13% of mining industry is female. 9% of the construction industry is female. 7% of leatherworkers are female. 9% of sewage treatment facility operators are female. 7% of industrial maintainers are female.
Approximately TWO percentage of the carpentry field is female (https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm). You could host all ~30K of them in a conference center.
However... 27% of computer programmers are female.
But it seems to be one long non-stop onslaught of "women in tech, women in STEM, female programmers, female venture capitalists."
Blackhawks (medium-lift, non-attack) helicopters run about $2200/flight hour of "all in" cost (including purchase price, training, spares, etc.). They seem to get ~8K flight hours across 10 years (https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/uh-60.htm), or about 800/year. So, about $1.76M/year. So this program cost about 12.5 helicopters. Given that this program lasted 5 years, we could have traded it for about a 2.5 helicopter fleet.
I always see news like this as an exercise in missing the point. The Department of DEFENSE was called to take a look at items flying at high speed, within national airspace, without permit, communications, or other markings. Yea. That's like, their job.
This. I count calories reasonably well and the calories my kid eats are off-the-chain crazy. As an example, at 9 months old she weighed in at ~23 pounds (big, but not exceptional) and was generally developing well. Here is a reasonably typical mealplan for her:
- 8 oz milk, 2 eggs (400 calories)
- rice cake, 8 oz milk (200 calories)
- banana (?!), 8 oz milk (250 calories)
- mini-quesadilla || 2 cups Cheerios, 8 oz milk (400 calories) ----- ~1250 calories for the day.
There is a bunch of stuff as part of the above list that I don't understand (how the fuck do you eat a pound of banana at 23 pounds total bodyweight?!). The flip side is that there isn't really anything objectionable on the list - she is eating meat, cheese, milk, and fruit. I'm pretty lazy and really only feed her when she complains that she is hungry or before bedtime (sleep through the night!).
She would do a diet plan like that for, like, 2 weeks. Then she would spend a week sleeping 15 hours/day or so on 800 calories. Then she would grow 2 inches. I don't understand how I could possibly figure out the proper nutritional requirements for that amount of variance. Also, its not like there is a conversation about how she has had enough to eat... Her word choice was exclusively limited to the set of [mama, dada, baba].
During this time I am/was on a quasi-strict 1000-calorie/day diet and never ceased to be amazed that she was eating more @23# than me @160# (although to be fair she runs around literally 100% of the non-sleep, non-eat hours).
Parent poster has the accurate picture - just stuff the kids full of water, apples, PB sandwiches, eggs, and oats/Cheerios until they stop complaining - any sensible effort in child nutrition is wasted.
This. Over the last 2 years I resolved to a) get better at gymnastics and b) lose weight. I've shed 35 pounds, going from 188 to 153. The most common response I get when I tell people that is something like "Wow! You? You were one of the few people that didn't need to lose weight."
Almost everyone in this country could stand to lose THIRTY pounds. Average body fat percentage for men is 25%, which is "flirting with obesity". It seems that only athletes and a minority of college students are in the 15% range.
Look at the recent article (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/03/less-than-3-percent-of-americans-live-a-healthy-lifestyle/475065/) for "how many Americans are healthy" by the following criteria: 1 - exercise moderately for 150 minutes per week. 2 - body fat percentage sub 20% 3 - not smoker 4 - reasonable diet according to the 'healthy eating index' (8 oz of meat, a potato, a glass of milk, and a side of broccoli counts as 'healthy'. Another sample day is 10 oz of salmon, bowl of oatmeal, greek yogurt, 2 glasses of wine... Another is 2 cans of beans, a quarter stick of butter, and a glass of apple juice. Its not a tough requirement.)
Less than 3% of Americans meet these criteria.
In other news, 46% of the country has high blood pressure. No shit. Dropping 30 pounds, doing 3 hours of yard work on Saturday, and "actually having a diet" will put you in the top THREE percent of America. Everyone is simply letting their health go to shit.
I like: "Above the Clouds" "In the Black Cloud" "In the Dark Cloud" "In the Radiation Zone" "In the Deep Cloud" "out of this world" "among the stars" "frozen at 0 K" "encircling the clouds" "moving faster than any object on the planet"
That said - its technically crap. failure rates in space are an order of magnitude higher than earth.
