The reverse is true to tho. Some attempt suicide- regret it then-- but then attempt suicide again later.

It depends on the reason. Is life shitty? Just lost your child? Just got fire?

Or is your brain just shitty? Constant suicidal impulses even tho life is going well? On a drug that enhances those impulses? Always in pain? Always depressed regardless of medication? Always feel like life is pointless even when nothing is wrong?

Sometimes the problem is chemical and there is little we can do to help the people. Sometimes, it's a permanent solution to a temporary problem and we can help those people.

And as you say, sometimes attempting and really facing death makes the person realize they don't want to die.

And yea... we were going to end the surveillance program anyway... yea! That's the ticket!

And we were going to stop illegal wire taps and sneaking back doors into our commercial products.

Yea... because our girlfriend... Candice Swanepoel didn't want us too.

Here in the states, LED bulbs are down to $11 to $13.

Still... good to hear 10% less energy usage.

As long as they 3100-3200K light and not that wierd 2900K stuff I might try one.

And they better give an honest 850-900 lumens for the "60 watt" variety!

Also, a lot of suicide decisions are based on impulses. There are many stories of people who took a suicidal action and then regretted doing so. Like the one about people in the emergency room screaming they want to live after they shot themselves or the guy who jumped off a bridge and realized the second after he did so that he wanted to live.

For all we know, that day was like any other. The co-pilot went to work thinking he was handling it. The pilot left the cabin and the co-pilot was unexpectedly overpowered by the urge to kill himself and he locked the door. No planning necessary.

On the parent topic- yes I think they should video and that video should be checked when a plane crashes or has an incident but wiped otherwise when a plane lands without incident.

100 day moving average. Some folks use the 100 day exponential moving average. Results are similar. They tend to get you out of the market for the worst dips - and get you back in before missing too much of the rise. But-- you should never get out 100%. It's more like reducing to 25% invested (maybe 20%). Very hard emotionally to put money back in if you go to 0% in. Scaling up an existing position is much easier.

There are some owner operators as described, but most are beholden.

The problem with swapping drivers has to do with hours of service requirements. A bit too much detail to get into right now, unfortunately.

Unless you are in 15% of jobs- you'll be forced to retire.

Good thing is, worst case you'll get about 85% of your social security benefits. This could be fixed if they raised the limit to 500k salary and raised the tax by 1%. Pretty small change so the problem is partially theatrics.

Bad thing is, those will only cover about 70% of your needs so you will need something to fill that gap. Medicare looks in trouble. It could be fixed if the U.S. offered to pay for medical school in return for lower cost service as germany does to doctors. And if we broke the medical school cartel and ramped up the number of doctors like we did during world war 2.

Save hard- as in 50%. I did and was able to retire at 51- not on social security for another 16 to 19 years.

Another stock market decline is coming soon (probably in calendar 2015). Hopefully 20-30%- but it could be another 50% hit. When the 100dma crosses back above the 300dma again after the bottom- that's when you put the money in and let it rise for years without having to do anything. That will multiply your savings.

So California Pacific lays off 500 existing IT workers to replace them with H1B workers who will be paid 2/3 the cost, forces the existing workers to train their H1B Infosys replacements if the u.s. workers want their severance- and forces them to sign NDA's if they want their full severance.

http://www.computerworld.com/a...

And people wonder why millenials are doing poorly in this kind of environment. California Pacific's layoff seems blatantly illegal (how can you say you need H1B's because you can't find american workers with the skill set when you are LAYING OFF EXISTING WORKERS to replace them with H1B's????) but many other companies are doing the same thing by eliminating jobs at site "A" and immediately starting up the jobs at site "B".

Look- if the companies were foreign companies- we might protect workers or at least get lower prices. But as it is we are expected to pay full prices for the product here while the company uses discount labor.

Here is a blatant obvious case-- will someone do something about this? At least the conservative talk radio is finally mad about the issue. In the past it was only the democrats. How many jobs have to go before something is done?

Why enter a field when you are directly competing with people who can go home and live well on $15k a year?

Aye... sort of irritating that the article on California Pacific laying off workers to replace them with H1B's from Infosys doesn't get approved for anyone submitting it and this gets approved twice. Laying off u.s. workers to replace them with H1B's. That sounds directly illegal and could be a tipping point in the struggle against H1B's since conservative talk radio is riled up over it too for a change.

I should actually correct myself slightly: Wal-Mart (and others) have some in house drivers and some outsourced.

BTW, in discussions of the transport industry, don't get distracted/lied to by the companies. Some drivers think they are owner operators, when in practice, they aren't. They will lease/buy a truck from (as an example, all of the bigs do this) Schneider. As part of the lease terms, they can only accept loads from Schneider. It should be obvious that the 'owner' is an employee who has assumed much of the risk that the company would usually take on.

ShanghaiBill has a decent reply, but he misses a point: if the automated truck is cheaper, the big companies will drive that change in a heartbeat. The trick is that someone has to be convinced that they will be cheaper. They are unlikely to automatically accept that an automated truck is safer, faster, etc. One area where they are likely to be impressed is the possibility of 24 hour operations, rather than the 10 hour per day (rough) limits of human operated trucks. In addition to (possibly) being cheaper, this will allow faster shipments for more mundane goods (there are already plenty of ways to have fast shipping, but it is cost prohibitive to do for everything) which would offer them a competitive advantage. I suspect this last point will be the thin edge of the wedge.

Too many devices.
Multiple tablets, roku, smart tv, multiple laptops, multiple computers.

If I change the password on one, I have to change them on all. If I have to change my system on one, then I have to write the passwords down.

It's not even "dumb". It's just reality.

However, so far- I've never had a password cracked and I haven't had a virus since "Your Amiga has Come Alive!" back in the early 90s.

I'm just not worth the effort most likely.

Most large companies outsource their transport to JB Hunt, Schneider, etc. Sure, the big letters say 'WalMart', but in smaller, DOT minimum sized font, it often has another name.

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time," and that's all a politician needs.

I don't vote party, except that I avoid both D and R whenever there's a candidate who doesn't want to put half the people I know in prison for smoking pot.

If anyone but Bruce Rauner had run against Quinn I would have voted for the Republican, becuase Quinn just wasn't a good governor. I think Rauner will be even worse, maybe even as bad as Ryan(R) or Blago(D), both were crooks. I don't know if Rauner is a crook but his policies are terrible. There were only two named on the ballot, so it was indeed a choice between two evils.

Look, Republicans are against the Social Security I paid into all my life and am now enjoying, against unions, without which I would have no pension, against the single payer health care system which has countries with it in place enjoying half the costs we face with far less infant mortality and longer life spans (Obamacare is really Romneycare in disguise); against the Medicare I again paid into and will get in a couple of years; against food stamps (that's simply un-Christian, yet they claim to be Christians?); against taxes (again, an un-Christian stance). Tell me, what Democrat views that the Republicans don't share are detrimental to me, a middle class retired guy?

But both parties are against pot legalization, for our insanely long copyrights, and quite a few more where there really isn't a valid choice.

Well, when a child says bye-bye, it sounds like a contraction (b'bye), but bye-bye is not a contraction. It's more like Cory Doctorow spells sidewalk: side-walk. Wnat contraction uses a hyphen instead of an apostrophe? Not bye-bye, it isn't a contraction of anything.

As to "SyFy", that's a trademark, not a word. It only applies to that bad cable channel. Hi-fi and sci-fi aren't contractions of high fidelity and science fiction, but new words made out of old ones.

I guess that could argue the validity of e-mail and e-books, though.