innocent bystanders shot by police? Or for that matter the technically guilty but non dangerous people like Sal Culosi? At least private accidental shooters are held accountable for it.
After seeing places like Libya on the human rights council without getting laughed out of the room, I'll pass on UN control. The US is mostly hands off compared to most of the countries on the UN.
When discussing the budget, time is not the only issue. A trip to Camp David doesn't cost as much as a trip to Hawaii for instance, largely because of security issues. To be fair, most vacations presidents take are working ones. As near as I can tell you are correct, Obama himself took fewer. Almost all of Bushe's vacations were to Camp David or to his ranch in Texas, both of which were set up for teleconferencing so he could work from them and have a regular security detail already. The ones that Obama takes that people complain about generally aren't. It's possible that he still mostly vacations at camp David and that those trips just aren't the ones being reported on. For budgeting, it's probably worth checking family vacations as well, but those are not consistently reported. I believe security expenditures are considered secret information.
I only really took issue with "Throw in taxing the 1% as much as the middle class pays and we're flush with cash." because it's clear that it wouldn't make us flush with cash, even with savings from no iraq war and no F-35.
Lack of capitalization was a pure oversight. My intent was to give him partial credit for it, but also to make it clear that his gesture was just a token.
That's not true. Some departments were not included in the sequester, and a few are taking actual reductions. Just not many of them, and it isn't an actual cut overall.
They could do what Romney did as governor of Massachusetts and opt to not take a paycheck at all. Even obama is returning 5% of his 400,000 salary. Now if only he would cancel some of his million dollar vacations...
Forgot to add: even with the sequester, total federal outlays are projected to be larger in 2013 than they were in 2012. I really get tired of DC pretending reductiong in future growth are the same as actual cuts.
That's Bull shit If they confiscated 100% of the top 1% it would just barely close the deficit this year, and it wouldn't have in 2012. $1.324 trillion AGI - $0.318 trillion income tax already paid would have been less than the 1.1 trillion 2012 deficit. The sequestration is chump change in the budget sadly.
You sure on the numbers of women raping men? Even major reports redefine rape to exclude "being made to penetrate". Since the report doesn't include offender data, it's impossible to say how many of those rapes were committed by women, but it's likely that sort of poor definition is used elsewhere. Women are still far more likely to be victimized, but it's just plain wrong to say it women don't rape men in measurable numbers.
The Flynn effect is an observed reality. There is no hypothesis behind it, it simply is. There are numerous hypothesized explanations for it, not all of which would be significantly different in rural areas.
It is deeply suspicious that the USHCN Time of observation adjustments in particular are nearly a perfect fit for a quadratic curve, whose low point was right around the time that temperatures in the US were spiking in the early 20th century. The Menne-Williams paper (linked from your link) which describes one type adjustments says it's an automatic adjustment. I'm suspicious that any signal present in the data is getting magnified by their algorithm. If I get truly ambitions, I'll see if I can duplicate their alogrithm using fake data that is half cyclic values with no trend and half data with a small trend, to see if the adjustments ALSO have the trend. I wouldn't hold your breath, since I do have some life.
In general, I think the concept of homogenization of the data is flawed, since the weather being measured is easily chaotic enough to produce unusual local values. Adjustments based on known changes are perfectly justifiable (station moved, explicitly changed the 24 hour period being measure for high/low). Adjustment based on "other nearby stations behaved differently" are only weakly justifiable at best. Opinion subject to change given convincing evidence. I'm still processing an argument for TOBS adjustments but I think I would have to process the raw data myself to understand it well.
Thanks for the link on the race versus socioeconomic status. I'm skimming it now. It specifically examines educational level, which cut the gap significantly with . Which is helpful, but doesn't eliminate the issues, although they mention other studies which break it down further but still don't fully eliminate it. My initial data already struggled with the fact that life expectancy by ethnicity in japan wasn't readily available. Getting educational attainment or other income factors by ethnicity and correlating it would be harder still. There are some real differences in genetic health issues, such as sickle-cell anemia, between racial groups so I wouldn't expect race correlations to disappear entirely. It is useful to check how much of the US's overall performance is due to having a less homogenous population. It's possible that your data on relative wealth is accurate, but that the poorest 10% in the US still do better than the poorest 10% in Japan.
The link on "differs from country to country" had a reasonable argument that life expectancy isn't closely tied to the quality of the medical system. There is further argument at Forbes, which also points out that examining outcomes at point of intervention is helpful to the US numbers. OTOH, it's impossible to say if the US is just catching it earlier on average, and also how wide the tails are on the distribution even if our average is better. Life expectancy may just be the best of a set of bad options.
In no way is my argument by types of cause of death nonsense. The further along you get, the more closely aligned causes of death are to medical causes, although not necessarily medical care. (Sudden fatal hear attack, DOA at hospital is a medical cause, but not tied to the healthcare system) And if you check life expectancy at 45, the US starts moving up the ranks. It tops out at rank 12 around age 80 . I did overstate the chart I linked. All accidents were collected into a single entry for each age group, but medical conditions were broken out, and it was only the top 10 causes so many deaths were left out of each age group.
