Are you paying your workplace $15-$40k a year to teach/educate/house you?

Is that because all the pharmaceutical companies are using Waterfall instead of Agile/Scrum?

I'd be curious how their development works because it's probably 20 years outdated as well.

ICE the new Peacekeepers of the planet.

With the same type of public perception and welcome.

You have to be careful what we try and warn people about though.

The fluoride mineral found in water itself isn't carcinogenic, it's been in water sources for eons and we've grown up/evolved while being exposed to it (much like UV radiation everyone is in a huff about).

Just as when we add man-made substances to what we ingest we shouldn't be so quick to remove them either don't you think?

I agree man-made artifices are ridiculous, but not all fluoride is intrinsically harmful, in fact it's essential for our dental health.

If people really cared they could use reverse-osmosis to remove the fluoride; but those of us with well water (albeit a small %) don't have much to worry about.

Link to shoddy looking site and ambiguous/pompous "educate yourself".? lol

Refute the actual question instead of some link you aren't able to elucidate: Are you denying fluoride occurs naturally in streams and underground water sources?

I'd find more recent sources than 2000 on some shoddy website to support my claims as well.

You know fluoride has and still does occur naturally within nature right? It's found naturally within streams and underground sources? Like my well water for instance?

Maybe people are just lazy and uneducated; thinking everything is man made and carcinogenic. For example UV radiation.

Rights like technology change over time. These aren't the 10 commandments written in stone anymore.

Looks like an article just trying to pose debate for his opinions of what he agrees should be a human right and shouldn't be.

And really comparing the right to having a horse to having the right to access of information? Please.

This: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2605666&cid=38599136

Like I said the vote should constitute our endorsement not our (ever failing) dollar.

Yep I just wish the citizens of foreign nations would understand that. Short of a revolt democratic change is slow and uneventful.

And I fear because of our sheer geographic size and population disbursement (in that groups who share the same ideas/ideals are geographically disconnected) we would really never get a good hold on a proper revolt.

I'm not sure what people you mean? Do the majority of voters band together to contribute money to campaigns?

No the majority uses (or fails to use) his/her vote. Don't you think the vote should constitute that? Why should the people have to explicitly pay to elect officials? Shouldn't that be part of how a democratic entity uses its funds?

The ones contributing money (at least the large bulk of it) are rich individuals or corporations which is why we see such large disparities between what people want and what corporations want.

Sometimes I wonder for how horrible it was how true Mutant Chronicles corporate states will become.

You need to catch up on Holmes on Homes so you can see why those 6 week houses take 25 years to pay off.

We can't elect anyone who is competent until we somehow fix the lobby-centric corporate buyout principal the political environment is built on here.

People (like Obama) seem competent to voters and then turn around and act just like (or worse than) the previous administration due to their corporate entrenchment.