I beg to differ. In fact, the majority of comments here appear to be overwhelmingly positive. Maybe we're just a little more soft-hearted than you give us credit.
Picocuries (or micromicrocuries, whatever suits your fancy) might be the standard for radcon experts, but they are no where near as ubiquitous as kilometers. Besides, why don't we use megameters? The general public is apparantly able to fathom the difference between megabyte and gigabyte, why not use standard terminology for everything?
Well, presently I pay nothing for first rate healthcare for my entire family in NYC, so I'm not exactly an ideal candidate. Nevertheless that website puts me at around 90 pounds for similar care in the E4 6AA postcode of London (I have no idea where that is, but I don't exactly live in Manhattan, so it seemed comparable), but doesn't cover dental or the cost of anything but out-patient surgery, as far as I can tell (doesn't cover surgery? then what's the point?). But about $140 a month is nearly a tenth of the average per-family cost in the US (presumably it would be higher than average here in NYC, and not cover dental either). That's very impressive.
But then, isn't the UK system government run? I'm fairly certain that most of the proposed US systems are going to still be private, just with Uncle Sam footing the bill. I would hardly say that the UK system is comparable, and by the same token neither is the public hospital system in Canada.
I think the only valid comparison might actually be right here in the US: our defense budget. According to the FY2011 budget, the present spending is about 700 billion dollars per year. Is that going to be enough to cover a $2.5 trillion (same link as "a tenth") industry? Or will people finally stop complaining about DoD spending when healthcare spending totally eclipses it?
That was oddly rambling and rife with parentheticals. My apologies if I got lost somewhere...
But, ya, when I needed surgery, I didn't have to do anything but sign my name somewhere. Is it like that in the UK? Does your healthcare cover the PRK I also got for free?
bit.ly? Seriously? Why is it not possible to just include a real link to the actual website? It's not like you're on twitter here, or you're hiding goatse. You're just keeping people who might actually think you're being honest from believing you by hiding your link behind a notorious troll cave.
Whatever happened to academic ability? Wouldn't this system further reinforce the kids who waste their childhood playing silly games, ultimately instilling a desire to contribute nothing to the development of mankind?
Additionally, I'm all for being healthy, but let's be honest here: no kid is going to be interested in these hollow shells of entertainment. Even at the age of 12 children can differentiate between what essentially amounts to government propaganda and actual entertainment. I'll give you a hint how they know: it's not entertaining.
Well, I think most stories are reader-submitted. Since the majority of readers are of like-mind, I would presume the majority of stories submitted would have one particular political slant. Even perfectly impartial editors would end up releasing submissions primarily focused toward the political views of the submitter base.
In short: If you want more stories with a specific view-point, submit them.
I know several Canadian citizens who moved to the states in a large part to escape the inferior national healthcare system up north. I suppose if you work part time at McDonalds, government run health care seems like a good idea, but if you have a job where you can actually afford real healthcare, it's terrible.
[sarcasm]Maybe we should raise the voting age to prevent those pesky poor college kids from voting their silly liberal views. That would eliminate a large portion of the support for this![/sarcasm]
But really, I have no idea what would be a better plan. Maybe not privatizing it, and actually have government employed doctors and government run hospitals. Like that would ever happen.
Here is some data to support your wild claim of America as the most giving. See figure 1 on the bottom of page 2, figure 2 on page 6 and table 1 on page 9. It should be noted that this data is based on private philanthropy, not government handouts, as other studies often are.
Personally, I think the best table there is on page 13, as it is adjusted against average income level, and not GDP (which may be biased for countries that have a high per capita GDP, like the US). In this table it can be seen that America is still the top giver internationally, but not by nearly as high of a margin.
Unfortunately, I still don't think this is a fair comparison. For example, people who make more money can afford to give a larger percentage to charity, as their cost of living is a lower percentage of their income. Possibly charitable donations over (per capita GDP minus average cost of living) would be a better scale. Regardless, by the given metric, America is the top charitable giver.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and all the major corporations throw their money into it.
I beg to differ. In fact, the majority of comments here appear to be overwhelmingly positive. Maybe we're just a little more soft-hearted than you give us credit.
I would presume that the people who work at Google would use adblock. I know I would.
In computing, a hyperlink (or link) is a reference to a document that the reader can directly follow, or that is followed automatically.
...
The most common example of hypertext today is the World Wide Web: webpages contain hyperlinks to webpages.
- Wikipedia
He's getting his fleet of hundreds of thousands underway by loosing the sails.
It's not a grammar note, but this link to the human Statue of Liberty thing would've been nice to include.
Picocuries (or micromicrocuries, whatever suits your fancy) might be the standard for radcon experts, but they are no where near as ubiquitous as kilometers. Besides, why don't we use megameters? The general public is apparantly able to fathom the difference between megabyte and gigabyte, why not use standard terminology for everything?
Well, he writes the Halo series, so competent might be a stretch.