Yes actually, although not what you think. Since the high period in the 40's isn't about as high as the high point in the late 90's, it's using adjusted data. Both GHCN and USHCN have warming trends in the adjustments. For USHCN in particular, without adjustments, 1998 was cooler than 1921 and 1931. The linear trend of the adjustments is roughly 6 times bigger than the linear trend in the raw data. GHCN didn't haves as large of an average adjustment, but there is a definite nearly linear trend in the adjustments for the 20th century.
It's worth noting that Asian americans have a higher life expectancy than residents of japan. I can't find a breakdown for life expectancy by ethnicity for Japan. Since race is strongly correlated with life expectancy, the mere fact of a more diverse population brings US numbers down, even if we handle every racial group better. Life expectancy is a poor measure to star with, since it's not closely tied to medical care in particular. Social factors are a major cause of premature deaths. Life expectancy at later ages may be more relevant, as medical conditions start taking over causes of death instead of accidents and violence.
The definition of live birth as actually calculated differs from country to country and this has a large impact on numbers. As a way of avoiding those differences in counting live births, I suggest perinatal mortality instead. And, go figure, the US is better than some of the countries that regular infant mortality would suggest would surpass it. The UK (25th) for instance goes from being 2 better than us to 1 worse on rates. It's funny, but the numbers on that wiki link do not correspond to sorty by any of the actual infant mortality numbers. I believe perinatal has it's own landmines, but the time frame immediately surrounding birth is more connected to medical system than from birth to 1.
A fair point, if polling data has truly shifted that much over the last few years. I find it doubtful, but it's certain not impossible and I hadn't even considered how long ago Prop 8 passed. He didn't cite any polls, and his number didn't match any hard polling data that I had previously seen.
Please note, I am not conservative. I didn't even state in the post that I'm against gay marriage. I threw in that last part because I was fairly sure that the poster didn't actuhttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3518863&cid=43093347#ally believe hist last point, and would support majority overriding the liberties of the minority in a number of cases.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. Most of the last decades terrorism attempts (including mass shootings) have been by insane people. A small minority have an identifiable ideology, and most of those have been left wing (If they are pro-socialism, whatever else their beliefs, they are closer to the left than to the right). Chris Dorner, Andrew Joseph Stack, James von Brunn. I'm sure there are others out there. However, I recognize that it's not valid to judge other members of a vast swath of people by the actions of an insane minority.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/04/19/tamerlan_tsarnaev_dead_bombing_suspect_i_don_t_have_a_single_american_friend.html says he is muslim.
Because they are muslims, not christians. Based on the reports I can find right now, but it's early yet.
Do you really want someone to list all the innocent bystanders shot by police? Or for that matter the technically guilty but non dangerous people like Sal Culosi? At least private accidental shooters are held accountable for it.
The protocol is blind. Alternate root servers have been done before.
After seeing places like Libya on the human rights council without getting laughed out of the room, I'll pass on UN control. The US is mostly hands off compared to most of the countries on the UN.
Death is consistent. That doesn't make it good. I'll take chaotic freedom over the peace over overwhelming censorship.
Unfortunately, the cost of that security can cost more than the president's annual salary. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/joe-bidens-trips-to-europe-cost-how-much/ gives a few examples.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201703.html has some references where one of Bush's large nominal vacations included work being done.
When discussing the budget, time is not the only issue. A trip to Camp David doesn't cost as much as a trip to Hawaii for instance, largely because of security issues. To be fair, most vacations presidents take are working ones. As near as I can tell you are correct, Obama himself took fewer. Almost all of Bushe's vacations were to Camp David or to his ranch in Texas, both of which were set up for teleconferencing so he could work from them and have a regular security detail already. The ones that Obama takes that people complain about generally aren't. It's possible that he still mostly vacations at camp David and that those trips just aren't the ones being reported on. For budgeting, it's probably worth checking family vacations as well, but those are not consistently reported. I believe security expenditures are considered secret information.
I only really took issue with "Throw in taxing the 1% as much as the middle class pays and we're flush with cash." because it's clear that it wouldn't make us flush with cash, even with savings from no iraq war and no F-35.
Lack of capitalization was a pure oversight. My intent was to give him partial credit for it, but also to make it clear that his gesture was just a token.
Income. Meant to include that, but the AGI and the link was kind of a give away.
For one year. It would kill the goose laying the golden eggs though, and the deficit would be even worse the following year.
That's not true. Some departments were not included in the sequester, and a few are taking actual reductions. Just not many of them, and it isn't an actual cut overall.
They could do what Romney did as governor of Massachusetts and opt to not take a paycheck at all. Even obama is returning 5% of his 400,000 salary. Now if only he would cancel some of his million dollar vacations...
Forgot to add: even with the sequester, total federal outlays are projected to be larger in 2013 than they were in 2012. I really get tired of DC pretending reductiong in future growth are the same as actual cuts.
That's Bull shit If they confiscated 100% of the top 1% it would just barely close the deficit this year, and it wouldn't have in 2012. $1.324 trillion AGI - $0.318 trillion income tax already paid would have been less than the 1.1 trillion 2012 deficit. The sequestration is chump change in the budget sadly.