I've thought a good deal about this, and there seem to be a few problems: 1 - People don't upvote those they disagree with. As a byproduct, in a forum such as/r/bodyweightfitness, posts don't get a lot of upvotes (10 is high enough to be top rated in any thread). A post like this (https://www.reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness/comments/6tmbf4/is_the_front_lever_taxing_on_your_elbow_joints) has a highest-rated upvote of 4for a 300-word, in-depth, properly formatted post. Discussions/Disagreements aren't properly rewarded. 2 - Karma isn't attributed well. My highest karma post is a 7-word pun in a/r/jokes thread. My lowest karma post is one in/r/Jokes where I literally replaced "Trump" with "Obama", and was modded into oblivion (https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/44gmsu/this_is_how_bad_the_economy_is/czqe58m/). 3 - Upvotes and karma are based on popularity *among the audience*. Saying "cast iron pans are a good idea" gets you a million upvotes in/r/bifl. Saying "cast iron pans are a good idea" in a cooking forum gets you a debate (see point 1) and no karma. 4 - Reddit page content is "Hot" based. Reddit post content is "Top" based. This makes the most popular opinions the ones that rise to the top of any page. Naturally, opinions like "the Government should give us all money" become top-rated pretty quick. As an example, let's take current-top-post current-top-comment from MensRights and Feminism. The MR top 2 are "here is a link to donate" and "feminism will ruin this". The Feminism top post is "women need more access to abortion pills".
Number of processing steps (bias towards inefficiency)? Tonnage (bias towards manufacture of tungsten and other heavy metals, bias towards simplistic manufacturing like sheet-metal)? Hours on a manufacturing line (bias towards long-stage manufacturing and heat/dry cycles, bias towards inefficiency, bias towards total assembly)? Number of mass-produced items (bias towards resellers and resuppliers rather than whole-car manufacturers, bias towards screws/bolts/small/low-complexity items) ? People employed (bias against robo-factories/efficiency) ? Robots employed (bias towards heavy robots?) ?
Whatever metric you prefer must account for manufacturing heavy things, light things, time spent, and complexity. It seems like "market value of the stuff" is probably about as good as you can get when trying to measure "how much manufacturing occurs."
Editor: "Please suggest 8 people to review your work" Researcher: "Okay, I suggest WellKnownResearcher, their mailing address [POBox that I own], and their E-mail address [WellKnownResearcherTopic@yahoo.com, an E-mail I just registered]" Editor: "To:WellKnownResearcherTopic@yahoo.com Body: Dear WellKnownResearcher, what do you think of this paper?" Researcher: "Wow. What great results. You should totally 100% publish this in your journal because it is, like, totally legit. Here are some ways in which it can be better, but mostly just act as a disguise." Editor: "Dear Researcher, your paper was well reviewed, we are happy to publish it." Researcher: "Dear University, I now meet the XXX minimum papers required to graduate requirement."... Time passes and the paper is rescinded for all of the right reasons (cannot replicate, fraudulent review discovered, etc.). Chinese "academic" gets away more-or-less scott free, depending, because academic dishonesty in China is treated very different than, say, the US or EU, where it is punishable by "career death."
These are some pretty impressive logical jumps - that poor people, despite paying no federal income tax, still manage to have high tax rates? You might consider reading TFA, which states pretty clearly: "But let’s get back to America. The average single U.S. worker with no kids earned $52,543 last year and paid a combined $13,649 in payroll taxes, federal income tax, state and local government taxes. Their employer pitched in another $4,020 in payroll taxes. That overall rate, of 31.7 percent, might seem like a lot, but it’s more than 4 points below the OECD average."
Perhaps you might think that to consult the IRS numbers that indicate that the top 1% have a higher tax rate than the top 5%, who have a higher tax rate than the top 10%? - https://taxfoundation.org/summ...
Further - the FEDERAL Government (mostly through the Earned Income Tax Credit) sets a NEGATIVE tax rate for the individuals in the bottom quintile, , in an effort to try to reduce effective tax burden. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...
