And how specifically is systems causing your issues. I'm no fan of systems but frankly the number of ACs making pretty vapid claims about it producing instability makesmme suspicious.
"Mistakes" is putting it lightly. Microsoft actively attempted to destroy Linux at one point (via SCO's lawsuit). Yes, now it has been forced to play nice, and while I'm not fanatically anti-MS, I see no reason to trust them. They're only playing nice right now because Android has utterly fucked over their market dominance in the consumer computing world.
And while Google and Apple have done their share of nasty or stupid things, the only other company I can think of that rises to MS's level of assholery is Oracle.
If you have an actual critique of the OECD findings, then bring it on. But you don't. You can't cherry pick average lifespan and infant mortality rates, you pathetic brainlessnwindbag.
You are aware that the US has some of the worst average health outcomes of the industrialized nations, right? Even if bankruptcy were no big deal (which, of course it is, and Trump has never gone personally bankrupt) the US health care system is absurdly expensive, on top of poor outcomes.
Have you used Windows 10? The GUI is fucking terrible. I'd say there are no decent desktop systems these days, but really, under the hood, Linux is as solid as ever. I run Debian installs as custom routers that are up 24/7/365 and I'm not seeing any evidence at all of instability. So frankly, your claim is just a load of shit.
For a society to maintain even just zero-growth population means on average every woman has to produce 2.1 children. Now maybe the coming age of AI and robots will alter that, but we're not there yet. Just look at Spain and Japan, two countries with negative demographic growth, and where falling populations literally are a demographic timebomb that is starting to go off.
If no one has kids, then no one is going to be looking after you in your fading years. I know this is tough for some people, but no kids, no society. So maybe you want to think twice before you demand to be let off the hook for "paying for other peoples' kids".
You will pay either way. If you simply allow people to go bankrupt, then there are significant legal and societal costs attached to major medical interventions. If they have no money or assets at all, then they still get the hospital treatment, and your taxes end up paying for their health care anyways. Unless your talking about literally throwing anyone out on the street who doesn't have health care, then you will still pay.
Largely because, historically, or at least since Medicaid was formed, there has been a notion of joint funding of health care, seeing as the Federal Government has far greater resources than the individual states.
Bullshit. The reason they didn't want to actually repeal it is because the second older Americans' insurance rates spiked because all the younger people pulled out or picked discount plans, there are lot of Republicans suddenly looking at serious problems when they have to seek re-election. Americans have made it pretty clear; they hate Obamacare, but they like the ACA, which shows you that branding is pretty important.
And no, they're not going to let Obamacare die either, because the end result would be the same, spiking premiums that would screw over their own voters.
Never the less, the survival of the ACA suggests, as some Conservative commentators have put it, the "Europeanization" of American health care. In other words, everyone seems to know that one way or the other a single payer health care system is likely the ultimate "fix" of Obamacare.
Indeed. Nunes' complaint, as is the complaints of many Republicans and Fox News types, seems to be "They caught our people doing bad things, and THAT'S WRONG!!!!!"
I don't think it's the drama, so much as it allows Trump's supporters to believe they're plugged into him. These tweets seem pretty mad to most people, but the impression I get is that the supporters look upon them almost as personal messages, propagating the illusion that somehow Trump is fighting for the little guy and cutting all them nasty elites out of the loop. There's a sort of crude brilliance to the Twitter strategy, at least so far as keeping the base onboard. Of course, the other sixty percent of America just gazes on in disbelief and horror at some of madness that he types out on his phone.
It matters because the President seems to have little idea how to actually run a government, which seems odd, because at least so far as official executive instructions go, you can't tell me the way he ran Trump Enterprises was to send grammatically and spelling-challenged missives over the company email system informing departments of new policy.
Maybe the real problem here is that Trump never in fact has run a damned fucking thing in his life, that he has had lawyers and accountants who translated his garbled directives into something human beings with normal cognitive function could interpret. Why exactly he has now decided to send out his directives via Twitter. The mere fact that nobody at the Pentagon seemed to have any idea, for instance, that he was instituting a transgender enlistment ban (whatever you may think of the policy) suggests to me that this is a man who knows virtually nothing about management and organizational communications.
Well, apparently he makes major policy announcements now via twitter, and doesn't even bother to inform departments via normal channels. I'm not even sure why he has a communications staff, or heck, even a cabinet. This is government by one man and his phone.
Nothing thwarts Darwin. In other words, change in allele frequency is happening in human populations all the time. There are still a few "Social Darwinists", who don't understand the first thing about evolutionary biology, who imagine certain types of medical intervention somehow magically defy nature, but these people are simply morons, and should be ignored, or treated with the contempt that vile halfwits earn.
Slashdot Mirror
And how specifically is systems causing your issues. I'm no fan of systems but frankly the number of ACs making pretty vapid claims about it producing instability makesmme suspicious.
You must be very fortunate indeed never to have had a Windows cease to boot properly.
