Agreed. A true student loan is not a bad thing since you can write off the interest paid. And they are very low interest loans as well. Great idea for "Upstart" though to get sure fire stock in a potential company in the future. But dumb if you are the student who just graduated.
If you are young and briliant you have a choice, help the world or help yourself and become filthy rich. Of course choosing the second leaves the option of later forming a massive foundation to help other people make the world a better place than you would if you chose the "good" option. And you still got to be rich.
Being young and brilliant (being savvy, lucky, brutal, and hardworking could be confused with brilliant I guess) you get to carry that 'brilliance' with you throughout your life. Now he's made a lot of money (though not his real goal, he just wants to be the winner), and being smart, what is one to do with all that money and be considered a winner throughout history? Let me see......how about starting a charitable foundation, that he controls, get the tax benefits, be able to pass along all of that power to whomever he chooses without the death tax, and be deemed a savior by all man kind. He has not and will not just give away all of his winnings.
Say what you will, he's still a vicious person who always wants to win at all costs. I don't hate him, but thinking that he somehow has seen the light is quite naive.
It's a morning show; they all suck. It doesn't have to be FOX News.
It does when both sides are so polarized and angry with each other. All the while we the sheeple keep believing whatever spews from either sides mouth. Both sides have their agenda, and both agendas suck in their own way.
I'm wondering how this is news for nerds? All news organizations repeat filtered facts, chock full of slanted opinion, with the purpose of keeping viewers to sell ad time. They all have become more entertainment then news.
IMO, you'll have to find the right company. They are HR folks who understand that there is value in mature workers who understand hard work, don't bitch about the little shit, and will show up at work without a hangover. That being said, there are plenty of 60+ers out there working in IT who can run circles around the 20 somethings. There is such a social placement on being young is equal to being special for some reason.
Unfortunately tipping the balance is all that is required to mess it up.
The good thing, or bad, depending on how you see it, is that the Earth will balance it back up and not take any living thing into consideration. That's just the way it works. Adaption is the key.
Not like we have world or national governance that can do anything about it.
The US government can't make a budget or run a money system of their own creation -- yet you think they can absorb science, understand it, and react to it in an effective fashion?
Such things only exist so that there can be sides for people to join and so there can be issues to argue about.
And we should all piss our pants if someone publishes that its slightly higher or slightly lower than expected? Laughable.. argue on children.
But the Govts of the world are doing something about it. Science or Religion (or both for some) have been manipulated by Govts for ever to 'control' the masses. I'm not a tin hat wearer, but I can understand the reasoning. The reason some folks don't want to have a changing environment, be it naturally or man-influenced, is because it can have a great affect on global or regional power. But guess what, there is little we can do to stop it. Can it be slowed? Perhaps, but only time will tell on that one.
Multiple hits cause chronic damage. That's why I kept my son out of hockey, and why I'll keep him out of football as well. Soccer and swimming seem relatively safe. Being Canadian, a lot of people rag on anyone who says that hockey is dangerous for hits (like that twit Don Cherry) but it's just obvious.
Any physical activity can cause any injury. Sure, they may not end up as one with 25 years of head injuries, but end up with a limp and arthritis at the ripe old age of 35 as well. I played football back in the day and other contact sports. It's fun. It's more fun if you are decent at your particular sport. I'm sure it's even more fun when you are a top flight athlete, like those in the professional ranks. I've seen cheerleaders (girls) who have chronic knee and back problems a few years after high school. And even cross country can cause serious knee and ankle injuries. Would I discourage my children from partaking in sports. Never. I'd just have them be as smart as they can be. I'd even support boxing or MMA should my child wish. If that is their desire to play said sport, I would totally support them.
seeing a whole graph of temperature (or daily max, or daily mean or whatever) against time will always tell you much more about a trends than a list of its peaks can.
"Hottest national averages on record (before today)."
I'm sure the Global warmers/deniers will be all over the place. Either way, the article for those who didn't read it have the following stats:
Hottest national averages on record (before today).
