Cars actually generate revenue. They're taxed very heavily and generate more revenue from those taxes then is spent on cars. A large portion of the gas tax for example is diverted for buses, bicycle roads, etc.

The revenue generated by cars does not make a dent in the external costs of automobile travel.

Everywhere in the US, in every county of every state, automobile travel is subsidized by governments from the town all the way up to the federal gov't.

mass transit is already hugely subsidized...

As is automobile travel and air travel and train travel.

I don't know how much a bicycle is subsidized, but it probably is to a certain extent.

I would be that a lot more money comes out of the public coffers to subsidized automobile travel than mass transit.

This is what's known as "BS".

That's what Common Core should be first and foremost. Teaching people who think Common Core history books don't mention the Civil War to be able to discern truth from the bullshit that they would read on right wing nut job websites or left wing nut job websites. Or conspiracy websites. Or anywhere, Slashdot included. But of course, if you try to teach critical thinking, it sends the right wing nut jobs into a tizzy, because they want to use the Bible as a science text.

The first article, on the "patriot update" site, claims that Common Core stops teachers from teaching the civil war, because there are instructions to teachers when teaching the Gettysburg Address to not give any specific historical background. What they fail to mention is that the textbook and materials involved are not from a history class, but from an English unit on rhetoric and speech. They're trying to get the students to focus entirely on the text itself without relying on historical reference. It also leaves out that it's an English textbook for juniors and seniors. If you check the history textbooks that Common Core uses from the same company. You will find that they make an extensive study of the Civil War in both freshman and sophomore level texts. Forcing students to analyze texts in this way is a common tool for promoting critical understanding of language. Should those students make it to college, they will find this skill immensely valuable.

Oh, and the "genfringe" article, on the website geared toward "conservative millennials" is made up out of whole cloth. Follow the links to see for yourself.

There is a lot to not like about the Common Core curriculum that was implemented during the Bush Administration as part of No Child Left Behind and how it continues to be used today. But not because of any perceived anti-American or anti-Christian bias.

Where it ends up in the next person's bank and then that person dies and it ends up in the next person's bank?

You can't claim me transferring you $100k of my wealth is stimulating the economy. If I didn't spend it, what's the guarantee that you won't? Me spending $100k on goods and services on the other hand is stimulating the economy. Talk about nothing about what you just said.

But really we're not arguing about whether they are contributing or not, I think we have agreement on that. My point is that they contribute more than they consume in medical costs. I think they do based on their ability to spend their retirement savings. If you think they don't... well then we'll just have to leave the discussion there.

If I was to invent a career in order to brag on Slashdot, PhD in English would not be my first choice.

APK, you have to chill, son. It's too easy to simply read comments at +1 and then you disappear for almost everyone except other Anonymous Cowards.

All it takes is for me to check this little drop down menu and then click this... ... ...

It's not possible to downmod a comment in a thread in which you have posted. You didn't know that?

You're assuming the only way to contribute to society is to work. That couldn't be any more wrong.
What do I know about retirees? I know they eat food, they drink drinks. I see them in shopping centres. Many retirees also seem to put effort into enjoying the end of their life. The ones I know go on holidays more than I do they consume more than I do. Retirees typically have their houses paid off and actually spend the money their fund gives them rather than saving it for ... retirement.

The thought people who don't work don't contribute to the economy is a fundamental lack of understanding of how the economy actually works. Even if you ignore taxes on goods and services you can't have GDP without someone to consume the product. And THAT is how the economy works.

So yes I still don't buy the conclusion that someone won't contribute that amount of money to the economy, even a man with a hip replacement still needs to eat.

You're assuming this is all very different to elsewhere. If you ever visited Australia you'll find in the cities things are very similar. The McMansion phenomenon is alive and well here and driving property prices through the roof. I myself am guilty of it. We are 2 people living in a 2 story 5 bedroom house. While I don't have a gas guzzler that's more the reality of the cars for sale here. Other than a hummer most of the cars here generally have smaller engines and are more fuel efficient on account of the petrol price here being double that of the USA. But certainly splurging is alive and well.

The answer is, "Yes, this is English class for APK".

Better looking is correct. No hyphen needed.

No, APK, that's not correct.

The hyphen can be used when it follows the infinitive. It's a usage thing. A matter of regional preference.

You also repeatedly used "and" between items. Wrong.

Giant run on sentences too? Please... lol!

Run on sentences are my thing. It's common for first-rate writers to use them when they are working in the vernacular. I use language the way Coltrane used a saxophone. As long as I'm understood, I make the rules.

And yes, to answer your repeated question, this is English class, clown. Just for you.

I wonder to what extent having all these disorders officially classified in the DSM is just a way for the medical profession to charge insurance companies for absolutely everything that goes wrong with someone.

What else is really gained by these classifications, except profit for the medical industry and a hell of a lot more people walking around feeling like victims of horrible diseases.

Oh, I guess the victimization industry also does pretty well by creating non-profit organizations that raise all sorts of money to "raise awareness" (whatever the hell that means) for their particular newly-classified disorder.

Tell the truth, the entire in-bred confluence of people who desperately want to feel like there is a reason for their unhappiness that they can point to, and the non-profit outfits that profit from them, and the medical industry that apparently doesn't have enough really sick people to worry about that they want everybody to feel like they have some officially classified disorder seems a lot like a gigantic scan to me.

Has the lot of people who believe they need to be better-looking at any cost really been made better by these classifications? I'm not sure.

The only solution seems to be to stop thinking about one's self all the time and think about other peoples' welfare for a change. That does wonders for whole categories of dysphorias, I have found first-hand.

I'm not sure about you but for me the difference would be made up in about 2 years of additional taxes that I get to pay on account of actually being alive not to mention the benefit to the economy of my general activities. Those monies would generally contribute to healthcare effectively repaying the cost of smoking.

Yes taxes sway the argument your way again but please don't pretend that the additional $100k is somehow a burden on society that I wouldn't repay many times over.. Otherwise one should consider the best option for society is banning new life altogether.

Based on RIAA accounting methods you should expect to be penalised in the order of $2000 for your heinous crimes.

As someone who has designed and ordered small runs (20 units) of electronics complete with factory assembly soldering and casing, I can tell you no.

Hardware is expensive in a giant company. If you're making a CD player for Sony, with a team of engineers, a bit of R&D, where you have 1 shot to make the product correct and are forced to order 100k units to meet economy of scale requirements, then yes sure, but you're also not going to be financing this with Kickstarter.

Kickstarter is about kick-starting your business, not mass producing. If you are running a kickstart campaign with the aim of a large production run first go then you should really not be in the business, and this is something that will self correct itself anyway.

There are MANY successful kickstarted projects that have taken off with very modest funding requirements. HR? Are you joking? If you have a HR team with hiring requirements then you shouldn't be on kickstarter. If on the other hand you're talking about paying a contractor a one off fee for design then yes, that would be appropriate.

Sorry whichever way you try and spin it, for what they are looking at producing I would instantly say asking for $500k funding is so high that alone should be a clear indication of potential fraudulent intentions.

Yes it is hard to find an old IBM think centre that is as the original poster has stated as a criteria "super cheap and super small" The powersupply in that IBM machine alone is about 10x the size of the example (Raspberry Pi) and simply the power wasted during inefficient energy conversion while the PSU sits there idle is more than the entire consumption of the example (Raspberry Pi).