We're also fighting major wars overseas with historically low tax rates.

If we set the top marginal tax rate to like 40% instead of 35, and closed corporate tax loopholes and taxed HFT at like a fraction of a penny per trade and stopped fighting expensive wars, we could easily afford to do a lot of things.

The problem isn't the budget deficit itself, it's the amount we owe in interest and our obligations on our debt. If we can pay that off, then the deficit itself doesn't matter.

Because as a collective whole, tax payers can afford to pay for college for everyone. But as individuals, a lot of people are falling through the cracks because of socioeconomic imbalance. Even people who would've been well off a generation ago are struggling.

Why bother doing anything on a collective group level if it means someone has to pay for anything to help anyone else? I mean, it's not my house on fire or me that's being mugged, what's in it for me? I drive, why bother paying for public transport infrastructure?

yeah but no game is going to be as good as MGS V: The Phantom Pain.

Even if the gameplay is as good or better, I'm pretty invested at this point in the story line so, I care about that more than just raw gameplay.

If the gameplay is awful then whee hype train just plowed through the terminus and completely derails, but all reports seem to be that yes, it's worth the hype.

First, why is it the purpose of higher education to get you a job?

You, like a lot of other people in tech nerdy spaces are confusing higher education with vocational training.

From your example, getting a degree in Women's Studies might not be great for finding a job alone, but if you're interested in understanding the context that women live in, then it's invaluable and you can't put a price on it.

Second, even if it is free, getting a CS degree or a physics degree or an MD or any other degree that is difficult still requires you to actually show up and do the work. You're just now burdened only by doing the work and not figuring out how to pay for the privilege of working your brains out to get a mastery of that subject matter.

Yes, because it's a good idea to give out college level educations.

Like, getting a BA in Philosophy might not be a great way to have a career, but it is worth it to round out one's education.

The idea that the firs twelve years of someone's education should have a free tier but any education after that comes out of our own pockets is laughable.

That's not to say that there's not a place for private institutions that charge tuition, but with the way things are going, we're going to have to prop up public universities and colleges anyway, so why not just make it free and stop squeezing students?

The NES got a trickle of games for it from 1991, release of the U.S. Super Nintendo, until 1995, U.S. release of the final game for the system.

So it's not been instantly.

Measuring in inches?

Yes. That's largely only an American thing.

Depending on the context, it's still a dick move.

Like pirating big media's work, whatever. I think it's devaluing the work, but not theft. In the aggregate it might suck because it makes it harder to continue making work, like in the case of some games, anime, manga and comics.

Using someone else's work to make money? That's a dick move. If you're a big corporation and using an artists work with out them getting credit? You've deprived someone of something in a huge way. That's theft in some degree.

They function differently, but to most folks, they appear exactly the same. This is how gun-control types inject fear, uncertainty and doubt into the debate.

He's talking about gun FUD.

Calling an AR-15 an "assault weapon" isn't FUD. AR-15s are marketed as weapons used to assault people. They're designed for assault. As opposed to pepper spray or a taser which, while unpleasant and possibly deadly, they're marketed for defensive use and not optimized for maximum death.

Also cite your sources and explain yourself. What do you mean by firearm related crime goes up? Are more people getting busted with owning an illegal firearm AND committing crime when they'd otherwise just be charged with just the crime? How are you defining these terms? Do more people get guns because they're banned?

Cites sources showing that defensive gun ownership is a myth.

not unless you work for Lockheed Martin

That thing has a better screen at 1080p than the MacBook has at 2304x1440?

Are you kidding?

Gunshot victim's family ordered to pay the legal feeds of ammo dealers.

American lawmakers, especially at the state level, are getting their marching orders from the gun lobby.

Even in "liberal" states like California and New York, gun control laws are getting laxer and laxer.

Yes, saying that a gun is more likely to kill a person in their own home is FUD but that we need guns to repel invaders or fight a tyrannical Federal Government isn't FUD.

I'm sorry but, firearms are largely designed for killing. Either animals or humans. Yes you can kill someone with a book or a car or a baseball bat, but no one's marketing books, cars or sports gear by telling you how efficiently and effectively you can end someone's life with their product.

A 21 pound, 21" notebook would mean you could skip leg and back day all you want.

Fuck that. I just want a charging port, external monitor and USB.

I just can't wait for the peripherals to get cheaper.

i hope they change the branding away from games so they won't feel so pressured into selling me preorders for games I don't give a shit about when I walk in for replacement cables or whatever it is i need.