1 January 7, 2013: 40.33 degrees 2 December 21, 1972: 40.17 3 December 20, 1972: 40.01 4 December 22, 1972: 39.82 5 January 1, 1973: 39.79 6 January 6, 2013: 39.71 7 December 17, 2002: 39.7 8 January 2, 1973: 39.65 9 January 3, 2013: 39.55 10 December 16, 2002: 39.54 11 December 30, 1972: 39.48 12 December 31, 1972: 39.43 13 January 27, 1936: 39.4 14 January 1, 1990: 39.39 15 January 4, 2013: 39.32 16 January 5, 2013: 39.26 17 January 2, 1990: 39.22 18 January 2, 2013: 39.21 19 December 18, 2002: 39.2 20 January 13, 1985: 38.98
So it would appear that 1972 and even 1973 were very hot years there. As well as it appears that 2013 will be as well. Finding cause in those two anomalies will be interesting. I don't think 1972 had as much CO2 in the air as we do now. Is the area of temp measurement too small to say either way was is the cause? I'm not a climatologist. But what I do know is it's hot.
The AIG (and other) bailouts were not typical bankruptcy cases. These are initiated by creditors when the debtor can't meet obligations.
And unlike the US Govt, no one, company or person, can print their own money to pay off their debt or hold interest rates down so the money they are borrowing is cheaper to borrow. And we bitch about banks manipulation of the flow of money.
Sounds like pot meeting kettle to me. But If I were a money expert, I wouldn't be poor.
the gun owners demonstrate why they should not own guns. They lose their cool and react in hate and threats. People who are that uncontrolled can't be trusted to operate a firearm under stress or for the right reason. They should have their guns taken away until the grow up.
The paper published what was on public record, so the gun owners try to intimidate the press - threaten death and violence- for publishing something they didn't like. but is readily available. W T F
Like I was told before, way to group everyone together and condemn the whole group because of the actions of a few.
Not from videos and reports I've seen. And I'm sure that those OWS folks who actually got off their sleeping bags and voted, put the current administration in office which is now cracking down on them.
Imagine that. I have an opinion, and it is that I disagree with the actions of OWS (based upon what I've seen), I'm automatically labeled. Does no one see the level of hypocrisy that is out there. I an neither a lefty or a righty. I think both sides should get the hell out of the 'middle' and stop trying to tell others how to do things.
And for the fact AC that tried to troll me with fox news line, pick your poison. You actually think there is an unbiased media out there? Are you that ignorant?
Not from videos and reports I've seen. And I'm sure that those OWS folks who actually got off their sleeping bags and voted, put the current administration in office which is now cracking down on them.
And yet for all the rhetoric that the press keeps pumping out about righties and lefties, the general public keeps eating it up. All the while it doesn't matter who gets voted in. Both 'sides' will screw the public. The real rouge, it's the govt against the public, not the righties vs lefties.
Why is this marked insightful???? It is in essence accusing without grounds PhD scientists who spend their lives studying these things with basing the entire thesis of a paper on grade school math errors. The author isn't supplying any quotations from the article supporting his assertion, other than a single number. It seems to me that the writer of this article is a peddler of misinformation. In the relatively recent past, he would be opening himself a libel suit. In the more distant past, the author would possibly in need of practicing his pistol aim and would need to find a second for his duelling appointment.
What I always enjoy about facts that we know of now will most assuredly be proven inaccurate in the future. At least if history is any indication.
Show me how exactly can you aim well after getting woken up by a break-in. Sometimes, the burglars will freeze in place, standing and shouting obscenities at you so you can aim at _one_. Sometimes. Usually, it's quick action, where even a trained soldier would likely miss a lot. Oh, and you have multiple opponents.
Also, against rational criminals one bullet would be enough: the risk of being the one who gets shot is enough of a deterrent, so they'll leave you alone. The problem is, most criminals are anything but rational. Alcohol and/or drugs don't help them think straight.
That is why you get a pump shotgun for home protection. The sound of the cocking of a pump action (geez, that looks bad) will chase most folks away. And as long as you get a shotgun with a large spread (larger diameter or shorter barrel), you'll not have to aim so well.
Just because YOU are ignorant of the methods and the available accuracy doesn't mean everyone is. What's your preference, ignore the possibility that we could be destroying our world because predicting the future is difficult? Yeah, good plan.
I don't think humans will be destroying the world. The world will remove humans from the equation and it will be fine moving forward. It's done it many times before, so there is little to doubt that it will do it again. Now don't jump on this as though I'm not saying to do anything, or that humans have an affect on the environment, because we do. Just like any other living thing, we have an impact on our surroundings. Resources are limited, every living thing takes resources. Some take from other living things.
Finding the magical balance with the Earth and humans will be a tough one to solve. Throw in the 'natural' ebb and flow of the weather and it's even more complicated. The question will be is how good humans really are at adapting to changes in the environment. We will always have an affect on it.
