Oh man, do we ever. Did you read the article written by our transportation director?
http://www.seattletimes.com/op...
The summary is that he wants to redo all the sidewalks around schools (most of which are already abundantly signed, reflective, and lighted/flashing), implement massive lane reductions, and a 5-mph speed reduction across the board (lowering it to 25mph on arterials), all of which are very expensive projects. I'm sorry, but anyone who is old enough to walk alone has an infinite number of stupid ways they can kill themselves and an infinite number of places. If you're going to speed money anywhere, fix the key dangerous spots (if any still exist) and then spend the rest on mental health. Or police/fire/ambulance are good services too (most of the time), and they safe innocent lives. They are going to ask us in the Fall to vote a nearly billion dollar road-fixing proposition that only spends around $200M on fixing roads, $100M million on fixing bridges, and $600M on other stuff, like "safety projects." I wonder if the voters know that passing that means they will get fixed roads, but not for their cars to travel on!

The feature shall be called, "Account Super-Sharing." Microsoft has bc? Big deal. Kiss our account super-sharing!

So you're saying the NSA network is permanently or temporarily connected to the Internet, and employees are allowed to take their laptops home. Riiiight, sure, if you say so.

When it gridlocks, unprofitable drivers will quit until it un-gridlocks, and the supply will correct itself. Works much better than government officials deciding what the proportion should, which is really what the taxi lobby that donates to the politicians want it to be.

I live in a city where Uber, Lyft, etc. have been approved to operate as many vehicles as they want as long as they buy commercial insurance, which they are now doing. The sky hasn't fallen. I see no discernible change in traffic. You can pull out as many armchair theories as you want, but reality speaks for itself. If you want to refute my point, go through the list of cities that have given Uber/Lyft/etc. free reign in present time and show me the data on how they are gridlocked now when they weren't before because of Uber/Lyft/etc. cars.

In other words, according to your own example, market forces corrected the oversupply issue naturally, when unprofitable drivers let those license expire There was no need to the government to intervene and create new problems.

In the article, before that quote, it said:

It's sort of a vague statement, but my guess is that Amazon is still allowing sellers on their marketplace to sell boxes preloaded with Kodi.

I hear ya. Even the oven timer is now a digital unit, and that broke on us (thankfully under warranty). They do it because a computer chip is a lot cheaper than a bunch of gears. The problem is that it's a lot easier to cut corners with computer components and software. Also, the first thing cost-cutting measure is to not test the UI, so the UI usually sucks. Like my Cisco phone at work - I still don't understand why I can't program speed dial from the phone.

That's why they need to be mapped so that they can be given historical designation.

Ah, so the Russians tested on themselves before deploying to Germany.

This is very different from the statements I criticized. Not only do you need to look at average return, but you need to look at difference between the average return that you get with the current programs versus the return you get with free education. I can't say whether the average return makes it pay for itself or not because I don't have that data - that's my criticism - people making these sky high claims of paid back in 5 years. It's no different from the 8X battery life claims. We're not saying that product doesn't boost battery life, but you can't just claim 8X w/o data.

In the engineering departments I've encountered, they have quotas, and you can't enter until you've spent about 2 years doing well in the intro (e.g. "weed-out") courses. And they have no issue kicking you out if you fail the courses regardless of how much you paid. The problem, if tuition is free, is not those majoring in highly employable fields but those majoring in fields with low demand. At the university, I saw it both ways. I saw students who just partied. Overwhelming, these students didn't have to pay a dime themselves (usually their parents paid), so they didn't care. I also saw students whose grades were impacted by having to work too much part-time. Thus, I think there's a balance about how much funding is most effective.

Not true. According to a 2011 study, 40% of people who included student loans in their bankruptcy filings were granted a discharge by the judge:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...
You just have to prove undue hardship. Also, the study found a lot of people didn't ask for it, and those who did not hire a lawyer were less likely to ask for it. So the bigger problem is this misinformation that people think it's not forgivable.

Given that the government guarantees the student loans, it doesn't matter if you're starting with nothing. Also, the student can always declare bankruptcy in the worst case, so there's no fear if you have nothing.

Just look at reality - look at all the people that got the loans and say they are struggling to pay it off now because college didn't give them the job with the return you're declaring here. Did you read /. story about boosting battery life by 8X? Where the reviewer says they could have advertised +50% and that would have been a great product, but now they are going to get ripped apart for claiming 8X? Claiming the pie in the sky completely undermines a viewpoint that otherwise could have been valid.

This is their secret marketing plan. Make outrageous claims, and all the do-gooders on the Internet will HAVE to buy one to debunk the claims!

If the return on investment was really that good, then the graduates should have no problem repaying their student loans. You're undermining your own argument against student loans. The usual argument for covering education is many students do not get their return on investment and therefore cannot pay off the loans, but there's some non-monetary benefit to society as a whole, thus society should foot part or all of the cost via taxes. Clearly, we believe in partial, and that's why we do have financial aid, federal loans, etc., but what's the best balance is hard to say.

Don't push it. You're just a robot.