Further - >95% of unprepared food is exempt for taxing, with the only exceptions being Oregon and Montana. http://blog.taxjar.com/wp-cont...
Notably, TFA _DID_ consider Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid a tax (http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-methodology-and-limitations-2017.pdf). Despite your protests, the OECD found that Americans are in the bottom third of tax-paying countries, and included the working poor among their numbers. You can still make a case that poor people are hit hard (they are), but they are not hit as hard as they are in other countries, effectively. The article specifically has a category for income earners making only 67% of average wages (totaling about $30K/year in USA, 50hr/wk @ $12/hr). Source (http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-methodology-and-limitations-2017.pdf).
This. Humans hunted almost all big, meaty, slow-moving animals to extinction. Starting with the woolly mammoth. Seriously, a TWO TON wombat (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Vombatus_ursinus_-Maria_Island_National_Park.jpg)? Something like _4000_ person-days worth of food (not to mention pelts, bones, etc.) with no natural defenses? Delicious, easy kill. All were slain.
It is more than that. Lets pretend its a car. I donate my (rightfully owned) car to a museum. (The car that rightfully belongs to the museum) is stolen from the museum. (The car that rightfully belongs to the museum) is retrieved by the police. (The car that rightfully belongs to the museum) is not claimed by the museum. It now rightfully belongs to the police. (The car that rightfully belongs to the police) is auctioned, and purchased by a buyer. I want my car back!
"My" car has now been rightfully owned by two other agencies and non-rightfully owned by a thief. It is fundamentally "not my car".
Other than the ~$5B that we spent to cure cancer last year (http://blogs.reuters.com/stories-id-like-to-see/2014/09/09/the-money-spent-in-fighting-cancer-and-alibabas-risk-factor/).
So, in 2014, we spent: 3,400,000,000,000... in 12 months
Mark Zuckerberg (of Facebook) claims that he will eliminate ALL diseases. Price tag? 3,000,000,000... in 120 months
So, just to be clear, Mr. Zuckerberg will cure _all_ the diseases on a budget of 1% of one years' expenditures, over 10 years? Quite frankly, it does seem like we already tried the "throw money at it" solution.
Just to be clear, the proposed cost of this "get to Alpha Centauri in 20 years" project is $100M for a "nanocraft" that moves at 0.2C. To put this number in comparison, it is approximately 2.3% of the cost of the Large Hadron Collider, which we built. It is not inconceivable that, within 50 years, we could place real, live, people on this planet. That said, it would require a re-prioritization.
Yea. We're finding *lots* of particles over here. They all say that, um, you're right. They were there the whole time but you didn't look, um, small enough. We're going to continue looking for ways to determine how *right* you are. No need to stop by.
Here's the thing... Do you think anyone n that country that would have been a recipient of a chicken would have refused them? If so, the Government did not act in the best interests of those people. If they were the majority, you could seriously claim that the Government was not acting in the best interests of its people (it total).
Okay... Feel free to answer the question then: "Where do insurance companies get the money to pay for medical care, especially the elderly?" Go ahead, try not to say "from their customers."
What's not to "buy" ? Insurance companies take money from all clients and distribute it to clients who are covered and get medical care. Nearly 100% of the cost of more-than-trivial medical transactions is "passed on to other clients".
If you are interested, you can come over to Soylent News, where they/we are following that model exactly. I see SN as the "old slashdot", where people still crunch the numbers.
You know, TFA actually said exactly this. Initial exploration was funded by Government until costs could be calculated, and then funded privately. Neil's point was that the exploration of Mars would follow the same pattern that history has followed until now: Government exploration, private exploitation.
Slashdot Mirror
Here are some interesting facts for you:
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat...
13% of mining industry is female.
9% of the construction industry is female.
7% of leatherworkers are female.
9% of sewage treatment facility operators are female.
7% of industrial maintainers are female.
had to dig a little deeper to find welders/brazers:
https://www.bls.gov/cps/wlftab...
4% of the welders are female.
Approximately TWO percentage of the carpentry field is female (https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm). You could host all ~30K of them in a conference center.