I do remember many times seeing the reports of how over-population was going to put such stresses on resources that it would be catastrophic to the globe. Well, looks like the problem has been solved. Yes it will be painful for a moment in time, but once population stabilizes, or even falls, there will be more for folks.
Frankly, the Govt can keep what I've paid into SS and the like. Just stop taking it out of my paychecks. I will take care of myself thank you very much.
Funny you mention this. Here in the US, we have a tax on entrenched wealth being passed from generation to generation. It's called the "Estate Tax", or derisively referred to as the "death tax" by Republicans looking to get rid of it. It used to take ~50% of money in excess of $1M. Over the past several years, it's been watered down to just 35% of money in excess of $5M. Obama's trying to put it back to 2001 levels. Romney wants to remove it entirely.
Voting matters. The rich and powerful want you to give up. They rely on it.
I still don't understand why a person who earns a dollar and pays a tax on that earning, only to see it taxed again because it's given to someone else after death. There is no purchase with that transaction, so how could it be considered income to the beneficiary for the tax to be legit? Life insurance beneficiaries pay no taxes on those dollars from the policy. So why do estates(cash/property) get held to a different measure?
And as for the 'rich and powerful,' don't hate success because you have not obtained it. Folks to this day still can obtain great wealth with sweat equity and smart moves. The 'rich and powerful' are not holding you back from your money. Just ask folks like zuckerberg.
But from what I hear, that free market thingy is going away since it's so unfair.
And who knew the world wasn't fair? Go figure. Sometimes you just have to work harder.
I do wonder what the rates are for female vs male nurses. (traditionally a female dominated area of work for a long time, while science was long dominated by males)
How about they all suck, and folks should stop defending/following/praising politicians who are volunteers for a job where they work for the public and are supposed to follow the US Constitution.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. A true student loan is not a bad thing since you can write off the interest paid. And they are very low interest loans as well. Great idea for "Upstart" though to get sure fire stock in a potential company in the future. But dumb if you are the student who just graduated.
How many children do you know bear a racial hatred for Western culture that is bred and drilled into them, or are armed with nuclear warheads?
Gangnam style!
If you are young and briliant you have a choice, help the world or help yourself and become filthy rich. Of course choosing the second leaves the option of later forming a massive foundation to help other people make the world a better place than you would if you chose the "good" option. And you still got to be rich.
Being young and brilliant (being savvy, lucky, brutal, and hardworking could be confused with brilliant I guess) you get to carry that 'brilliance' with you throughout your life. Now he's made a lot of money (though not his real goal, he just wants to be the winner), and being smart, what is one to do with all that money and be considered a winner throughout history? Let me see......how about starting a charitable foundation, that he controls, get the tax benefits, be able to pass along all of that power to whomever he chooses without the death tax, and be deemed a savior by all man kind. He has not and will not just give away all of his winnings.
Say what you will, he's still a vicious person who always wants to win at all costs. I don't hate him, but thinking that he somehow has seen the light is quite naive.
It's a morning show; they all suck. It doesn't have to be FOX News.
It does when both sides are so polarized and angry with each other. All the while we the sheeple keep believing whatever spews from either sides mouth. Both sides have their agenda, and both agendas suck in their own way.
I'm wondering how this is news for nerds? All news organizations repeat filtered facts, chock full of slanted opinion, with the purpose of keeping viewers to sell ad time. They all have become more entertainment then news.
...by someone who could be your grandson).
He's only 58, not 78.
IMO, you'll have to find the right company. They are HR folks who understand that there is value in mature workers who understand hard work, don't bitch about the little shit, and will show up at work without a hangover. That being said, there are plenty of 60+ers out there working in IT who can run circles around the 20 somethings. There is such a social placement on being young is equal to being special for some reason.
Unfortunately tipping the balance is all that is required to mess it up.
The good thing, or bad, depending on how you see it, is that the Earth will balance it back up and not take any living thing into consideration. That's just the way it works. Adaption is the key.
Not like we have world or national governance that can do anything about it.
The US government can't make a budget or run a money system of their own creation -- yet you think they can absorb science, understand it, and react to it in an effective fashion?
Such things only exist so that there can be sides for people to join and so there can be issues to argue about.
And we should all piss our pants if someone publishes that its slightly higher or slightly lower than expected? Laughable.. argue on children.
