+1 to your comment. Some of the biggest problems in our current society trace back to making groups of people no longer groups of people - we pretend that corporations have a compass, when a piece of paper can have no such thing. We then treat the government as some external entity that oppresses us, when in theory the Great Experiment is supposed to be "government of the people, for the people, by the people" - *we* are the government. These people *are* uber. Are those people served by having morals, in so much as making money is concerned? Clearly they don't think so.
when you say something fanatical like "no republicans have ever tried to push a bill like that on the entire country" you put yourself in a group that hates helping sick people and also tends to think it's great to blow up people elsewhere (like, suffering is just great all around, I guess). You then try to use the Constitution to justify your statements - but don't really understand what is in the document at all. Such as, the Constitution directly stating there shouldn't be a standing army. The two subjects are remarkably intertwined; ACA costs a small fraction of the wars in the middle east, and at least ACA provides a
/benefit/. But hey, maybe you buck the system. Maybe you don't like our middle east involvement either - maybe you're an honest "constitutionalist." Which would be great, except for the farking part that the FFs were slave owners and treated women like crap. Stop pretending one side or the other are angels without flaws, and stop pretending the Constitution was sent by G-d. Argue something on it's own merits, not based on what some long-dead slave owner thought.
to be fair, this was only really clear starting with Omnibus - prior to that, HIPAA relied a lot on common sense and a personal sense of ethics from the reader. Fortunately, the semi-retroactive nature of it to 2009, plus Omnibus being released 9 months prior to healthcare.gov, means that yes - the government faces stiff penalties of paying itself money (amount=irrelevant, since paying self) and the BAs made $1.7BILLION for making a farking WEBSITE for fark's sake, so I don't think the 1.5M max fine will really cramp their style much.
::blink:: wait, what? Something inside me wants to know how you interpret Art1, Sect8, Clause12...just for giggles.
they can't, but the fine has a max penalty per year, and that max would just be the fed paying itself a number at which it wouldn't blink even if it wasn't paying itself. Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it won't happen - if the only penalty for underage drinking was you had to have sex with Scarlet Johansen, do you think that would work as much of a deterrent? We don't live in a world where society can decide it doesn't accept a certain behavior, and then just expect everyone to not do it regardless what the penalty might be
I can not imagine a scenario in which something *has* to be local (ie, not a term into a cluster or HPC unit of some sort), *has* to be a laptop, and *has* to have 3-6 disk slots. Are you pretending you need the multiple slots for raid for performance reasons? Are you really going to claim that an SSD isn't fast enough for you? Perhaps you have to myopic of a view, or perhaps - and this is far more likely imo, you're part of the "engineers are Gods!" crowd, and the real answer is that the engineers want an uber-laptop they can take home for personal use, on their employer's dime. Seriously, *try* to justify why it has to have those specs. I dare ya.
really? If china blocked all incoming email from google servers, you don't think that might force people outside of china who want to do business with people in china to use email services other than google? Are you
/certain/ you know how the internet works?
umm...so I guess you don't buy anything? Note I didn't give a specific something listed....you don't buy
/anything/? Fermenters, cell phones, edamame, board games, yarn, whatever?
that's quite the sense of entitlement you've got there - yes, sometimes things aren't working. So what, go outside, or maybe spend time with your familiy. Secondly, you might look into getting broadband - people are able to get decent speeds now, we no longer have to use dialup (ie, downloading something shouldn't be a concern anymore). 10 years from now I won't have a PS4 or XBox One, just like I don't play on my old atari anymore either (though I do play clones on my PC sometimes...which satisfies the nostalgia without needing rooms full of shelves to store various types of media and players). I *am* voting with my money - I'm getting something more convenient, reliable, flexible, etc. Yes, in fact, I said reliable - have you never had your house burn down, or robbed? I've had both happen, both things wiped out the entire library of everything. Now though, I log on with the various services and boom - my library is still right there. Amaaaaaazing stuff. While Sony and Microsoft should have been able to prevent the issues, they're still the victims in the situation - how about we put at least
/some/ of the blame on the people who did it?
it's still how it works. Apparently the GP doesn't even think about it but yeah, they pay to receive phone calls.
it must really bother you that the ozone layer is recovering after a global effort to fix it, huh. I mean really, it impinges on the ultra-wealthy to do whatever they want, and that's a bad thing to the likes of you...society saying enough is enough on issues that effect everyone? Horrible, it should be the 0.1% making those decisions! (misdirection is such a fun tool, eh?)
um, there can be varying degrees of something. Just because two people are attractive, for instance, doesn't mean they're equally attractive. Outright refusing to engage in honest debate however, does make someone something other than a skeptic; with so much actual data painting a relatively clear picture, if you're going to say that picture is something else then... The foundations of statistics are based on the idea that if a pattern emerges with very little deviation - very few outliers in the data - then you can be very certain (to some degree) of the conclusion. If you're going to deny the very process itself, versus the results, then we have to throw away most of what we know - not just climate change.
were I to show data that average temps on Mars increased during generally about the same time range, I could point to the cause being external (ie, something with the Sun). Thus it wouldn't be anything humans were doing. That (were there facts to back it up) would be an example of actual skepticism. Covering your eyes and yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA" is not.
the English speaker isn't misunderstanding, they're being intentionally misled. That is a very big difference. They are perfectly understanding the intended message.
Um, I don't if you're aware, but Islam didn't invent English. The word you're describing is "submission" or perhaps "conformity." "Peace" means, in English, what it means - Islam doesn't get to define that.