Two things:
1) Yes, they are rich. The fact that they have a lot of bills is irrelevant. 2) You don't get insurance if you're poor. Some states do this, but not most. Here in TN, we used to do that, with TennCare, but the governor had to cut the program because it was apparently too expensive. Hundreds of people who relied on it for live-saving medications died. I'm not making this up -- it was on the television every day here in Nashville.
As for your friends, I think their daughter should have health care provided. I think everyone should -- regardless of income. However, if they make enough money to buy a boat and multiple luxury car, they'll still be paying for it, but it would be in taxes, and not out of pocket medication. I don't think that would be "gaming the system" or anything else. The health insurance industry makes massive profits off their business model of denying coverage. It's such a vital need -- as vital as education, drinking water, electricity, roads, or any of the other things that are subsidized by the government. I'm not saying people who work in health care shouldn't be compensated fairly, but as long as there Big Money to be made in health care, and as long as the bottom line is more important than providing care to those who need it, we need Health Care reform. Giving it to everyone, the same way we give roads and education to everyone, is the only realistic way I see to fix the system.
And $40k a year isn't that much money to support yourself and a child. It's certainly not enough to buy a new Lexus. The poverty levels in the country are unrealistically low. I'd like you to show me anyone who's getting by on the poverty level + $1.
Also, the idea that only children should get healthcare is pretty stupid. If you're worried about the child's welfare, they're going to need parents who are healthy enough to take care of them. And that could be a mother OR a father.
It's because of their Do No Evil policy. Right wing nutjobs are evil. Left Wing nutjobs aren't. Quick example: rejecting health care for poor children. That's pretty evil.
Extensions are, I think, the number one cited reason why Firefox users don't want to switch to Opera. It's not just a nice addition, it's a deal-breaking feature.
The Mozilla/5.0 part is a little confusing, but I think that's a hold-over from Netscape days. But if you look you'll see rv:1.8.1.7, which is the version of Gecko, which they seem to be calling "Mozilla" in this summary.
That's what HCL's are for. Apple decides what hardware it works with, and that's all it will support. It does that anyway, it just happens to also be the supplier of the hardware. The same is basically true for Windows, except that everyone and his momma has (sometimes buggy) drivers for the hardware. Microsoft COULD say however, "Here's the list of hardware we support. If you're using other hardware, don't call us when you have problems."
Most poor people become poor through ethical means, and horrid amounts of hard work. What's funny is that I find the harder someone works, the less money they make. In fact, the people with the most money in our society don't work at all! How's that for backwards?
You've obviously never been in a pinch, where the only reason you had food was because of your credit card. And, no, it's not because you're better than anyone, it's because you're lucky.
I don't think we can prove that it DOES do things like this, but the languages and broad powers it gives certainly means that it CAN, and I think that's scary enough to warrant a LOT of concern.
Yeah, but Mountain Dew is 12 cans for 3 bucks, on sale. That shit you're talking about is either expensive, or only available at specialty stores (and probably expensive). I think the convenience issue is the ONLY reason people drink so much soda. It's moderately tasty, cheap, and ubiquitous. The fact it's bad for you isn't too big of a concern because most people don't have time to think or worry about it, and because "moderately tasty" is a lot better than water on most people's charts. And yummy is better than healthy. We love to stimulate our pleasurable senses to the detriment of just about everything else. (That's great as a survival trait but it's almost harmful these days, because it's so easy to do, there's not "natural" moderation to it.)
Depending on where you live, there might not be a spot dark enough within a couple hundred miles. I live in Nashville, and I'd be willing to make a short roadtrip to find a place dark enough to see the stars. Does anyone know of a database dark sites, or how I could find a place near me?
Wow, yet another brilliant resource redistribution scheme that didn't work out, what a freaking shock.
Yeah. They should be taking money directly out of the rich people's incomes and putting the into the poor folks'. All this stuff in between is just a mess.
Unlike everyone else here, I think your friend should find a new doctor. She is paying for a service, she should get it the way she likes. Not saying that guy was a bad doctor, but it wasn't the right one for her.
I've been reading a lot about the FairTax and the idea of a sales tax to replace income tax. But I'm not sure why a lot of people think a well-written sales tax is better than a well-written income tax. I look for the pros and cons of the two systems without people pointing at specific implementations.
Considering that sentencing is usually cumulative, yeah, it does matter. x sentence for the murder + x sentence for hate crime > x sentence for murder. As the GP said, really two crimes were committed. One was terrorism, the other was murder. They aren't the same, and there's no reason not to sentence for both of them.
Assuming you can afford those appeals. And just because there's new evidence, or a witness recants doesn't mean shit. I just watched American Justice. Check out the case against Clarence Elkins and rethink that bit about recants and new evidence.
I was gonna post this if someone else didn't. Filesharing would be like going into a store, aiming your magic wand at a product, duplicating your own, and walking off with the one you'd conjured. Or in other words, not really comparable to theft at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Two things:
1) Yes, they are rich. The fact that they have a lot of bills is irrelevant.
