The problem with those things is that they require thought and judgement, which if they ever existed in the students, the B-schools expunge. Simple-minded "numerical" analysis is what they emphasize. Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Talk to the GGP. He's the one that chose to categorize politics as such. Should I go on a grand dissertation of shades of gray? Sorry, no time for that now. I just told him how full of shit he is.
There's also the problem that CDS's are insurance, but because of deliberate technicalities are not regulated as such. The laws and regulations that have been introduced since the 17th century, which keep insurance from being a complete scam or gamble, didn't apply. You could get a CDS on something you didn't even own; you could even get CDS's for several times the value. That's like letting me take out a $1M insurance policy on your $300k home, and then looking the other way when I go to your place and play with matches. It's a setup that's pretty much guaranteed to explode at some time - it doesn't take much to set it off.
From the folks who brought you the Dred Scott decision and the Slaughterhouse cases: the Supreme Court has declared bribery legal.
Liberals will be furious at your claim..... because it puts the Government in a "bad nanny" position.
Listen to Rush Limbaugh much? Try thinking instead of regurgitating. Here's a book by a serious and unabashed lefty: The Conservative Nanny State. Sorry if the cognitive dissonance makes your head hurt.
Compared to all the other banks that took stupid risks GS was one of the firm that actaully did not require the bailout money due to their better risk management..
They got TARP money, a few billion form the AIG bailout, etc. They also got to declare themselves a "bank" (as in a depository bank, not an investment bank, which is what they are). That gave them access to billions in effectively interest free loans from the Fed. If you don't think that's a bailout, try getting a 0.1% loan from the Fed. I'd love to get that deal for my mortgage.
Our government clearly lacks the balls to regulate the banks and provide leadership. This is just sad.
I disagree. It's not lack of balls, but a combination of regulatory capture and (generally legal) bribery.
This is normal behavior for a plant inoculated with mycorrhizae
No kidding, but there is a bit more to their work. Otherwise please explain why these girls won three of the most prestigious science contests. I doubt the judges are idiots.
My "I haven't checked Google to be sure" guess is the waters within 100 miles of the US west coast and a 100 mile circle around Hawaii are the only waters declared as US waters.
The US claims territorial waters only up to 12 nautical miles from the shore, which is the maximum allowed by international law.
US warships really shouldn't be anywhere near China
They're not. The Spratly islands (map here) are hundreds of miles from China. They're much closer to the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei. Should we avoid sailing near any of those countries in case China's next claim is that those countries are all historically part of China?
Was the water contested before the island was build?
Yes.
After the island ws build it certainly was not
International law on these issues is anything but clear, and are subject to a great deal of argument, which is why there are always contested areas.
As for the UK, it's a natural island that has been inhabited by the same peoples for centuries (at the least - you can argue about 1066). Now that's clear.
Building artificial islands in contested waters is rattling the sabre a lot more than just sailing a few ships through it.
easier to compile assembly to assembly in multiple ways than to compile high level languages to multiple assembly languages.
In other words, they don't want to be bothered writing real compilers.
Isn't this suggestion for a design modification just a little late?
Bullshit. Any social structure that diminishes personal responsibility is suspect.
You mean like how a country diminishes personal responsibility for wars of aggression?
"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll
