Comment Re:Theory says it is possible (Score 1) 415
Specifically, * equivalently - stacking multiple flow control branches to simulate the singular GOTO is not the same.
So, any sane attempt to pathfind (say an A* search) is not embarrassingly parallel
Also true is that any sane attempt to calculate the color of a pixel is not embarrassingly parallel...
Your problem is that you know just enough to fuck up the basics.
So why can't the government make you pay for health care that you don't agree with?
The government doesnt have the right to do so. The fact that it sometimes (more and more frequently these days) does things that it doesnt have a right to do is not an excuse.
There is a process where the federal government can be granted new rights. This happens only when the States approve a modification to the constitution.
"I'm not denying treatment, I'm denying payment."
Hobby Lobby denies neither, proving that you are one of those hyper-reactionary liberals that doesnt know what went down. The employees of Hobby Lobby continue to have the liberty to consume drugs such as Plan B. What they dont have is the liberty to force their employer to pay for their Plan B.
Lots of things arent part of an employees compensation package. Even such necessities as food and shelter, but somehow in the liberal mind Plan B is so much more important than food and shelter that employers must pay for it specifically.
Shows us where the liberal priorities lie... the murder of what they have unscientifically dehumanized is top priority. I guess if the liberty of the unborn human isnt important, than why should anybody elses liberty be important.
On a related note, I wonder how many more accidents happen because of "safe" behavior done mindlessly than "risky" behavior done safely...
How many tailgaters would continue to tailgate if it was as simple as slamming on the breaks to ruin them financially...
My premiums don't go up because I ate too many ice cream cones, because I don't pay premiums per se. I pay taxes and my taxes pay for medical treatment for anyone who lives in my jurisdiction.
Translation: Everyone pays more because you eat too many ice cream cones.
Mandating insurance forces premiums _down_ because the pool of insured people becomes much bigger.
Thats not how it works.
Increasing the number of insured people is meaningless to the premiums needed unless the amount of risk associated with the "new" policies is as-a-matter-of-fact less than the amount of risk associated with the "old" policies. Now if thats true AND both "new" and "old" are in the same pool, only THEN would the cost of policies change.
What you have done is taken an argument from another situation (perhaps the liberal justification for getting everyone on health insurance), and then misapplied it to this one. The reason you misapplied it is because you never understood it to begin with.
Whats worse is even if you understood the argument, you probably still wouldnt understand the injustice of it (which is that less risky people are forced to subsidize more risky people if you force them into the same risk pool.)
Yeah.. I know.. understanding the money is hard, which is why you don't.
And even most C64 owners dropped it ASAP and went straight for assembly.
Which only has equivalents to goto and gosub.... you were saying?
It's a terrible decision, as it means that somehow not only are corporations 'persons', but they have the religious freedom to impose their will on their employees.
I rest my case.
and aside from a straw man/slippery slope argument no one will seriously consider the possibility that they could be mandated for widespread use.
Yes, just like when the government first started messing around with health insurance (tax exempt if the employer pays for it, large employers must pay for it, etc..) it was just a slippery that the government would eventually mandate that every person had health insurance.
So here we are.... using the "just a slippery slope" argument again?
This is, of course, assuming the end goal is limiting unwanted pregnancies.
Doesnt matter what the motives are...what will it actually be used for?
Planned Parenthood chipping up as many poor people as they can, perhaps?
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.