You're right; 0.004% of the best-educated, most culturally advanced (IMO) people on the planet have figured out how to do it right.

I"m not sure that's a very encouraging figure?

Personally, I believe that Iceland - population 300,000 - is probably somewhere near a natural limit of actual connected, responsible government. In the same sense that true communism really only works at the household/clan/tribal level, it may be that representative democracy - as an actual thing, not just a pastiche of it - tops out at a certain point as well, and beyond that every government leans towards despotism, for practical effectiveness' sake even setting aside the apparently inherently aggrandizing and greedy nature of humans.

Not precisely. You need to work on your history. First of all, this was the result of policies implemented in the 90s - when Clinton was in office.
I remember in the 90s the parade of corporate execs being called before congress (and Mr Frank specifically) to be publicly pilloried for 'racism' of 'redlining' districts - ie, calling out low-income areas as not-worth-the-risk-of-loaning to.
As a result of these activities, the US gov't loosened requirements and strongly encouraged these firms both public and private to lend to the low-income households so they too could "share in the American dream".
NO DOUBT, once the government made its stance clear, the banking/loan industry went after these ignorance, naive customers aggressively and in many cases illegally exploiting them.
But the Bush White House for 6 years warned that there were problems on the horizon without significant structure reform of GSEs like Fannie Mae (http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/10/20081009-10.html) but nothing was done - and I'll *certainly* agree with you that the GOP congress was absolutely incompetent from 2000-2004 when they really COULD have done something useful.

"...and democracies with governments wanting to become dictatorships..."

I know you feel you're being cleverly cynical, but name a democracy (or really ANY government) that doesn't have dictatorial tendencies?

That was the brilliance of the US Constitution; the framers assumed that government - as much as we need it in practical terms - was always looking to grow both in scope and power, and that the individuals attracted to that were likely themselves dangerous to the public good.

PLUTO has a diameter of 1440 miles.
Charon has a diameter of 790.

I know you're being cynical, but it IS the deal.

Because of the unstated last clause: "...because we have to make sure they will keep loaning TO US!"

It has been ever so, since the days of the Fuggers and the Medicis. Since kings can no longer simply decree pogroms against the people they are deeply indebted to, they've had to simply make sure the bankers get paid.

Congrats, you just figured out civilization.

See, and I'd say hypocrisy is spending the last 6 years of your career in government complaining about the fuckery going on with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and their subprime loans...when you were in charge of the relevant committee AND were 'married to' * the dude RESPONSIBLE for the subprime loans at one of those very two agencies.

THAT'S hypocrisy.

* quote only because it was proforma at the time

Now you are simply lying.

Healthcare: any hurt person going into an emergency room is treated, full stop.
Education: every US resident has free education through 12th grade, including transportation thereto.
Safety: the most dangerous people to poor people is...other or people.
Freedom: sure they have freedom - freedom to make shitty choices and live with the consequences of those choices. That's actual freedom, in fact.

We all know that (in broadly applicable generalizations) it's not true of whites, likely untrue of Asians, possibly true of Hispanics, and certainly true of blacks, just nobody wants to say it out loud.

Hate the comment all you like, you know it's what everyone is thinking.

If you actually want security and not moral posturing, yes.
I get that this is hard for some people to understand.

Nonsense.
http://www.heritage.org/resear...

More than 50% of the "poor" in America have
refrigeration
television
stove and oven
Microwave
Air Conditioning
Clothes Washer
at least one VCR
Cable TV
Clothes Dryer
>1 TV
Cordless Telephone
Cellular Phone
Ceiling Fans
Personal Computer
Nonportable stereo
coffee maker
internet service
computer printer
dishwasher
answering machine ....arguably, almost all of these could be served by a staff of household staff pre 1950 but even a household staff wouldn't be as convenient as, say, a single cellphone today - owned by more than THREE QUARTERS of the defined poor.

...I dispute that it would be such a utopia in any case.

We (in the Western world) live in the most benign circumstances ever in human history.
We largely have no fear of death by war, plague, famine, or pestilence. We live longer than ever before, and our primary health problems stem from TOO MUCH FOOD. Violence is steadily decreasing, and average wealth & comfort constantly improving. The average American lives better than a king of only several decades ago, and in fact has many abilities at the touch of a button that the greatest emperors never dreamed of.

Nevertheless...as our comforts increase, so does our bitching. Every imagined grievance, every contrived slight prompts paens of ceaseless grief over how horrible everything is.

If the current generation of solar powered drone stays up for more than a day, the next generation might stay up for weeks. Basically, what this shows is that we're pretty close to the threshhold where incoming photovoltaic energy over 24 hours matches the energy needs to keep the thing flying. Just a bit more optimization could mean that the thing takes in more energy than it uses, and then it can basically fly until something wears out. All kinds of interesting things then become possible.

Posturing histrionics.

Have gchq or other intelligence organizations ever used the data inappropriately?

To suggest that such organizations are somehow morally above being spied-upon ignores the long long history of such groups being used as cat's paws by others whose intentions are not so noble.

Sorry, if I'm in charge of security for a church, I'm still frisking the nuns, because to do otherwise would be irresponsible.

100% bullshit.
The very idea that others have to tiptoe around your personal sensitivities is anathema to the very concept of free speech (and, frankly, being an adult).
In particular, the idea that certain groups can assert that other groups are entitled to social protection because of some historical or perceived grievance is not only particularist (and in that sense astonishingly narcissistic) but patronizing as well.
It's really nothing more than oversensitivity, displaced so one doesn't even have to take ownership: "it's not that I'm being hypersensitive, because I'm feeling this way on BEHALF of that person over there."
A very later-20th-century form of nonsense.

I actually think this is great. After all, the patent expires in what, 25 years? I doubt a single engine will be built in that time, but forever afterwards, this idea in the public domain. Consider the alternative, if someone waited to patent this thing until applications were actually ready. Then the patent would prevent competitors from entering the market. But because Boeing hasn't waited, it has basically ensured that nobody will use patent law to put the brakes on innovation when we get around to actually making serious spaceships - which is what this propulsion system is obviously for.