"Mistakes" is putting it lightly. Microsoft actively attempted to destroy Linux at one point (via SCO's lawsuit). Yes, now it has been forced to play nice, and while I'm not fanatically anti-MS, I see no reason to trust them. They're only playing nice right now because Android has utterly fucked over their market dominance in the consumer computing world.
And while Google and Apple have done their share of nasty or stupid things, the only other company I can think of that rises to MS's level of assholery is Oracle.
If you have an actual critique of the OECD findings, then bring it on. But you don't. You can't cherry pick average lifespan and infant mortality rates, you pathetic brainlessnwindbag.
You are aware that the US has some of the worst average health outcomes of the industrialized nations, right? Even if bankruptcy were no big deal (which, of course it is, and Trump has never gone personally bankrupt) the US health care system is absurdly expensive, on top of poor outcomes.
Have you used Windows 10? The GUI is fucking terrible. I'd say there are no decent desktop systems these days, but really, under the hood, Linux is as solid as ever. I run Debian installs as custom routers that are up 24/7/365 and I'm not seeing any evidence at all of instability. So frankly, your claim is just a load of shit.
Troll troll troll your boat....
For a society to maintain even just zero-growth population means on average every woman has to produce 2.1 children. Now maybe the coming age of AI and robots will alter that, but we're not there yet. Just look at Spain and Japan, two countries with negative demographic growth, and where falling populations literally are a demographic timebomb that is starting to go off.
If no one has kids, then no one is going to be looking after you in your fading years. I know this is tough for some people, but no kids, no society. So maybe you want to think twice before you demand to be let off the hook for "paying for other peoples' kids".
No, this appears to be a story about raising taxes on the upper middle class. The wealthy appear to get away without any significant tax increases.
You will pay either way. If you simply allow people to go bankrupt, then there are significant legal and societal costs attached to major medical interventions. If they have no money or assets at all, then they still get the hospital treatment, and your taxes end up paying for their health care anyways. Unless your talking about literally throwing anyone out on the street who doesn't have health care, then you will still pay.
Largely because, historically, or at least since Medicaid was formed, there has been a notion of joint funding of health care, seeing as the Federal Government has far greater resources than the individual states.
Bullshit. The reason they didn't want to actually repeal it is because the second older Americans' insurance rates spiked because all the younger people pulled out or picked discount plans, there are lot of Republicans suddenly looking at serious problems when they have to seek re-election. Americans have made it pretty clear; they hate Obamacare, but they like the ACA, which shows you that branding is pretty important.
And no, they're not going to let Obamacare die either, because the end result would be the same, spiking premiums that would screw over their own voters.
Never the less, the survival of the ACA suggests, as some Conservative commentators have put it, the "Europeanization" of American health care. In other words, everyone seems to know that one way or the other a single payer health care system is likely the ultimate "fix" of Obamacare.
American citizens talking with Russian citizens has been cause for concern since about 1945.
If there's this big rejection of "leftist" ideas, why is it exactly that the ACA is still alive this morning?
Indeed. Nunes' complaint, as is the complaints of many Republicans and Fox News types, seems to be "They caught our people doing bad things, and THAT'S WRONG!!!!!"
I don't think it's the drama, so much as it allows Trump's supporters to believe they're plugged into him. These tweets seem pretty mad to most people, but the impression I get is that the supporters look upon them almost as personal messages, propagating the illusion that somehow Trump is fighting for the little guy and cutting all them nasty elites out of the loop. There's a sort of crude brilliance to the Twitter strategy, at least so far as keeping the base onboard. Of course, the other sixty percent of America just gazes on in disbelief and horror at some of madness that he types out on his phone.
It matters because the President seems to have little idea how to actually run a government, which seems odd, because at least so far as official executive instructions go, you can't tell me the way he ran Trump Enterprises was to send grammatically and spelling-challenged missives over the company email system informing departments of new policy.
Maybe the real problem here is that Trump never in fact has run a damned fucking thing in his life, that he has had lawyers and accountants who translated his garbled directives into something human beings with normal cognitive function could interpret. Why exactly he has now decided to send out his directives via Twitter. The mere fact that nobody at the Pentagon seemed to have any idea, for instance, that he was instituting a transgender enlistment ban (whatever you may think of the policy) suggests to me that this is a man who knows virtually nothing about management and organizational communications.
Well, apparently he makes major policy announcements now via twitter, and doesn't even bother to inform departments via normal channels. I'm not even sure why he has a communications staff, or heck, even a cabinet. This is government by one man and his phone.
By 2040 the number of EVs on the road will probably be as great, or greater, than hydrocarbon-fueled vehicles.
He's a sociopath. He doesn't care about the future.
So being an infant is now a genetic defect?
Nothing thwarts Darwin. In other words, change in allele frequency is happening in human populations all the time. There are still a few "Social Darwinists", who don't understand the first thing about evolutionary biology, who imagine certain types of medical intervention somehow magically defy nature, but these people are simply morons, and should be ignored, or treated with the contempt that vile halfwits earn.
Bullshit. This is fallout from a scam artist who managed to get a considerable following among idiots.