Can't we just say 2.7 microcuries now?
You're absolutely right, and I personally know people who make that choice. Cell phones are much cheaper, even with the crazy prices we pay in the US.
Well, presently I pay nothing for first rate healthcare for my entire family in NYC, so I'm not exactly an ideal candidate. Nevertheless that website puts me at around 90 pounds for similar care in the E4 6AA postcode of London (I have no idea where that is, but I don't exactly live in Manhattan, so it seemed comparable), but doesn't cover dental or the cost of anything but out-patient surgery, as far as I can tell (doesn't cover surgery? then what's the point?). But about $140 a month is nearly a tenth of the average per-family cost in the US (presumably it would be higher than average here in NYC, and not cover dental either). That's very impressive.
But then, isn't the UK system government run? I'm fairly certain that most of the proposed US systems are going to still be private, just with Uncle Sam footing the bill. I would hardly say that the UK system is comparable, and by the same token neither is the public hospital system in Canada.
I think the only valid comparison might actually be right here in the US: our defense budget. According to the FY2011 budget, the present spending is about 700 billion dollars per year. Is that going to be enough to cover a $2.5 trillion (same link as "a tenth") industry? Or will people finally stop complaining about DoD spending when healthcare spending totally eclipses it?
That was oddly rambling and rife with parentheticals. My apologies if I got lost somewhere...
But, ya, when I needed surgery, I didn't have to do anything but sign my name somewhere. Is it like that in the UK? Does your healthcare cover the PRK I also got for free?
bit.ly? Seriously? Why is it not possible to just include a real link to the actual website? It's not like you're on twitter here, or you're hiding goatse. You're just keeping people who might actually think you're being honest from believing you by hiding your link behind a notorious troll cave.
Well, I compare with Canada because I know a bunch of Canadians, and I don't know any UKians.
So that's why my car gets covered in an inch-thick sheet of perfectly clear ice. That's always bothered me, thanks!
Yes, we all want desperately to know every detail of your menstrual cycle... *cough*
You're likely right, people who can't afford healthcare in the US (15% are uninsured) probably don't buy cellphone plans (82% have plans).
Whatever happened to academic ability? Wouldn't this system further reinforce the kids who waste their childhood playing silly games, ultimately instilling a desire to contribute nothing to the development of mankind?
Additionally, I'm all for being healthy, but let's be honest here: no kid is going to be interested in these hollow shells of entertainment. Even at the age of 12 children can differentiate between what essentially amounts to government propaganda and actual entertainment. I'll give you a hint how they know: it's not entertaining.
Well, I think most stories are reader-submitted. Since the majority of readers are of like-mind, I would presume the majority of stories submitted would have one particular political slant. Even perfectly impartial editors would end up releasing submissions primarily focused toward the political views of the submitter base.
In short: If you want more stories with a specific view-point, submit them.
I know several Canadian citizens who moved to the states in a large part to escape the inferior national healthcare system up north. I suppose if you work part time at McDonalds, government run health care seems like a good idea, but if you have a job where you can actually afford real healthcare, it's terrible.
[sarcasm]Maybe we should raise the voting age to prevent those pesky poor college kids from voting their silly liberal views. That would eliminate a large portion of the support for this![/sarcasm]
But really, I have no idea what would be a better plan. Maybe not privatizing it, and actually have government employed doctors and government run hospitals. Like that would ever happen.
I'm really glad I'm not the only one a little surprised by that post getting modded troll.
Here is some data to support your wild claim of America as the most giving. See figure 1 on the bottom of page 2, figure 2 on page 6 and table 1 on page 9. It should be noted that this data is based on private philanthropy, not government handouts, as other studies often are.
Personally, I think the best table there is on page 13, as it is adjusted against average income level, and not GDP (which may be biased for countries that have a high per capita GDP, like the US). In this table it can be seen that America is still the top giver internationally, but not by nearly as high of a margin.
Unfortunately, I still don't think this is a fair comparison. For example, people who make more money can afford to give a larger percentage to charity, as their cost of living is a lower percentage of their income. Possibly charitable donations over (per capita GDP minus average cost of living) would be a better scale. Regardless, by the given metric, America is the top charitable giver.
If I squash the Cicada in my computer, will it finally stop making that clicking noise whenever it's working hard?
IDK, my BFF Jill?
Good thing they didn't add anything else that required Mono, like gbrainy or something.
And just for the hell of it, I ran it.
Worst. Puzzles. Ever.
Here's an example:
Given the following words, what word has the closest relationship to "vinegar:" sugar / sweet ?
Answer: sour (As context here, previous questions provided words as options for answers)
Here's another:
6 hours ago it was as long after 4 as it was before 10 on the same day. What time is it now?
Here's a hint: It's 4 (um, ya.)
Maybe I can't read. Maybe I can't do math. For me, though, the word sour is neither the word sweet nor sugar, and 6 hours after 7 is 1.