2) You don't get insurance if you're poor. Some states do this, but not most. Here in TN, we used to do that, with TennCare, but the governor had to cut the program because it was apparently too expensive. Hundreds of people who relied on it for live-saving medications died. I'm not making this up -- it was on the television every day here in Nashville.
As for your friends, I think their daughter should have health care provided. I think everyone should -- regardless of income. However, if they make enough money to buy a boat and multiple luxury car, they'll still be paying for it, but it would be in taxes, and not out of pocket medication. I don't think that would be "gaming the system" or anything else. The health insurance industry makes massive profits off their business model of denying coverage. It's such a vital need -- as vital as education, drinking water, electricity, roads, or any of the other things that are subsidized by the government. I'm not saying people who work in health care shouldn't be compensated fairly, but as long as there Big Money to be made in health care, and as long as the bottom line is more important than providing care to those who need it, we need Health Care reform. Giving it to everyone, the same way we give roads and education to everyone, is the only realistic way I see to fix the system.
And $40k a year isn't that much money to support yourself and a child. It's certainly not enough to buy a new Lexus. The poverty levels in the country are unrealistically low. I'd like you to show me anyone who's getting by on the poverty level + $1.
Also, the idea that only children should get healthcare is pretty stupid. If you're worried about the child's welfare, they're going to need parents who are healthy enough to take care of them. And that could be a mother OR a father.
It's because of their Do No Evil policy. Right wing nutjobs are evil. Left Wing nutjobs aren't. Quick example: rejecting health care for poor children. That's pretty evil.
I'd suggest you contact your representative about this issue.
Extensions are, I think, the number one cited reason why Firefox users don't want to switch to Opera. It's not just a nice addition, it's a deal-breaking feature.
The Mozilla/5.0 part is a little confusing, but I think that's a hold-over from Netscape days. But if you look you'll see rv:1.8.1.7, which is the version of Gecko, which they seem to be calling "Mozilla" in this summary.
That's what HCL's are for. Apple decides what hardware it works with, and that's all it will support. It does that anyway, it just happens to also be the supplier of the hardware. The same is basically true for Windows, except that everyone and his momma has (sometimes buggy) drivers for the hardware. Microsoft COULD say however, "Here's the list of hardware we support. If you're using other hardware, don't call us when you have problems."
Most poor people become poor through ethical means, and horrid amounts of hard work. What's funny is that I find the harder someone works, the less money they make. In fact, the people with the most money in our society don't work at all! How's that for backwards?
Seems like someone has never been without a way to work. Or more likely, doesn't work at all.
You've obviously never been in a pinch, where the only reason you had food was because of your credit card. And, no, it's not because you're better than anyone, it's because you're lucky.
sfc /scannow
I take it you've never worked for Wal-Mart?
I don't think we can prove that it DOES do things like this, but the languages and broad powers it gives certainly means that it CAN, and I think that's scary enough to warrant a LOT of concern.
I thought Rosetta was an emulator?
Yeah, but Mountain Dew is 12 cans for 3 bucks, on sale. That shit you're talking about is either expensive, or only available at specialty stores (and probably expensive). I think the convenience issue is the ONLY reason people drink so much soda. It's moderately tasty, cheap, and ubiquitous. The fact it's bad for you isn't too big of a concern because most people don't have time to think or worry about it, and because "moderately tasty" is a lot better than water on most people's charts. And yummy is better than healthy. We love to stimulate our pleasurable senses to the detriment of just about everything else. (That's great as a survival trait but it's almost harmful these days, because it's so easy to do, there's not "natural" moderation to it.)
Depending on where you live, there might not be a spot dark enough within a couple hundred miles. I live in Nashville, and I'd be willing to make a short roadtrip to find a place dark enough to see the stars. Does anyone know of a database dark sites, or how I could find a place near me?
Unlike everyone else here, I think your friend should find a new doctor. She is paying for a service, she should get it the way she likes. Not saying that guy was a bad doctor, but it wasn't the right one for her.
I've been reading a lot about the FairTax and the idea of a sales tax to replace income tax. But I'm not sure why a lot of people think a well-written sales tax is better than a well-written income tax. I look for the pros and cons of the two systems without people pointing at specific implementations.
Considering that sentencing is usually cumulative, yeah, it does matter. x sentence for the murder + x sentence for hate crime > x sentence for murder. As the GP said, really two crimes were committed. One was terrorism, the other was murder. They aren't the same, and there's no reason not to sentence for both of them.
I've heard of people killing others while driving when they weren't under the effects of alcohol of marijuana, too. What's your point?
Assuming you can afford those appeals. And just because there's new evidence, or a witness recants doesn't mean shit. I just watched American Justice. Check out the case against Clarence Elkins and rethink that bit about recants and new evidence.
I was gonna post this if someone else didn't. Filesharing would be like going into a store, aiming your magic wand at a product, duplicating your own, and walking off with the one you'd conjured. Or in other words, not really comparable to theft at all.
It sounds like you can prove a vote was missing, but not that a vote was added.
How is this any different from no paper trail at all? If you can't prove the paper receipt is for a real vote, how is it useful in any way?