No, that was Perl5. Perl6 is all of that, with Asian twins.

... oh, and regular expression grammars, but hey: Asian twins!

That's not a contradiction at all.

The fact of the matter is, just because somebody says they are adding a new onerous task for safety, doesn't mean it actually nets you safety, or that it's reasonable.

Remember, cars kill far more people than nuclear power, even if you take the most insane exaggerations as the deaths from nuclear power throughout history, which implies that cars are, in aggregate, much more dangerous than nuclear power is, in aggregate.

The safest thing we could do is outlaw cars and aggressively eliminate them. The next safest thing we could do is design them such that they are physically incapable of moving faster than a below-average human can walk away. Think that's unreasonable? WHY DO YOU LOVE IT WHEN PEOPLE DIE IN CAR ACCIDENTS??!?!? I can't think of a reason ANYONE would want the vehicular transport industry to be less safe than it could possibly be. Except that this is a strawman and real life is about considering issues in context.

I can also tell you that every power source -- every one of them -- has dangers involved. Yes, all of them. Eventually you hit a point where your best choice for safety still doesn't meet your wild standards, so to meet safety standards you have to use the *less safe* option which nevertheless has less strict safety standards.

So what would be neat to know is what is being softened here, so we could tell whether it's a good or a bad idea. It could be either way. Everyone assuming that softening the standards is a bad thing, based on literally no information, has demonstrated themselves to be unqualified to make judgements because they have presupposed the conclusion. What I do know is that nuclear safety is very highly regulated to begin with, and I like that there is such regulation, and my only problem is that some common sources that are beastly-dangers do not undergo similar rigour like the much-put-upon fossil fuels.

The last refuge of the incompetent is violence and in your case violent tendencies are expressed in personal ad-hominem attacks.

He meant narwhally. Which is still not fish, but closer.

Everything private is cheaper in a free market economy. In a non-free market economy (which is what is set up almost everywhere across the world), private companies can manipulate governments to their advantage by buying influence and thus preventing actual competition.

FDA is there to prevent competition, so is every other law and tax, preventing actual competition creates a skewed market, in which it is impossible to get a true reading on what costs are actually.

Same with any government operation, money is fungible, so government operations are subsidised in more ways than one. Since there are very few actual free markets and that health care is not allowed to operate as a free market almost anywhere at all, comparing private health care in a non-free market and declaring that government beats free-market private health care is in itself a gigantic lie that you prefer to promote, that's your business, but you are not going to fog this issue that way for me.

It is a set of corporations, parent corporation and a number of daughter businesses set up to minimise taxes and other types of liabilities. It is what I have to work with in the current environment. I prefer bearer certificates personally, they are a bit difficult to set up today. I prefer it if governments didn't exit at all and there was no such thing as a government controlled corporate charter of-course, given that the world is what it is, I come up with the best way of doing business I can in our reality.

Of course he has no expectation that it will pass. In fact, he'd be horrified if it did! He absolutely does NOT want it to pass, because it's pure theater, designed to allow lefty politicians to say in advertisements that their opponents hate education spending, etc. It's 100% empty, completely disingenuous rhetoric, and should have the bright light of day on it from the beginning.

Apple would exist just fine, government wouldn't exist.

Government shouldn't be protecting anybody in business for any reason, including 'intellectual property' nonsense.

As to murdering and kidnapping - this is a private matter, it is up to any given locality how to deal with such nonsense, personally I prefer completely private security and private courts for handling any criminal activity.

Roads do not disappear if government does not usurp power by oppressing people into submission, roads should be completely private as well.

Gasoline quality and whatever other quality, all of it is up to private brands to maintain and compete upon.

A functioning government is a Mafia and should be understood and treated as such.

Yes, hypocrisy is amusing, however there is no hypocrisy with a company that earned money in a foreign country not bringing its profits to USA so they can avoid paying those taxes.

As to the corporate charter provided by government - this shouldn't exist.

There shouldn't be intellectual property law - this shouldn't exist.