However...
27% of computer programmers are female.
But it seems to be one long non-stop onslaught of "women in tech, women in STEM, female programmers, female venture capitalists."
Blackhawks (medium-lift, non-attack) helicopters run about $2200/flight hour of "all in" cost (including purchase price, training, spares, etc.). They seem to get ~8K flight hours across 10 years (https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/uh-60.htm), or about 800/year. So, about $1.76M/year. So this program cost about 12.5 helicopters. Given that this program lasted 5 years, we could have traded it for about a 2.5 helicopter fleet.
I always see news like this as an exercise in missing the point. The Department of DEFENSE was called to take a look at items flying at high speed, within national airspace, without permit, communications, or other markings. Yea. That's like, their job.
If it were in orbit, you would call NASA.
This. I count calories reasonably well and the calories my kid eats are off-the-chain crazy. As an example, at 9 months old she weighed in at ~23 pounds (big, but not exceptional) and was generally developing well. Here is a reasonably typical mealplan for her:
- 8 oz milk, 2 eggs (400 calories)
- rice cake, 8 oz milk (200 calories)
- banana (?!), 8 oz milk (250 calories)
- mini-quesadilla || 2 cups Cheerios, 8 oz milk (400 calories)
-----
~1250 calories for the day.
There is a bunch of stuff as part of the above list that I don't understand (how the fuck do you eat a pound of banana at 23 pounds total bodyweight?!). The flip side is that there isn't really anything objectionable on the list - she is eating meat, cheese, milk, and fruit. I'm pretty lazy and really only feed her when she complains that she is hungry or before bedtime (sleep through the night!).
She would do a diet plan like that for, like, 2 weeks. Then she would spend a week sleeping 15 hours/day or so on 800 calories. Then she would grow 2 inches. I don't understand how I could possibly figure out the proper nutritional requirements for that amount of variance. Also, its not like there is a conversation about how she has had enough to eat... Her word choice was exclusively limited to the set of [mama, dada, baba].
During this time I am/was on a quasi-strict 1000-calorie/day diet and never ceased to be amazed that she was eating more @23# than me @160# (although to be fair she runs around literally 100% of the non-sleep, non-eat hours).
Parent poster has the accurate picture - just stuff the kids full of water, apples, PB sandwiches, eggs, and oats/Cheerios until they stop complaining - any sensible effort in child nutrition is wasted.
This. Over the last 2 years I resolved to a) get better at gymnastics and b) lose weight. I've shed 35 pounds, going from 188 to 153. The most common response I get when I tell people that is something like "Wow! You? You were one of the few people that didn't need to lose weight."
Almost everyone in this country could stand to lose THIRTY pounds. Average body fat percentage for men is 25%, which is "flirting with obesity". It seems that only athletes and a minority of college students are in the 15% range.
Look at the recent article (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/03/less-than-3-percent-of-americans-live-a-healthy-lifestyle/475065/) for "how many Americans are healthy" by the following criteria:
1 - exercise moderately for 150 minutes per week.
2 - body fat percentage sub 20%
3 - not smoker
4 - reasonable diet according to the 'healthy eating index' (8 oz of meat, a potato, a glass of milk, and a side of broccoli counts as 'healthy'. Another sample day is 10 oz of salmon, bowl of oatmeal, greek yogurt, 2 glasses of wine... Another is 2 cans of beans, a quarter stick of butter, and a glass of apple juice. Its not a tough requirement.)
Less than 3% of Americans meet these criteria.
In other news, 46% of the country has high blood pressure. No shit. Dropping 30 pounds, doing 3 hours of yard work on Saturday, and "actually having a diet" will put you in the top THREE percent of America. Everyone is simply letting their health go to shit.
You can trade all the gold in the world for a 2013 China!
I like:
"Above the Clouds"
"In the Black Cloud"
"In the Dark Cloud"
"In the Radiation Zone"
"In the Deep Cloud"
"out of this world"
"among the stars"
"frozen at 0 K"
"encircling the clouds"
"moving faster than any object on the planet"
That said - its technically crap. failure rates in space are an order of magnitude higher than earth.
