Don't tell me there will be plot holes in a space opera.

And you have the Marines, who are just now getting some used TRS-80's from the Army and Air Force.

I'm going to go way out on limb here and say that nursing is more frequently done by the mothers.

How are you going to stop the wealthy from getting better services? Will you shut down the Harvards and Yales? Force them to teach who you deem worthy?

This "public" you speak of which will dole out education to those approved -- who are they? The same elected officials and their agents who have caused the current problems? You don't think this will lead to only the best connected getting the premium schools?

At least in a free market a poor person with talent can take a loan to go to a good school. The best schools will continue to want the most talented people.

Also, risk shouldn't necessarily be borne by the universities, but by the lenders. A student would probably end up with a credit score for education loans based on a universities success, their own academic history, their chosen field's ability to repay, etc... The poor would definitely be able to attend an elite university in this fashion, they just might not be able to study 18th century French literature.

One of the major causes of the high price of college is the easy availability of loans. College students are not price sensitive. Lenders are not risk sensitive since these loans are either government backed or non-dischargeable.

Today's solution *is* a non-market solution. It is a government created situation which, of course, means the same people who caused the current problem will be screaming for even more government to solve it.

No. I don't want to fund the current crop of college students. There is no accountability that they are doing anything worthwhile. The vast majority of degrees are meaningless.

Let the market fund the schools instead of government loans and non-dischargeable debt. The college price bubble would crash and true lenders could actually enter the market.

What am I saying?! Let's just give away more money that we really don't have.

John Edwards and his kind are the reason. Many malpractice suits don't have any scientific basis, it's just a matter of running a sympathetic "victim" in front of a jury.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/aug/16/20040816-011234-1949r/?page=all

While some of the material may have been what those sympathetic to Manning might call "whistelblower" material, the majority of it was probably much more mundane. Even so, releasing the boring stuff compromises our sources, whether they are electronic or human intelligence. Many documents are classified much more strongly because of how we obtained the material than what the material actually is.

Some boring piece of correspondence will have some boring detail about how one person went from home to the grocery store and it will be pieced together that his driver is the an intelligence source. It turns out this guy wasn't even an agent, he just has a conversation at a bar with a friend about his day. But these documents get released, one thing leads to another and some poor driver ends up getting beaten.

But none of this matters, because we don't like Bush.

Typically this is holding the power button for a few seconds.

Not sure who you mean by "everyone else", but when I search for reviews the only negatives that I find are questions whether a new car company can make it. There is very, very little negative about about any of the actual cars. Things like "rear headroom is cramped", stuff like that.

http://www.automobilemag.com/features/awards/1301_2013_automobile_of_the_year_tesla_model_s/viewall.html

Explain to me how having additional sources of energy would raise the price of natural gas.

I disagree. It is more than a fad in the sense that an e-ink reader actually improves reading in a number of ways. It is lighter than a single book. Can hold thousands of books. There is no curve to the page and can be easier to read than paper. It will sit flat on its own.

When "lying on the couch at home" it is superior to a regular book in every way. There are pros and cons for buying it since there are limited options to buy (but instant delivery) and there is no resell value of an ebook.

Not a fad, just a luxury.

My point is that fixing the tax code is never in the direction of simplification. It always gets more complicated which means more people lobbying and more politicians taking more money.

The low corporate taxes now *are* the result of many many fixes. Yet people go back to the government and want *more* fixes instead of rolling things back and simplifying it because they all want to keep their particular fixes (hey, I want my mortgage deduction!).

Government makes stupid laws.
Companies follow those laws.
This is the fault of the companies and requires more government.

"essential", "sharply", "emergency"

Yea, nothing vague there.

It's the masses voting to take what isn't theirs, plain and simple.