Everything you said was false. US is ranked 38th in the world in healthcare. The ER is not socialized medicine. You get a bill. Our expensive healthcare goes to the pockets of rich people, its not an efficient or an ethical system. The drug companies exploit the American consumer on drug prices, we don't subsidize anything. The for profit system makes sure we pay the most the market will bear. The socialized system negotiates prices with drug companies. Stop making shit up.
oh for some mod points. I can only believe that those who didn't want it to be true modded this down. I'd suggest it is simpler - if you take profit from health, it costs more, and some priorities are taken from just health. Capital markets aren't more efficient, but they sure can pay for generations of advertising to claim it.
That's not what *LIFE* is about... but it is what *BUSINESS* is about.
... and going back to the story, you are now less safe flying in the US as a result. See why only thinking about profit gives you me, and everyone a bad outcome now?
Also, and very importantly, US citizens, through taxes and insurance, sponsors to a great degree health care in Europe. They do this by paying for medications developed by US companies in full, not at cut-rate prices. In this way, the people in the US pays for development and testing of drugs that Europeans get access to. Europe is hardly in the forefront of pharmaceutical development.
Bigotry and nonsense. I have relatives in the field, and could list dozens of cutting edge drugs invented in UK first. That said, i'm sure there are many from the US and numbers of new discoveries in the East is rising dramatically. You sir, are nothing but an ill-informed bigot.
and how is that when you consider the EU? Also look at historical figures. US unemployment is very rarely above two figures. EU unemployment is rarely below.
Above two figures would be at least 100%. Moving on...
Most states in the US (it is dependent on state) has an at-will employment law. This means that the employer can let you go for any reason whatsoever or no reason at all. This is based on the fact that you and your employer are basically consenting adults engaged in a mutually beneficial work-pay relationship. In other words, the law treats you like you are an adult.
This is different from most countries in Europe, where the law basically assumes that the employer-employee is in a exploitative relationship with the employer exploiting the employee. In other words, most European countries treat you like you are a dumb-ass, no-brains child that needs to be protected against cruel and terrible employers. The European system is absurd. NOTE: I live and work in a European country. Some countries - France is an example, have laws that are literally insane, where employers can basically not fire anybody for any reason whatsoever.
The European system is a major contributor to the current problems in Europe, and it is also a major contributor to the fact that innovation, development and other important functions haven't worked in Europe since before WWII. Europe is going to (have to) change these laws. They are absurd.
Europe has to change? The arrogance of the young. My school was founded before your country. get some perspective before you mouth off, child.
Did you have any counter arguments or are you just trolling? I have lived and worked longer in Europe than in the US, but I have done both for more than ten years. Do you have any experience? Any comments? Any rational arguments?
.. any manners? Shame you didn't learn more from Europe.
Explain to me where "Jennifer" was obviously fired because she wasn't pulling her weight. She raised important flaws within the organisation which could consiquently be resolved. That sounds pretty fucking valuable to me.
... and this is where the argument for the free market breaks down. That is massively valuable, but a stupid boss won't see that. Pure free market business can work efficiently only with the assumption that people are well informed and make intelligent decisions. Many to most aren't and don't. This is why many business do many inefficient and unprofitable things. Sometimes they support this by legislating out competition, or bullying (patent trolling e.g.), or sometimes there just isn't an efficient competitor (finite people and resources). It is amazing that the myth of free market caught the religious fervour of anyone...
Nearly all ISP's in the UK have a service which allows the customer's Internet connection to be set to "off." When the "off" setting is activated, all pornographic Internet content can no longer be accessed. This technology is cutting edge — no other filtering is 100% effective.
Love it. Just for that I'd send you free pictures;-)
I really don't think is is even the majority in UK - cdertainly not the majority that I speak with. But it does appear to be a repeated obsession with a small but influential group of (mostly) chrisitan influential groups.
My interpretation is that Christianity never really made its peace with sexuality, like more natural religions, from the strange inheretence path of the greek cult of virginity into what was originally a Jewish sect.
I also believe strongly that those argueing for censorship here are missing the real dangers. The internet is public space and should be treated as such. If you are not yet ready to allow your child alone in public space and talking to strangers, don't let them access the internet alone and unmonitored. There are actually worse dangers for children than finding images on the internet, such as predatory grooming, that no amount of filtering will prevent.
Have a read in to the history of marriage. many of your assumptions are just wrong. It was state before religious, and male unions date from Hellenistic times at least.
I'd hope you'd agree however, that whether it is new or old, it is the morality of the state that is the issue. There may be a lot of laws to change, but change they must, and as soon as is possible.
Citation needed. There are lots of games that (like Mass Effect tend to be M rated, but probably are played by some children) - man up and show some reference to where you campaigned against, say, Saints Row 3, or similar games with hetrosexual images.
No-one is shoving anything in your face. Wake up! I haven't said anything about my personal sex life, nor do I intend to. But saying people must keep things to themselves, is an attempt to force your view by censorship. Live and let live. Jesus did.