Free market is exactly absence of government creating monopolies, destroying competition, taxing income and profit and wealth, meddling with businesses, passing labour laws, etc.

There shouldn't be any government and there shouldn't be such a thing as 'limited liability' provided by government corporate law.

Yes, deficits are bad. Yes, running deficits and adding to debts means higher future payments due to interest on the debt and it means higher future taxes.

In order to restart economic activity debts have to be paid off and/or restructured, debts have to be minimised and deficits have to stop.

Running deficits means taxing future earnings at a higher rate than the current tax rate, that's because debts cannot be accrued forever and it's not fake 'borrowing ceiling' that governments don't care about, it's the real lending ceiling that will be imposed by people who will no longer subsidise your economy with their productivity.

Cutting taxes and increasing debt based spending or inflation based spending is not cutting taxes at all, which is why Bush never actually cut taxes, he increased them by increasing spending.

USA is now the biggest debtor in history of the world and his happened since Nixon defaulted on the dollar in 1971 and the inflation started wiping out USA economy.

Government provided health care is not cheaper. FDA is not cheaper, government laws and taxes and regulations do not make things cheaper, they either make things impossible or much more expensive than otherwise.

You are full of statistics, aren't you? Private health care, actually private, without government intervention cannot be beat by price by any government health care at all, given that TAX AND REGULATIONS COSTS ARE HIDDEN FROM SIGHT.

Really? :)))) That would make for one EMPTY WalMart, wouldn't it?

Go ahead, think through that once more, you like your stuff that you buy every day in any store in USA? Most of it was NOT made in America.

Maybe you should use a meme generator for that one?

Or, consider the reality of it. Cops who pull people over while driving unmarked cars are completely used to not being trusted - by anyone, of any color. I have a great relationship with the cops I know, and have never had a bad moment with any I don't. My wife and I are lily white, but I'd never encourage her to pull over for an unmarked car anywhere but in a very populated spot, and ideally in front of the local police station. I do not trust unmarked cars, and there's good reason for that. Great news bit just this morning, where a cop-impersonating douche in a white Crown Vic pulled over (wait for it!) an off duty cop. Good one. He got to flash his badge, and was packing (guy drove off, but was promptly caught and arrested). What do the rest of us get to do?

Meanwhile, back in your race-card-playing department: there's a reason that cops in rougher neighborhoods don't EVER do normal traffic stops in unmarked cars. Cops in marked cruisers get attacked, run over, shot at and otherwise put in peril all the time. And those are guys rolling in plainly marked cars, wearing uniforms. I'll have to look around to see if there are any stats on basic traffic stops in marked vs. unmarked cars in high crime areas. My sense, from talking to people in that line of work, is that it's very rare. Unmarked cars in those areas aren't about traffic citations - they're usually working warrants, drug mules, trafficking, that sort of thing.

In the mean time, if you get the lights on you from an unmarked car, and it doesn't matter what color you are, proceed at the speed limit to the nearest station, or look for a marked car and honk to get their attention (if the unmarked is real, the officer in the marked car will already know what's going on, and will usually join in the stop to help protect the unmarked guy and to make sure anyone seeing the scene understands it's legit).

Ok, now take your analogy and add the following: if you are constantly eating on 'the tab', while you are no longer being productive, you lost your job, you ate through your assets, you have nothing left and your skills are deteriorating, the restaurant would be full-hearty to keep feeding you there, thinking that you would ever pay any of that debt back.

Western world is seeing its economies being destroyed and not in small part due to welfare state policies of that world. The government and health care or insurance should not be mixed. Same applies to everything, including military at this point as far as I am concerned, at least if the idea is to keep peace rather than increase violence and murder. The reality is the problem for you, not me, you don't actually pay attention to the reality and the reality is bigger than only health care, it is the entire state of economy and health care is not outside of the economy. I prefer to use private health care specifically because of much better quality and given choices people would take that option, their choices are removed from them by their governments and by the declining economy, which is again, resulting from their government growth and destruction of free market capitalism.