The article you linked has your answer only a few paragraphs in:
I uncovered confidential documents that revealed the tragic consequences of a tagging company's failure to act on a repeat offender.
The biggest problem with the current system is the disconnect between crime and punishment. That's the difference between the proposed scheme and jail (which can't be swift) and the British version (which simply isn't be enforced):
...and swift, certain punishment for any deviations...
That's not to say that there is no way that this can be abused, or that the American version will be enforced in practice any better than the British one or even whether this kind of "easy punishment" creates a moral hazard which will ultimately result in 90% of the population in a wall-less prison in the next decade. I'm only pointing out that the specific failure of the British system is something the OP has addressed in the summary.
(Disclaimer, I bought the iPhone 2G and then the 3G and was thinking about the 3GS until the iPad arrived
Please hand in your Apple Fanboy Card and leave the meeting.
The only source of truly uncooked data currently would be the raw satellite data, but NASA doesn't give that out until they massage it.
As for illegal aliens, 10 million of the so-called "40 million Americans without insurance" are illegal residents. I'd say it's a significant issue, and if you don't believe me then I'm going to bring my stuff over and setup my bed in your spare room (since you apparently think illegal entrance is a-okay).
Um, did you read the post to which you are replying?
Illegal aliens: This is a non-issue, made up to inflame the ignorant. The right way to deal with illegal aliens is through immigration law reform.
It's a non-issue in terms of a Health Care bill. There are other parts of law designed to deal with illegal immigration. The parent never said that illegal entrance is a-okay. However, by your argument, it's a-okay to deny coverage to 30 million legitimate American residents because there exist 10 million illegal ones.
Frankly, I'd just rather be rich....I'm willing to do just about whatever it takes to get there...
Look, if you'd really wanted to be part of the club, you'd have been born into a richer family. Sorry for your poor foresight in the womb.
Life is short, I'd rather live comfortably the rest of my years, rather than be poor, scraping for a living an idealistic...
Yes, and that is exactly why the system works. People, even fairly rational and intelligent people, are convinced that A) there is a way to get into the upper echelon of society, and B) that is the only way to be happy and/or comfortable.
The fact of the matter is, you are really unlikely to ever make it there and that there are many, many other ways to be happy. But most of those don't increase the GDP as much as working you like a mule until you die.
It's not like making a game, with rules and all, really makes that much difference if they just decide that because you are playing the game by the rules, that you are somehow bad because you succeed? So, you can play the game by their rules, so long as you lose?!?!?
I'm sorry, I got a little confused there; were you talking about casinos or the entire financial industry?
I don't think you quite understand who works for whom, here. If the goal is to vacuum as money out of The Masses' wallets and into the pockets of the rich, then obviously the incentives should be for "investing".
And this is not some kind of conspiracy, here, this is simply a lot of people trying to act in their own best interests and, in the case of Wall St and Washington, succeeding. Unfortuately, because of the way our financial system is set up, that is at the direct expense of Joe Six-pack. Until your average person becomes a little more savvy and realizes that more than half The Economy is a Ponzi scheme, this will continue. Sadlly, it is likely that by the time Joe Six-pack gets wise, Wall St and Washington will have moved on to bigger and better money vacuums.
Dealing with the problem of pure staff accumulation, all our researches ... point to an average increase of 5.75% per year. -- C.N. Parkinson