At 120 hours a week you don't have much time to spend any of that windfall, and by the time you do have time to go shopping you're spending it in India.
There's not even enough time left to sleep, eat and shower - one ought be skeptical of the claims.
Wealth of Congress Jumps $150 Million.
What does the wealth of congress-critters have to do with what I said? Yeah, they're all for sale, we've known that for a long time - that is how we end up with all these shitty pro-corporate laws because the people can't pool up enough money to outbid the large corporations.
This link substantially refutes your assertion about the South => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
No, that argument is completely tangential. Money going to a state is not inherently welfare nor is it inherently based on the wealth of the people who live there. I'm pointing out if you compare the money the state contributes to the federal budget (by way of individual income tax) to the money they get back (by way of projects their congress-critters push through), you'll find those ratios are higher in the south.
It's kind of hilarious that a bunch of self-styled libertarians need to have a leader cult, isn't it?
Almost as hilarious as the fact that the leader who wants to bring about the greatest (in scope) fascist revolution in this country is pretending to do it in the name of "liberty".
That sounds suspiciously like an ad-hominem argument. "Most average" Ob/Gyn? What does that even mean, other than to convey dark undertones?
I am using that because his followers make a huge deal about the number of babies he has delivered. However considering how long he was a practicing Ob/Gyn, that number is actually not particularly impressive - particularly if he was the main or only practicing Ob for a moderately populated area.
Shouldn't we be considering the merits of his argument, rather than his background?
From what I have seen, so far all he has been saying is that we're doing it wrong. I haven't seen anything from him about how to do it right. Naturally, his followers jump all over it as gospel.
Obama's Ebola czar (Ron Klain) is a lawyer and former chief-of-staff. Do you think *he's* qualified to tell us what we're doing wrong?
The Ebola czar is supposed to help manage the response. Just as the Surgeon General does not perform surgeries while a member of the cabinet, the Ebola czar is just a manager.
What the heck are you getting at? What's your purpose in posting this?
My point is that there are a lot of people - including one particular cult leader / politician / retired physician - telling us that we're doing it wrong. I have not seen any of these people do anything other than bitch and moan about it being done wrong; I most certainly have not seen them propose anything other than what we are doing.
Hell any proposal for the government to do anything would be automatically rejected as "the wrong thing" by Ron Paul as he is against all forms of government spending, regardless of how many lives are at stake (excluding, of course, his own).
There's a rapid diagnostic test that is developed and can be at West African airport departure gates in less than three months if the FDA gets out of the way. I know, it's only nutters like the NPR health sciences correspondent going on about this - was Dr. Paul also saying crazy things like the government is making the situation worse? Instead, they should totally go ahead and implement a travel ban so people sneak into the country with ebola instead of coming through the airports.
Meanwhile nobody in the US is infected with ebola and cattle are still far more dangerous, right? Wait - fear, fear, fear! Give us power and
No. You cannot say "we're a country of low violent crime except for all the violent criminals".
I'll bet you see the fallacy in that argument.
p.s. And I don't mean to imply anything like I think it's like Lefties' stupid idea of a "hate crime", where somehow the crime is worse if there's something more sinister going on behind it. The damage is the damage, so the crime is the crime. Being primarily motivated by trashing the system versus primarily by empowering oneself doesn't make the crime any worse. It just means there's something additional the voters ought to be watching out for from that "representative".
It's not near as sinister as intentionally trying to give capitalism a few good licks, because one despises it. But it is criminal.
What the other replies said to this guy about average vs local density is perfectly correct. But even in low density areas, this is STRICTLY an upfront capital issue. Only the original install costs much more. The increased service delivery cost once you have the larger amount of fiber per customer installed is barely worth discussing except for the accountants who finally figure out that the US suburbs should be paying 1.87 cents per GB rather than 1.74...it would be those kinds of numbers.
The article says it plainly: in dense apartment areas, $280 per install; US housing, $2200. But really, what's $2200? A one-time investment that pays off over what, 40 years? The copper lines to my house date to 1954, the TV cable to 1973. The asset lifespan exceeds the 40 year max that even a large utility can get to pay down an investment. So even with interest (which these days is tiny, by the way, but lets use 4%), it's about $100/year added to your bill to pay off your install, unless you want to pay up front.
God, it's such a crap argument in so many ways - so unworthy of a nation that was among the first to bring in electricity and then phone and then cable, the last especially to provide so much less utility (57 channels and nuthin' on...) than Internet...but it comes up every time. That 57 channel TV cable was DONE, jack, between about 1970 when I first heard talk of it, and 1980 when everybody had switched to it. Here we are 20 years after everybody started wanting on the Internet, and virtually no new lines strung, they're still using the 1930s phone wires and the 1970s TV cables that were already paid for...but charging you like they had.
The people making these excuses for them are among the robbed, and they should just stop.
What if (IF!) there was an imbalance, and the people of the state felt as though Milwaukee were sucking them dry, and Walker was merely leveling the playing field? Same behavior pattern as, say, Washington D.C. draining the rest of the country, in the vampire fashion?
That is quite an IF statement there. We already know that on the national level it does not parse out the way you want it to; the states with the highest ratio of (money back from the federal government) : (money paid to federal government in taxes) are all in the south where people are bitching that the federal government is holding them down.
Of course we all know that conservative capitalism depends on keeping some economic classes down as allowing everyone to prosper is bad for business. Setting up a deliberately crippling tax system to prevent people from climbing the socio-economic ladder is one way to do that. Making sure that quality education is only available to certain voting classes is another (that goes hand-in-hand with the previous).
I want them to have the tools that they might realistically need
I do too. I just don't want them to have those tools be less obtrusive or noticeable.
There's already some statistics on departments that have started using wearable cams for their officers, and the drop in police use of force, and in citizens' complaints about police abuse, are quite remarkable.
If police behave better when there are eyes on them, I don't want to take ears off them.
I realize your argument is more reasonable, by the way. Just so you know I'm aware of that. I'm just still a little raw from a summer with so many examples of the negative results when local municipal police officers become Tommy Tactical. I'm not talking about SWAT teams, I'm talking about regular rank and file officers.
I live two blocks from the Chicago Police Academy - walk the dog around the campus every day - and after decades of seeing the department start to hire more professional men and women, it's disheartening to see ex-Blackwater commandos training them in urban warfare.
Seafile. Got it. Thank you.
By comparing them to those to the south of them?
I cannot argue with that. So, let's say, "relatively level-headed" compared to the world's most violent people with indoor plumbing.
A list is only as strong as its weakest link. -- Don Knuth