The only homosexuality that is yours to accept or not accept would be your own (if you wanted). Can't you see you are starting from an illogical position?
If everybody gets these so-called benefits, why not just abandon state legal marriage altogether and make the benefits available to everybody, married or not? Why discriminate against single people?
All the usual crap people list as marriage benefits like income pooling for tax purposes and sharing of benefits from insurance should be available to anybody. Why can't I temporarily share my insurance with my buddy who just lost his job, but now some gay guys can marry each other and share insurance?
Any assignment of benefits to only one group of people ("married", regardless of whether that includes gays) is by definition discriminatory. So I have a hard time believing that gay marriage proponents are *really* interested in equality or fairness.
So do you post on other stories talking about a hetro marriage saying it discriminates against you? I'm not sure if this is flawed logic to have a go at "the gay rights lobby", or you really believe all marriages are somehow discriminating against you. In either case you really sound like you need to hug someone, now.
Sorry but history really doesn't bear you out. It was quite the reverse - the Church moved in on a legal practice. Notice how Jesus doesn't marry anyone, but performs the other sacrements? Religious marriage wasn't a church sacrement, or common practice until fairly late in church history. The history of the church and marriage rather surprised me - worth a read around.
That said I'd not want to take the idea of religious marriage from you, and welcome the idea of keeping "legal" or "state" marriage separate.
How does my marriage devalue anyone else's? Did every married couple somehow become less married when I did?
Interesting - If true the thesis that there is a fixed proportion of "marriedness" shared out between all couple, surely population growth is a far great threat. Must research further. Can you please tell me how married you are as of today?
The only avowed atheist state now (since China dropped the title) is North Korea. The Uk is a religious state with a formal state religion, and whilst not perfect, is a good counter example to your selection.
I don't think anything is 'intended' to go inside the anus. It seems to be a pretty straightforward one way valve. From a biological perspective I think a good argument can be made that sticking anything up there is unnatural. And the large intestine certainly doesn't seem designed for sexual gratification in any way.
The human body isn't designed. Baseball is also unnatural, and unpleasant for me, but I wouldn't campaign against it.
Slashdot Mirror
Everything you said was false. US is ranked 38th in the world in healthcare. The ER is not socialized medicine. You get a bill. Our expensive healthcare goes to the pockets of rich people, its not an efficient or an ethical system. The drug companies exploit the American consumer on drug prices, we don't subsidize anything. The for profit system makes sure we pay the most the market will bear. The socialized system negotiates prices with drug companies. Stop making shit up.
oh for some mod points. I can only believe that those who didn't want it to be true modded this down. I'd suggest it is simpler - if you take profit from health, it costs more, and some priorities are taken from just health. Capital markets aren't more efficient, but they sure can pay for generations of advertising to claim it.
That's not what *LIFE* is about... but it is what *BUSINESS* is about.
... and going back to the story, you are now less safe flying in the US as a result. See why only thinking about profit gives you me, and everyone a bad outcome now?
Also, and very importantly, US citizens, through taxes and insurance, sponsors to a great degree health care in Europe. They do this by paying for medications developed by US companies in full, not at cut-rate prices. In this way, the people in the US pays for development and testing of drugs that Europeans get access to. Europe is hardly in the forefront of pharmaceutical development.
Bigotry and nonsense. I have relatives in the field, and could list dozens of cutting edge drugs invented in UK first. That said, i'm sure there are many from the US and numbers of new discoveries in the East is rising dramatically. You sir, are nothing but an ill-informed bigot.
and how is that when you consider the EU? Also look at historical figures. US unemployment is very rarely above two figures. EU unemployment is rarely below.
Above two figures would be at least 100%. Moving on...
Most states in the US (it is dependent on state) has an at-will employment law. This means that the employer can let you go for any reason whatsoever or no reason at all. This is based on the fact that you and your employer are basically consenting adults engaged in a mutually beneficial work-pay relationship. In other words, the law treats you like you are an adult.
This is different from most countries in Europe, where the law basically assumes that the employer-employee is in a exploitative relationship with the employer exploiting the employee. In other words, most European countries treat you like you are a dumb-ass, no-brains child that needs to be protected against cruel and terrible employers. The European system is absurd. NOTE: I live and work in a European country. Some countries - France is an example, have laws that are literally insane, where employers can basically not fire anybody for any reason whatsoever.
The European system is a major contributor to the current problems in Europe, and it is also a major contributor to the fact that innovation, development and other important functions haven't worked in Europe since before WWII. Europe is going to (have to) change these laws. They are absurd.
Europe has to change? The arrogance of the young. My school was founded before your country. get some perspective before you mouth off, child.
Did you have any counter arguments or are you just trolling? I have lived and worked longer in Europe than in the US, but I have done both for more than ten years. Do you have any experience? Any comments? Any rational arguments?
.. any manners? Shame you didn't learn more from Europe.