But the Govts of the world are doing something about it. Science or Religion (or both for some) have been manipulated by Govts for ever to 'control' the masses. I'm not a tin hat wearer, but I can understand the reasoning. The reason some folks don't want to have a changing environment, be it naturally or man-influenced, is because it can have a great affect on global or regional power. But guess what, there is little we can do to stop it. Can it be slowed? Perhaps, but only time will tell on that one.
Multiple hits cause chronic damage. That's why I kept my son out of hockey, and why I'll keep him out of football as well. Soccer and swimming seem relatively safe. Being Canadian, a lot of people rag on anyone who says that hockey is dangerous for hits (like that twit Don Cherry) but it's just obvious.
Any physical activity can cause any injury. Sure, they may not end up as one with 25 years of head injuries, but end up with a limp and arthritis at the ripe old age of 35 as well. I played football back in the day and other contact sports. It's fun. It's more fun if you are decent at your particular sport. I'm sure it's even more fun when you are a top flight athlete, like those in the professional ranks. I've seen cheerleaders (girls) who have chronic knee and back problems a few years after high school. And even cross country can cause serious knee and ankle injuries. Would I discourage my children from partaking in sports. Never. I'd just have them be as smart as they can be. I'd even support boxing or MMA should my child wish. If that is their desire to play said sport, I would totally support them.
seeing a whole graph of temperature (or daily max, or daily mean or whatever) against time will always tell you much more about a trends than a list of its peaks can.
"Hottest national averages on record (before today)."
I'm sure the Global warmers/deniers will be all over the place. Either way, the article for those who didn't read it have the following stats:
Hottest national averages on record (before today).
1 January 7, 2013: 40.33 degrees
2 December 21, 1972: 40.17
3 December 20, 1972: 40.01
4 December 22, 1972: 39.82
5 January 1, 1973: 39.79
6 January 6, 2013: 39.71
7 December 17, 2002: 39.7
8 January 2, 1973: 39.65
9 January 3, 2013: 39.55
10 December 16, 2002: 39.54
11 December 30, 1972: 39.48
12 December 31, 1972: 39.43
13 January 27, 1936: 39.4
14 January 1, 1990: 39.39
15 January 4, 2013: 39.32
16 January 5, 2013: 39.26
17 January 2, 1990: 39.22
18 January 2, 2013: 39.21
19 December 18, 2002: 39.2
20 January 13, 1985: 38.98
So it would appear that 1972 and even 1973 were very hot years there. As well as it appears that 2013 will be as well. Finding cause in those two anomalies will be interesting. I don't think 1972 had as much CO2 in the air as we do now. Is the area of temp measurement too small to say either way was is the cause? I'm not a climatologist. But what I do know is it's hot.
The AIG (and other) bailouts were not typical bankruptcy cases. These are initiated by creditors when the debtor can't meet obligations.
And unlike the US Govt, no one, company or person, can print their own money to pay off their debt or hold interest rates down so the money they are borrowing is cheaper to borrow. And we bitch about banks manipulation of the flow of money.
Sounds like pot meeting kettle to me. But If I were a money expert, I wouldn't be poor.
It's very easy to use a weapon for evil. It's much harder to use it for good. Of course you knew this, and I'm just reiterating it to make a point...
That all depends on which side of the weapon you are on.
the gun owners demonstrate why they should not own guns. They lose their cool and react in hate and threats. People who are that uncontrolled can't be trusted to operate a firearm under stress or for the right reason. They should have their guns taken away until the grow up.
The paper published what was on public record, so the gun owners try to intimidate the press - threaten death and violence- for publishing something they didn't like. but is readily available. W T F
Like I was told before, way to group everyone together and condemn the whole group because of the actions of a few.
Not from videos and reports I've seen. And I'm sure that those OWS folks who actually got off their sleeping bags and voted, put the current administration in office which is now cracking down on them.
Imagine that. I have an opinion, and it is that I disagree with the actions of OWS (based upon what I've seen), I'm automatically labeled. Does no one see the level of hypocrisy that is out there. I an neither a lefty or a righty. I think both sides should get the hell out of the 'middle' and stop trying to tell others how to do things.
And for the fact AC that tried to troll me with fox news line, pick your poison. You actually think there is an unbiased media out there? Are you that ignorant?
Not from videos and reports I've seen. And I'm sure that those OWS folks who actually got off their sleeping bags and voted, put the current administration in office which is now cracking down on them.
