Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Who cares (Score 1) 571

It's not only the housing but costs for providing social security is unsustainable with the current flow of asylum seekers. It doesn't take more just few years and even 100 % taxation wouldn't be enough to provide social security for these asylum seekers. Although some of the asylum seekers may be able to find jobs, the traditional levels of employment have been very low for many of these groups (for example, the biggest asylum seeker groups in Finland are Iraqis and Somalis and even during better economic times, they have had about 15 % employment (not unemployment) rate).

And within surprisingly short time, the local population would become minority, unless the social security system collapses before that and the flood of asylum seekers stops. And if history tells something, it quite often means very bad times for the original population (e.g. Palestinians, Indians, Aboriginals etc).

I am afraid that if it this flood is not stopped in one way or another soon, there will chaos or even wars in large parts of Europe.

Is this because they refuse to work, or because the locals won't hire them? I find it a bit hard to believe that somebody who was a pediatrician in Syria will come to Sweden and decide to go on welfare.

Comment Re:Oh, that's ironic (Score 1) 571

The second hit is a piece in the Wall Street Journal.

The piece mentions nothing of immigrants, Muslims, or anyone else filing a petition or calling for a ban. It does mention that Christian Conservatives want to exclude all immigrants from festivities and Bavaria in general.

Having read ALL the first 20 links, it appears that the petition to ban Oktoberfest was submitted by the same Christian Conservatives and that all names and signatures were fraudulent. But I guess since these fraudsters aren't brown, we can now pretend the petition never happened.

I see it now.
Monday "Conservatives ban immigrants from Oktoberfest"
Tuesday "Muslim alcohol-hating immigrants boycott Oktoberfest"
Wednesday "Conservatives demand compulsory Oktoberfest attendance from immigrants"

Comment Re:Oh, that's ironic (Score 1) 571

"How about we relocate some ISIS scumbag next to your house or apartment?"

According to TFA, Jobb not only hates European countries for letting those "refugees" flood in, but he also hates the US for fighting back agains the same set of forces.

My reasons:
(1) I want to protest against American imperialism, which I regard as the cause of most of all evil in the world: wars, tyranny, poverty, migration.
(2) I want to protest against EU tyranny, which is mostly the result of US imperialism.
(3) I want to demonstrate my sovereignty, something I would welcome to see much more often in science and politics.
In particular, I dislike that the USA and the EU aggressively promote a way of life that conflicts with my own way of life. I dislike the flood of immigrants they caused to come here - come here to replace unprofitable Europeans like me.
After so many years of hard work on TREEFINDER, I have still not been paid any reward.
I want to stress that this license change is not against my colleagues in the USA, but against a small rich elite there that misuses the country's power to rule the world.
The USA is our worst enemy. I have collected many links to background information, including some in English language, here.

Comment Re:Oh, that's ironic (Score 1) 571

There are basically 3 choices in Syria; side with Iran and restore Assad's Shiite reign of terror. Side with ISIS and institute a new, Sunni reign of terror. Of support one of the "moderate" rebel groups, who wouldn't have a snowball's chance in Hell even if they all got together.
So I can't blame Obama for taking a "I don't need this crap" attitude. Let the world's Sunni terrorists turn their sights on Russia for a while when Putin starts bombing ISIS.

Comment Re:How racism? (Score 1) 571

Nationalism, yes.

But wanting to stop the flow if illegal immigrants is not racism, because you don't care what color they are - just that people should immigrate legally, so that they can come in at a rate that they can mesh well with existing society.

That is merely realizing that a national identity has value, and is worth protecting...

Mind you, I disagree with how they are trying to protect against immigration - what if some of the people they have blocked are supporters of their cause? Perhaps instead they should demand public statements on websites of the companies denouncing illegal immigration.

he's not against illegal immigration, he's just against immigration.

Comment Re:Do you own stock in insurance companies? (Score 2) 232

You should. If there is anything you can count on, it is that this will lead to more revenue and profit for them. Just as the Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2010 (more commonly called "The Affordable Care Act" or "Obamacare") was the greatest corporate handout in the history of government, you can count on the insurance industry making plenty of money off of this as well. The longer an insurance company can deny payment for services, the greater the chances are that they won't have to pay it at all.

Oh, Medicare Part D was WAAAY bigger handout to corporations than ACA.

I disagree. Medicare Part D only allows Medicare users to purchase prescription coverage, but does not force it. Some people opted not to buy it for any number of reasons. The ACA, however, makes every living American an obligate consumer of the health insurance system and most of us have no option but to buy it from a for-profit company. Couple that to the fact that it gives them even more power over the consumer than they already had (which was not easy to do, but congress found a way!) and it is hard to see how anything could ever be a bigger handout.

But Medicare D specifically prohibits the government from bargaining with drug manufacturers over drug prices; while medicare haggles with doctors, hospitals, even the pharmacists themselves over their fees. The result is hedge fund managers buying up rights to a drug and jacking the price up to $750. The result is that US residents pay more for their drugs than any other country. The result is Americans sneaking into Canada or Mexico to buy drugs they can't afford; or getting suckered in by ads for "Canadian pharmacies" on the internet. According to the 2013 Medicare trustees report (“General Revenue”, Page 111), through 2012, Medicare Part D added $318 billion to the national debt; and Medicare Part D will add $852 billion to the debt over the next 10 years.

Comment Re:How Much? (Score 1) 232

Will costs increase because doctors now have to hire more people to encode patient's charts? They already have at least one, very expensive, employee dedicated to that now. This is a typical government response to a fake problem...more rules, more crap, more costs.

The thing is that any given doctor does 90% of his/her work within maybe a dozen codes. Your garden variety family practitioner will have little use for accidents due to weightlessness or burns from flaming waterskis, and will go on coding office visit new patient, office visit returning patient, immunization, annual checkup, etc. The biggest addition will be for things like fractured toe where the body has multiple choices, they will now have to code which toe, etc. but since the code is pretty standardized about what suffixes serve for these across all the different limbs, it won't be that bad.

Comment Re:ICD10 is universal (Score 1) 232

ICD-10 does not describe medical procedures, it only describes (as the name implies) medical ailments.

In the UK we have a separate coding system (OPCS) for describing medical procedures.

The one-code-system-to-rule-them-all is SNOMED CT, which almost no-one implements thoroughly because it's such a monster.

In the US we have a couple of procedure coding systems. There are CPT codes, used to describe procedures on outpatients, and ICD9 (soon to be 10) procedure codes, for inpatient procedures. It wasn't until getting inspired by this /. topic to investigate this stuff further that I learned that these ICD procedures are not actually part of the basic WHO ICD9 or 10.
as are not the ICD10CM, the "clinical modifications" which are the 70,000 codes being mourned herein; the central basic WHO ICD10 itself has only 15,000 codes.

The life of a repo man is always intense.