Explain to me where "Jennifer" was obviously fired because she wasn't pulling her weight. She raised important flaws within the organisation which could consiquently be resolved. That sounds pretty fucking valuable to me.
... and this is where the argument for the free market breaks down. That is massively valuable, but a stupid boss won't see that. Pure free market business can work efficiently only with the assumption that people are well informed and make intelligent decisions. Many to most aren't and don't. This is why many business do many inefficient and unprofitable things. Sometimes they support this by legislating out competition, or bullying (patent trolling e.g.), or sometimes there just isn't an efficient competitor (finite people and resources). It is amazing that the myth of free market caught the religious fervour of anyone ...
Nearly all ISP's in the UK have a service which allows the customer's Internet connection to be set to "off." When the "off" setting is activated, all pornographic Internet content can no longer be accessed. This technology is cutting edge — no other filtering is 100% effective.
Love it. Just for that I'd send you free pictures ;-)
Not all Uk people. Certainly a wanker here :)
I really don't think is is even the majority in UK - cdertainly not the majority that I speak with. But it does appear to be a repeated obsession with a small but influential group of (mostly) chrisitan influential groups.
My interpretation is that Christianity never really made its peace with sexuality, like more natural religions, from the strange inheretence path of the greek cult of virginity into what was originally a Jewish sect.
I also believe strongly that those argueing for censorship here are missing the real dangers. The internet is public space and should be treated as such. If you are not yet ready to allow your child alone in public space and talking to strangers, don't let them access the internet alone and unmonitored. There are actually worse dangers for children than finding images on the internet, such as predatory grooming, that no amount of filtering will prevent.
Have a read in to the history of marriage. many of your assumptions are just wrong. It was state before religious, and male unions date from Hellenistic times at least.
I'd hope you'd agree however, that whether it is new or old, it is the morality of the state that is the issue. There may be a lot of laws to change, but change they must, and as soon as is possible.
Citation needed. There are lots of games that (like Mass Effect tend to be M rated, but probably are played by some children) - man up and show some reference to where you campaigned against, say, Saints Row 3, or similar games with hetrosexual images.
No-one is shoving anything in your face. Wake up! I haven't said anything about my personal sex life, nor do I intend to. But saying people must keep things to themselves, is an attempt to force your view by censorship. Live and let live. Jesus did.
Killing ... way more important than the option sex stuff.
Where did he say "natural" means "should be made legal"? No the point is it is not unnatural, like many other things, good, bad, and indifferent.
Timefor you to retake logic 101.
The only homosexuality that is yours to accept or not accept would be your own (if you wanted). Can't you see you are starting from an illogical position?
If everybody gets these so-called benefits, why not just abandon state legal marriage altogether and make the benefits available to everybody, married or not? Why discriminate against single people?
All the usual crap people list as marriage benefits like income pooling for tax purposes and sharing of benefits from insurance should be available to anybody. Why can't I temporarily share my insurance with my buddy who just lost his job, but now some gay guys can marry each other and share insurance?
Any assignment of benefits to only one group of people ("married", regardless of whether that includes gays) is by definition discriminatory. So I have a hard time believing that gay marriage proponents are *really* interested in equality or fairness.
So do you post on other stories talking about a hetro marriage saying it discriminates against you? I'm not sure if this is flawed logic to have a go at "the gay rights lobby", or you really believe all marriages are somehow discriminating against you. In either case you really sound like you need to hug someone, now.
Sorry but history really doesn't bear you out. It was quite the reverse - the Church moved in on a legal practice. Notice how Jesus doesn't marry anyone, but performs the other sacrements? Religious marriage wasn't a church sacrement, or common practice until fairly late in church history. The history of the church and marriage rather surprised me - worth a read around.
That said I'd not want to take the idea of religious marriage from you, and welcome the idea of keeping "legal" or "state" marriage separate.
How does my marriage devalue anyone else's? Did every married couple somehow become less married when I did?
Interesting - If true the thesis that there is a fixed proportion of "marriedness" shared out between all couple, surely population growth is a far great threat. Must research further. Can you please tell me how married you are as of today?
Get a better dictionary.
Dear America - can you see why we sent you the Puritans now? We are sorry, but very glad they are no longer here. Yours, the UK.
You sir, are a bigot. Please for the love of Jesus have a sit down and a talk with a quaker. You might be saved from your obvious hatred.
The only avowed atheist state now (since China dropped the title) is North Korea. The Uk is a religious state with a formal state religion, and whilst not perfect, is a good counter example to your selection.
I believe homosexuality should not be promoted.
How does one 'promote' homosexuality?
Two for one?
Human life doesn't.
I don't think anything is 'intended' to go inside the anus. It seems to be a pretty straightforward one way valve. From a biological perspective I think a good argument can be made that sticking anything up there is unnatural. And the large intestine certainly doesn't seem designed for sexual gratification in any way.
The human body isn't designed. Baseball is also unnatural, and unpleasant for me, but I wouldn't campaign against it.