And yet for all the rhetoric that the press keeps pumping out about righties and lefties, the general public keeps eating it up. All the while it doesn't matter who gets voted in. Both 'sides' will screw the public. The real rouge, it's the govt against the public, not the righties vs lefties.
I thought Christian Slater would have more work by now.
Why is this marked insightful???? It is in essence accusing without grounds PhD scientists who spend their lives studying these things with basing the entire thesis of a paper on grade school math errors. The author isn't supplying any quotations from the article supporting his assertion, other than a single number. It seems to me that the writer of this article is a peddler of misinformation. In the relatively recent past, he would be opening himself a libel suit. In the more distant past, the author would possibly in need of practicing his pistol aim and would need to find a second for his duelling appointment.
What I always enjoy about facts that we know of now will most assuredly be proven inaccurate in the future. At least if history is any indication.
This is a common misconception among people who don't use shotguns.
You are correct on that statement. I don't own, but I do support ownership as a right. And thanks for the info.
but it will make a hell of a mess out of whatever it does hit.
And that's a good selling point IMO as a home defense system, because if there is a threat, I want it gone.
Show me how exactly can you aim well after getting woken up by a break-in. Sometimes, the burglars will freeze in place, standing and shouting obscenities at you so you can aim at _one_. Sometimes. Usually, it's quick action, where even a trained soldier would likely miss a lot. Oh, and you have multiple opponents.
Also, against rational criminals one bullet would be enough: the risk of being the one who gets shot is enough of a deterrent, so they'll leave you alone. The problem is, most criminals are anything but rational. Alcohol and/or drugs don't help them think straight.
That is why you get a pump shotgun for home protection. The sound of the cocking of a pump action (geez, that looks bad) will chase most folks away. And as long as you get a shotgun with a large spread (larger diameter or shorter barrel), you'll not have to aim so well.
Just because YOU are ignorant of the methods and the available accuracy doesn't mean everyone is.
What's your preference, ignore the possibility that we could be destroying our world because predicting the future is difficult?
Yeah, good plan.
I don't think humans will be destroying the world. The world will remove humans from the equation and it will be fine moving forward. It's done it many times before, so there is little to doubt that it will do it again. Now don't jump on this as though I'm not saying to do anything, or that humans have an affect on the environment, because we do. Just like any other living thing, we have an impact on our surroundings. Resources are limited, every living thing takes resources. Some take from other living things.
Finding the magical balance with the Earth and humans will be a tough one to solve. Throw in the 'natural' ebb and flow of the weather and it's even more complicated. The question will be is how good humans really are at adapting to changes in the environment. We will always have an affect on it.
I do remember many times seeing the reports of how over-population was going to put such stresses on resources that it would be catastrophic to the globe. Well, looks like the problem has been solved. Yes it will be painful for a moment in time, but once population stabilizes, or even falls, there will be more for folks.
Frankly, the Govt can keep what I've paid into SS and the like. Just stop taking it out of my paychecks. I will take care of myself thank you very much.
Funny you mention this. Here in the US, we have a tax on entrenched wealth being passed from generation to generation. It's called the "Estate Tax", or derisively referred to as the "death tax" by Republicans looking to get rid of it. It used to take ~50% of money in excess of $1M. Over the past several years, it's been watered down to just 35% of money in excess of $5M. Obama's trying to put it back to 2001 levels. Romney wants to remove it entirely.
Voting matters. The rich and powerful want you to give up. They rely on it.
I still don't understand why a person who earns a dollar and pays a tax on that earning, only to see it taxed again because it's given to someone else after death. There is no purchase with that transaction, so how could it be considered income to the beneficiary for the tax to be legit? Life insurance beneficiaries pay no taxes on those dollars from the policy. So why do estates(cash/property) get held to a different measure?
And as for the 'rich and powerful,' don't hate success because you have not obtained it. Folks to this day still can obtain great wealth with sweat equity and smart moves. The 'rich and powerful' are not holding you back from your money. Just ask folks like zuckerberg.
But from what I hear, that free market thingy is going away since it's so unfair.
And who knew the world wasn't fair? Go figure. Sometimes you just have to work harder.
I do wonder what the rates are for female vs male nurses. (traditionally a female dominated area of work for a long time, while science was long dominated by males)
How about they all suck, and folks should stop defending/following/praising politicians who are volunteers for a job where they work for the public and are supposed to follow the US Constitution.