I've thought a good deal about this, and there seem to be a few problems: /r/bodyweightfitness, posts don't get a lot of upvotes (10 is high enough to be top rated in any thread). A post like this (https://www.reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness/comments/6tmbf4/is_the_front_lever_taxing_on_your_elbow_joints) has a highest-rated upvote of 4for a 300-word, in-depth, properly formatted post. Discussions/Disagreements aren't properly rewarded. /r/jokes thread. My lowest karma post is one in /r/Jokes where I literally replaced "Trump" with "Obama", and was modded into oblivion (https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/44gmsu/this_is_how_bad_the_economy_is/czqe58m/). /r/bifl. Saying "cast iron pans are a good idea" in a cooking forum gets you a debate (see point 1) and no karma.
1 - People don't upvote those they disagree with. As a byproduct, in a forum such as
2 - Karma isn't attributed well. My highest karma post is a 7-word pun in a
3 - Upvotes and karma are based on popularity *among the audience*. Saying "cast iron pans are a good idea" gets you a million upvotes in
4 - Reddit page content is "Hot" based. Reddit post content is "Top" based. This makes the most popular opinions the ones that rise to the top of any page. Naturally, opinions like "the Government should give us all money" become top-rated pretty quick. As an example, let's take current-top-post current-top-comment from MensRights and Feminism. The MR top 2 are "here is a link to donate" and "feminism will ruin this". The Feminism top post is "women need more access to abortion pills".
What metric would you prefer?
Number of processing steps (bias towards inefficiency)?
Tonnage (bias towards manufacture of tungsten and other heavy metals, bias towards simplistic manufacturing like sheet-metal)?
Hours on a manufacturing line (bias towards long-stage manufacturing and heat/dry cycles, bias towards inefficiency, bias towards total assembly)?
Number of mass-produced items (bias towards resellers and resuppliers rather than whole-car manufacturers, bias towards screws/bolts/small/low-complexity items) ?
People employed (bias against robo-factories/efficiency) ?
Robots employed (bias towards heavy robots?) ?
Whatever metric you prefer must account for manufacturing heavy things, light things, time spent, and complexity. It seems like "market value of the stuff" is probably about as good as you can get when trying to measure "how much manufacturing occurs."
Editor: "Please suggest 8 people to review your work" ...
Researcher: "Okay, I suggest WellKnownResearcher, their mailing address [POBox that I own], and their E-mail address [WellKnownResearcherTopic@yahoo.com, an E-mail I just registered]"
Editor: "To:WellKnownResearcherTopic@yahoo.com Body: Dear WellKnownResearcher, what do you think of this paper?"
Researcher: "Wow. What great results. You should totally 100% publish this in your journal because it is, like, totally legit. Here are some ways in which it can be better, but mostly just act as a disguise."
Editor: "Dear Researcher, your paper was well reviewed, we are happy to publish it."
Researcher: "Dear University, I now meet the XXX minimum papers required to graduate requirement."
Time passes and the paper is rescinded for all of the right reasons (cannot replicate, fraudulent review discovered, etc.). Chinese "academic" gets away more-or-less scott free, depending, because academic dishonesty in China is treated very different than, say, the US or EU, where it is punishable by "career death."
*cough*
https://soylentnews.org/
'scuse me.
It has just taken this long for the meetings and paperwork to be completed.
So now its something that is actually going to happen and therefor news, right?
These are some pretty impressive logical jumps - that poor people, despite paying no federal income tax, still manage to have high tax rates? You might consider reading TFA, which states pretty clearly:
"But let’s get back to America. The average single U.S. worker with no kids earned $52,543 last year and paid a combined $13,649 in payroll taxes, federal income tax, state and local government taxes. Their employer pitched in another $4,020 in payroll taxes. That overall rate, of 31.7 percent, might seem like a lot, but it’s more than 4 points below the OECD average."
Perhaps you might think that to consult the IRS numbers that indicate that the top 1% have a higher tax rate than the top 5%, who have a higher tax rate than the top 10%? - https://taxfoundation.org/summ...