You sure on the numbers of women raping men? Even major reports redefine rape to exclude "being made to penetrate". Since the report doesn't include offender data, it's impossible to say how many of those rapes were committed by women, but it's likely that sort of poor definition is used elsewhere. Women are still far more likely to be victimized, but it's just plain wrong to say it women don't rape men in measurable numbers.
The Flynn effect is an observed reality. There is no hypothesis behind it, it simply is. There are numerous hypothesized explanations for it, not all of which would be significantly different in rural areas.
It is deeply suspicious that the USHCN Time of observation adjustments in particular are nearly a perfect fit for a quadratic curve, whose low point was right around the time that temperatures in the US were spiking in the early 20th century. The Menne-Williams paper (linked from your link) which describes one type adjustments says it's an automatic adjustment. I'm suspicious that any signal present in the data is getting magnified by their algorithm. If I get truly ambitions, I'll see if I can duplicate their alogrithm using fake data that is half cyclic values with no trend and half data with a small trend, to see if the adjustments ALSO have the trend. I wouldn't hold your breath, since I do have some life.
In general, I think the concept of homogenization of the data is flawed, since the weather being measured is easily chaotic enough to produce unusual local values. Adjustments based on known changes are perfectly justifiable (station moved, explicitly changed the 24 hour period being measure for high/low). Adjustment based on "other nearby stations behaved differently" are only weakly justifiable at best. Opinion subject to change given convincing evidence. I'm still processing an argument for TOBS adjustments but I think I would have to process the raw data myself to understand it well.
Thanks for the link on the race versus socioeconomic status. I'm skimming it now. It specifically examines educational level, which cut the gap significantly with . Which is helpful, but doesn't eliminate the issues, although they mention other studies which break it down further but still don't fully eliminate it. My initial data already struggled with the fact that life expectancy by ethnicity in japan wasn't readily available. Getting educational attainment or other income factors by ethnicity and correlating it would be harder still. There are some real differences in genetic health issues, such as sickle-cell anemia, between racial groups so I wouldn't expect race correlations to disappear entirely. It is useful to check how much of the US's overall performance is due to having a less homogenous population. It's possible that your data on relative wealth is accurate, but that the poorest 10% in the US still do better than the poorest 10% in Japan.
The link on "differs from country to country" had a reasonable argument that life expectancy isn't closely tied to the quality of the medical system. There is further argument at Forbes, which also points out that examining outcomes at point of intervention is helpful to the US numbers. OTOH, it's impossible to say if the US is just catching it earlier on average, and also how wide the tails are on the distribution even if our average is better. Life expectancy may just be the best of a set of bad options.
In no way is my argument by types of cause of death nonsense. The further along you get, the more closely aligned causes of death are to medical causes, although not necessarily medical care. (Sudden fatal hear attack, DOA at hospital is a medical cause, but not tied to the healthcare system) And if you check life expectancy at 45, the US starts moving up the ranks. It tops out at rank 12 around age 80 . I did overstate the chart I linked. All accidents were collected into a single entry for each age group, but medical conditions were broken out, and it was only the top 10 causes so many deaths were left out of each age group.
Yes actually, although not what you think. Since the high period in the 40's isn't about as high as the high point in the late 90's, it's using adjusted data. Both GHCN and USHCN have warming trends in the adjustments. For USHCN in particular, without adjustments, 1998 was cooler than 1921 and 1931. The linear trend of the adjustments is roughly 6 times bigger than the linear trend in the raw data. GHCN didn't haves as large of an average adjustment, but there is a definite nearly linear trend in the adjustments for the 20th century.
It's worth noting that Asian americans have a higher life expectancy than residents of japan. I can't find a breakdown for life expectancy by ethnicity for Japan. Since race is strongly correlated with life expectancy, the mere fact of a more diverse population brings US numbers down, even if we handle every racial group better. Life expectancy is a poor measure to star with, since it's not closely tied to medical care in particular. Social factors are a major cause of premature deaths. Life expectancy at later ages may be more relevant, as medical conditions start taking over causes of death instead of accidents and violence.
The definition of live birth as actually calculated differs from country to country and this has a large impact on numbers. As a way of avoiding those differences in counting live births, I suggest perinatal mortality instead. And, go figure, the US is better than some of the countries that regular infant mortality would suggest would surpass it. The UK (25th) for instance goes from being 2 better than us to 1 worse on rates. It's funny, but the numbers on that wiki link do not correspond to sorty by any of the actual infant mortality numbers. I believe perinatal has it's own landmines, but the time frame immediately surrounding birth is more connected to medical system than from birth to 1.
A fair point, if polling data has truly shifted that much over the last few years. I find it doubtful, but it's certain not impossible and I hadn't even considered how long ago Prop 8 passed. He didn't cite any polls, and his number didn't match any hard polling data that I had previously seen.
Please note, I am not conservative. I didn't even state in the post that I'm against gay marriage. I threw in that last part because I was fairly sure that the poster didn't actuhttp://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3518863&cid=43093347#ally believe hist last point, and would support majority overriding the liberties of the minority in a number of cases.