do you REALLY want these people in charge of your healthcare? I don't.
Congrats you baited me. The Government is not in charge of your healthcare any more than the SEC is in charge of your stock portfolio. ACA created a regulated market for private insurance. The person deciding whether or not you get surgery is a medical director at a *private* insurance company. Not a government official. If anything, ACA made it harder for insurance companies to deny coverage for certain types of care. This Republican talking point is way over-played and not based on facts.
Go-live fiascos like this are quite common in the private sector. Large corporate bureaucracies can be just as bad, if not worse, than government. The difference is that this particular SNAFU is getting dissected in the press. It's a great opportunity to learn about the complexities involved when deploying large, complex, federated systems. I guarantee you there are people in the private sector pushing these articles to their corp. IT as a way to shame CIOs and CEOs into cutting the red tape, procurement hurdles, fiefdoms, and archaic development methodologies in their own organizations. If you want something meaningful from this event, learn from it rather than pointing fingers at "The Government." These are problems in most large organizations.
Not as authoritative as you thought:
"A coalition of electronics recyclers are disputing the Retina MacBook Pro's newly minted EPEAT "Gold" status, noting that the industrial-strength glue holding the battery in place runs afoul of rules designed to make computers easier to recycle. It turns out that the Gold rating was handed to Apple by none other than Apple itself, though EPEAT can require Apple to remove the rating after evaluating its assessment of standard criteria."
Mostly enterprise planning incompetence. We have "legacy" corporate encryption and security cripple-ware that only works on XP machines... the 2-year project completed last year.
You want to be able to tell the New York Times, the BBC, Google, your local radio stations, Microsoft, all of the bloggers that ramble online, every book publisher, people who choose which songs to perform songs in bars (or used to be able to choose, before your illiberal Orwellian anti-freedom kicked in)... you want to define freedom for them by denyin them choice.
Just so we are clear, the GP is saying that the companies above should have the freedom to reach their audiences and customers without being selectively blocked by ISPs.
He needs a mentor that can keep up with him. Rather than focusing on high school vs. college, I'd focus on finding the best possible person to set him down a fulfilling path for his life. That teacher or mentor could be in a University or high school. Putting this kid in any classroom is like handing out the keys to a Formula 1 car. You'll want to make sure that the driver can steer this mind towards reaching its full potential (both in achievement and personal fulfillment).
Exactly. You can't share your Spotify tracks or Netflix que on your timeline without something that monoitors activity while you are on other sites. Not sure why everyone on here is freaking out. If you want to share your life online, you'll have to allow FB to track your life. If you don't want to, stay off FB.
Big market != Good business. Trading profits, IP, and making compromises on your business for access to a big market are not necessarily good business moves.
People think focus means saying yes to the thing you've got to focus on. But that's not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. -Steve Jobs
Troops are just the tip of the iceberg. The Naval Special Warfare Development Group could not have nabbed Bin Laden without intel, comms, logistics, payroll, and equipment. You think the systems to manage all that stuff is off the shelf? The military's global dominance was built on systems - not guns. Having a bunch of "specialized" groups of grunts will not secure your dominance on the battle field; having the systems to keep them coordinated, informed, fed, fueled, equipped, and battle field aware will.
Reaganomics (macroeconomically) worked in the 80s (it lifted us out of the stagflation of the 70s.) Oddly enough, both supply-siders and Keynesians think that their model is correct, despite the fact that you can just about look at the description of the two and figure out that reality is probably somewhere in between.
"Reaganomics" may be credited with lifting us out of 70s stagflation, but it's hard to know why. Republicans point to lower taxes, but that era also saw a significant increase in deficit spending. It's hard to know if the recovery was due to lower taxes or from huge amounts of borrowed money being pumped into the economy.
If you're paying 30% on that income, you need a better accountant. You should not pay more than 15% on cap gains (unless you are a day trader), most munis have even lower tax rates, and depreciation on real estate can offset a lot of income on paper while the intrinsic value of the asset probably increased in value. The concept of a progressive tax rate is a joke. The smart money does not pay taxes in this country.
False. Rich people don't make money from wages. They make money from investments, dividends, and bond interest. That's why the super rich pay almost no tax (and why C-levels get paid in stock as opposed to salary). In the US we tax income from work, but we do not tax income from wealth.
Slashdot Mirror
Governments pay every Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
do you REALLY want these people in charge of your healthcare? I don't.
Congrats you baited me. The Government is not in charge of your healthcare any more than the SEC is in charge of your stock portfolio. ACA created a regulated market for private insurance. The person deciding whether or not you get surgery is a medical director at a *private* insurance company. Not a government official. If anything, ACA made it harder for insurance companies to deny coverage for certain types of care. This Republican talking point is way over-played and not based on facts.
Add something meaningful.