Further - the FEDERAL Government (mostly through the Earned Income Tax Credit) sets a NEGATIVE tax rate for the individuals in the bottom quintile, , in an effort to try to reduce effective tax burden. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...
Further - >95% of unprepared food is exempt for taxing, with the only exceptions being Oregon and Montana. http://blog.taxjar.com/wp-cont...
Notably, TFA _DID_ consider Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid a tax (http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-methodology-and-limitations-2017.pdf). Despite your protests, the OECD found that Americans are in the bottom third of tax-paying countries, and included the working poor among their numbers. You can still make a case that poor people are hit hard (they are), but they are not hit as hard as they are in other countries, effectively. The article specifically has a category for income earners making only 67% of average wages (totaling about $30K/year in USA, 50hr/wk @ $12/hr). Source (http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-methodology-and-limitations-2017.pdf).
This. Humans hunted almost all big, meaty, slow-moving animals to extinction. Starting with the woolly mammoth. Seriously, a TWO TON wombat (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Vombatus_ursinus_-Maria_Island_National_Park.jpg)? Something like _4000_ person-days worth of food (not to mention pelts, bones, etc.) with no natural defenses? Delicious, easy kill. All were slain.
It is more than that. Lets pretend its a car.
I donate my (rightfully owned) car to a museum.
(The car that rightfully belongs to the museum) is stolen from the museum.
(The car that rightfully belongs to the museum) is retrieved by the police.
(The car that rightfully belongs to the museum) is not claimed by the museum. It now rightfully belongs to the police.
(The car that rightfully belongs to the police) is auctioned, and purchased by a buyer.
I want my car back!
"My" car has now been rightfully owned by two other agencies and non-rightfully owned by a thief. It is fundamentally "not my car".
Other than the ~$5B that we spent to cure cancer last year (http://blogs.reuters.com/stories-id-like-to-see/2014/09/09/the-money-spent-in-fighting-cancer-and-alibabas-risk-factor/).
So, in 2014, we spent:
3,400,000,000,000... in 12 months
Mark Zuckerberg (of Facebook) claims that he will eliminate ALL diseases. Price tag?
3,000,000,000... in 120 months
So, just to be clear, Mr. Zuckerberg will cure _all_ the diseases on a budget of 1% of one years' expenditures, over 10 years? Quite frankly, it does seem like we already tried the "throw money at it" solution.
Just to be clear, the proposed cost of this "get to Alpha Centauri in 20 years" project is $100M for a "nanocraft" that moves at 0.2C. To put this number in comparison, it is approximately 2.3% of the cost of the Large Hadron Collider, which we built. It is not inconceivable that, within 50 years, we could place real, live, people on this planet. That said, it would require a re-prioritization.
Yea. We're finding *lots* of particles over here. They all say that, um, you're right. They were there the whole time but you didn't look, um, small enough. We're going to continue looking for ways to determine how *right* you are. No need to stop by.
Here's the thing... Do you think anyone n that country that would have been a recipient of a chicken would have refused them? If so, the Government did not act in the best interests of those people. If they were the majority, you could seriously claim that the Government was not acting in the best interests of its people (it total).
There is a part of me that hopes his site is successful and that all of the people who cannot handle criticism leave Reddit and go there.
There is another part of me that is fearful of the above situation resulting in reddit-as-the-new-4chan.
Okay... Feel free to answer the question then:
"Where do insurance companies get the money to pay for medical care, especially the elderly?"
Go ahead, try not to say "from their customers."
What's not to "buy" ? Insurance companies take money from all clients and distribute it to clients who are covered and get medical care. Nearly 100% of the cost of more-than-trivial medical transactions is "passed on to other clients".
To be fair, I really do want to draw a sword, defeat my enemies, get the girl, and kiss her in the rain.
If you are interested, you can come over to Soylent News, where they/we are following that model exactly. I see SN as the "old slashdot", where people still crunch the numbers.
You know, TFA actually said exactly this. Initial exploration was funded by Government until costs could be calculated, and then funded privately. Neil's point was that the exploration of Mars would follow the same pattern that history has followed until now: Government exploration, private exploitation.