Having plans like this public and running these drills hopefully means we never have to find out.

And destroying without a shadow of a doubt North Korea's ability to hit us with another Nuke probably means such overkill with nuclear bombardment of the possible silo locations that almost nobody in North Korea would survive.

I never want to find out just how far we would go in that scenario, but I imagine it's far.

Ok, here's my quote about an idealized capitalist society. Now I didn't say that was my ideal society, I could have been a communist and have written what I wrote. All I did was point out what the two idealized societies are. But anyway, but here's what I wrote:

So in a ideal capitalist society, a person would be encouraged to save everyone a million man-hours because if he made something that useful he'd become rich.

In this world, this man is not compensated for the millions of man hours he saved, but he is able to get rich from his invention by selling what he made because it's so useful (and presumably since it's an invention and not just a skill, rare). Useful + rarity could be considered supply and demand here.

So in a ideal capitalist society, a person would be encouraged to save everyone a million man-hours because if he made something that useful he'd become rich.

In an idealized communist society, it's to each according to need and from each according to ability, so that person would be encouraged to save everyone a million man hours for no reward, but just because he has the ability.

In your idealized society, you think he should be paid based on... how many hours he worked? Your hybrid economic system removes both the altruistic motive of communism and the reward motive of capitalism.

So you've invented the worst economic system possible. Congrats!

This is a fantastic comment, but it leaves something important out. I've also been very impressed with BPs actions after the accident, they've been trying everything anyone can think of and aren't skimping. Before the accident, it's another story.

They acted absolutely appallingly which allowed this to happen in the first place. Always putting speed above safety and a culture of shifting blame is the real cause of this. Watching the 60 minutes episode on this, it's absolutely disgusting how they acted. I hope they're hurt badly enough that they never recover.

In the book "Before the Dawn" it says that the idea that we reproduced with neanderthals is effectively ruled out due to genetic distance. Neanderthals were encountered by modern humans in Europe, and so Europeans should have more genetic distance from other peoples if we had bred with them.

It's funny because free markets encourage monopolistic behavior, and any kind of antitrust activity is regulation of the otherwise free market.

Only if you think that mothers and fathers are the same and interchangeable.

I think most of us think they're not, and there's biology to support that (hormones, pheremones, breast feeding, etc). Of the people I know who think mothers and fathers are interchangable, none of them have raised kids.

Right - a independent, successful woman who has plenty of options decides - makes the conscious choice - to stay home and raise her kids, and that's still an issue of sexism?

Stop telling people what to think. Women, and everyone else, have the right to self determination. Oh but she made a choice you don't approve of, so clearly we can't take her decision seriously as being her decision, after all, she made the wrong one. Did I get that right?

If someone wants to stay home and raise their kids, you have no business telling them what to do. Why don't you look at it as sacrificing her career in order to make sure her kids are raised well? Can't you respect her decision enough to not view her as a victim but look at her as someone who did something noble? And it was noble, so have a little respect.

Valuable in the sense I'm using it means the amount of compensation you can get for it. I don't mean moral value, or value to society, or any other meaning of value, just the amount you get paid. The amount you get paid is dictated entirely by how much you're worth to an employer (demand) and how easy that position is to fill (supply), which has no moral judgments in it.

I'm not saying people shouldn't do selfless things, or accept lower paying jobs that help people.

Also, jobs that have a high social benefit, their salaries are also regulated by the same forces and are not always low. Doctors get paid a lot because it takes a smart person ten years to become a doctor, and they are very much needed and provide a great benefit to society. An engineer who can design a new hybrid car is the same.

There are no moral judgments involved, you're simply selling your services on an open market.

Exactly. In your example supply for the (level of) service you provide would be extremely low.

You don't get paid based on how much you or anyone else thinks you deserve. You get paid based on what salary you can command, which is regulated by supply and demand.

It's not an outrage at all that one kind of job doesn't get the same salary as another. If you want more money do something more valuable, which will be something there is a lower supply and/or a higher demand for.

Well, the production of things like LCD screens are naturally resistant to being driven by market economies.

You need hundreds of millions of dollars in investment before you can make a single screen, so naturally there are only going to be one or a small number of companies capable of making them. I think this is a trend we're going to see more of with different products, as producing high tech things isn't conducive to having a large number of small manufacturers. Who in the world can make the an intel chip?

Since this trend is natural and basically unavoidable, we have to step up antitrust investigation and prosecution. Markets don't always occur naturally, sometimes monopolies occur naturally, and then you need government intervention to turn the monopolies or trusts either into competitive markets or into into regulated monopolies if that's impossible.

Why isn't there an automatic "-1, paranoid delusional mental midget" moderation for when any link is posted that has any association with Alex Jones?