Go-live fiascos like this are quite common in the private sector. Large corporate bureaucracies can be just as bad, if not worse, than government. The difference is that this particular SNAFU is getting dissected in the press. It's a great opportunity to learn about the complexities involved when deploying large, complex, federated systems. I guarantee you there are people in the private sector pushing these articles to their corp. IT as a way to shame CIOs and CEOs into cutting the red tape, procurement hurdles, fiefdoms, and archaic development methodologies in their own organizations. If you want something meaningful from this event, learn from it rather than pointing fingers at "The Government." These are problems in most large organizations.
Political dissidents, whistle blowers... and FREEDOM LOVERS.
Mod up. He paid ultimate price for what he believed. There is not a stronger litmus test for one's character.
Marketing isn't just about how much money you throw at it - your ads have to actually be good. The WP7/Bing ads have been awful.
The product you're selling also has to be good. "Fool me once..."
Not as authoritative as you thought:
"A coalition of electronics recyclers are disputing the Retina MacBook Pro's newly minted EPEAT "Gold" status, noting that the industrial-strength glue holding the battery in place runs afoul of rules designed to make computers easier to recycle. It turns out that the Gold rating was handed to Apple by none other than Apple itself, though EPEAT can require Apple to remove the rating after evaluating its assessment of standard criteria."
Source:"all of Apple’s Mac line had top EPEAT ratings, with the exception of the company’s new MacBook Pro with Retina Display."
"...all qualifying products." I didn't hear that future products (like additional retina screen lap tops) will be EPEAT.
Who knew the surrender button was such a desirable feature?
Mostly enterprise planning incompetence. We have "legacy" corporate encryption and security cripple-ware that only works on XP machines... the 2-year project completed last year.
Thank you. This thread is a pos if you are interested in learning the topic. This is why people hate nerds.
You want to be able to tell the New York Times, the BBC, Google, your local radio stations, Microsoft, all of the bloggers that ramble online, every book publisher, people who choose which songs to perform songs in bars (or used to be able to choose, before your illiberal Orwellian anti-freedom kicked in) ... you want to define freedom for them by denyin them choice.
Just so we are clear, the GP is saying that the companies above should have the freedom to reach their audiences and customers without being selectively blocked by ISPs.
Freedom is not having my business's website blocked by my customers' ISP.
He needs a mentor that can keep up with him. Rather than focusing on high school vs. college, I'd focus on finding the best possible person to set him down a fulfilling path for his life. That teacher or mentor could be in a University or high school. Putting this kid in any classroom is like handing out the keys to a Formula 1 car. You'll want to make sure that the driver can steer this mind towards reaching its full potential (both in achievement and personal fulfillment).
Exactly. You can't share your Spotify tracks or Netflix que on your timeline without something that monoitors activity while you are on other sites. Not sure why everyone on here is freaking out. If you want to share your life online, you'll have to allow FB to track your life. If you don't want to, stay off FB.
Whatever. It doesn't run linux.
Big market != Good business. Trading profits, IP, and making compromises on your business for access to a big market are not necessarily good business moves.
If we keep spending at the rate we are without the revenues to support it, it'll be a much faster deline.
Fixed it for you
People think focus means saying yes to the thing you've got to focus on. But that's not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. -Steve Jobs
Troops are just the tip of the iceberg. The Naval Special Warfare Development Group could not have nabbed Bin Laden without intel, comms, logistics, payroll, and equipment. You think the systems to manage all that stuff is off the shelf? The military's global dominance was built on systems - not guns. Having a bunch of "specialized" groups of grunts will not secure your dominance on the battle field; having the systems to keep them coordinated, informed, fed, fueled, equipped, and battle field aware will.
Reaganomics (macroeconomically) worked in the 80s (it lifted us out of the stagflation of the 70s.) Oddly enough, both supply-siders and Keynesians think that their model is correct, despite the fact that you can just about look at the description of the two and figure out that reality is probably somewhere in between.
"Reaganomics" may be credited with lifting us out of 70s stagflation, but it's hard to know why. Republicans point to lower taxes, but that era also saw a significant increase in deficit spending. It's hard to know if the recovery was due to lower taxes or from huge amounts of borrowed money being pumped into the economy.
If you're paying 30% on that income, you need a better accountant. You should not pay more than 15% on cap gains (unless you are a day trader), most munis have even lower tax rates, and depreciation on real estate can offset a lot of income on paper while the intrinsic value of the asset probably increased in value. The concept of a progressive tax rate is a joke. The smart money does not pay taxes in this country.
Paper gains are almost never taxed
My main point still holds: we tax work a lot more than wealth in this country
Rich people pay above 30%.
False. Rich people don't make money from wages. They make money from investments, dividends, and bond interest. That's why the super rich pay almost no tax (and why C-levels get paid in stock as opposed to salary). In the US we tax income from work, but we do not tax income from wealth.