Excellently put! I am familiar with the etimology of Communism, and I did take a short cut to the modern English word Community, but I'm sure you are aware that Community shares those same roots.

And my appologies for my lack of clear message. I was trying to point out that no "communist" state has ever been true communism just as no "capitalist" state has ever been true capitalism. Both are failed experiements.

What is of value though, is elements of both. The free market is incredibly powerful, but it must be contained. Just as socialist programs bring a huge benefit to the people, but must be capped to prevent excessive consolidation of power.

So what we try to achieve is a set of social programs that ensure everyone in the country can live at a minimal acceptable standard of living and an open market that allows individuals to rise and fall based on their own merits.

Some people are just so rabbidly Mcarthy about things that the word "Socialism" is immediately associated with all things evil and anti-American. While it is one of the fundamental bedrocks of our society.

-Rick

Just the opposite. The theory of COMMUNism is that everything is done by the community. There is no need for a central authority once the communities are set up.

And there-in lies the rub. The central authority will always see a need for more work from the central authority. So it never goes away. But part of its duties are to remove all other authorities, which leaves it as the sole authority. And once you have a singular authority you arrive at fascism.

It's not that communism is evil, just as capitalism is not evil. It's that they are theories that will never be implemented in reality as mankind as a whole is too imperfect to reach and maintain such a state.

-Rick

So you're OK with Socialism, just not the US Federal governments involvement in socialism? If so, you should really make that more clear.

Neither of which were ever true socialist states. They took a lot more socialist ideals, but the whole concept of socialism, or to the farthest reaches of true-communism, is that there is NO central authority. In reality, that never occurs. Someone will always take power, and typically the person most willing to do so is the person you least likely want to have it.

And the exact same thing can be said for the free markets. With out the stablising force of a strong government, a free market will eat itself and collapse. See the 1920's, 1980's, 2000's, and we'll probably see it again by the 2030's.

A rank that won't be ours for much longer. The BRIC countries are expanding at such a rate that by 2020 we will no longer hold either of those records.

-Rick

ooh! Ohh! I'll play!!

Applied Socialism:
Public Schools
Public Roads
Public Police Force
Public Fire Departments

Applied unregulated freemarket Capitalism:
Ethiopia.

True Capitalism is just like true communism. Great in theory, horrible in practice. There is a healthy balance of taking elements from both theories. Taking the socialist approach to ensuring a safety net over which a capitalist driven system can opperate. Take out the safety net, and one mistake can have catostrophic results. Build too big of safety net, and the tightrope of capitalism will get tangled up in it.

And I think we can surmize, given the US's current level of social-capitalist involvement, as compared to the rest of the modern world (G7 and BRIC), that we are not anywhere remotely close to the excessively socialist side.

-Rick

You are correct in that there are many factors different studies have tried to take into account. It depends on place too. Right now you could attack somebody in broad daylight on my street and nobody would see you. It's 20 degrees outside and people don't sit and look out their windows much. The fact remains that it's never been conclusive either way.
 
We've had a rapist on the prowl in our area recently. He knocks on your door and then forces his way in. I'm pretty sure he doesn't care a whit about street lights.
 
Rather than getting street lights up it is MUCH more effective to get employment up.

People may say they feel whatever, but there are plenty of studies that show no correlation, or even an increase in crime.
 
Light can be a great help to criminals. Not least of which they're easier to spot when waving a flashlight. Also, if your under a streetlight, EVERYBODY NOT under a light is automatically hidden from you. But when everyone is in equal lighting and can see equally, it's harder to hide.
 
    It's amazing how many people don't even know their eyes will adjust.

    Most probably some types of crime will go up and others will go down. I'll leave it to you type "street lights crime study" into google.

"Always consider the possibility that installing a light may aid criminal activity."

http://www.britastro.org/dark-skies/crime.html#noreduction

Bad guys who wave flashlights are easier to spot than bad guys who don't need extra lighting.

Oh what I wouldn't give to discover an asteroid, just so I could name it:

';delete * from celestialobjects;

-Rick

Every developer hits that point eventually. And your choices aren't necesarily limited. Assuming you're ok with a pay cut.

There are plenty of opportunities to move in the direction or Project/IT management. That's the direction I've gone. 15 years of seeing poorly run projects and trying to get them back on track has left me pretty well practiced for taking the reigns.

Switching over to the networking side of the house isn't a bad option either. There's some learning involved, and you're not going to start out as a senior architect, but you can get work with the ancilary skills you've developed.

All industries can benefit from exceptionally bright solution developers. Look into 6-Sigma training and advance your career into process improvement.

And if all else fails, get out of the office. Find yourself a lumbar jack gig, maybe come camp counciling in the summer, park maintenance in the Everglades, etc....

-Rick

You have to put it into rational terms though.

1 cubic foot of air weighs 0.0807 lbs. CO2 makes up about 0.039% of our atmosphere, so roughly 0.00315 lbs/qubic foot. 1 gram is about 0.0022 lbs.

Assuming your calculations are accurate. 1000 metric tons would be able to completely remove ALL of the CO2 in a cubic foot of atmosphere.

I am curious as to what the rate on that number is. But I think it's safe to say that in non-arid areas and places with out grey water issues, planting actual trees and grasses is a better option.

In the super dence areas, I could see this being used as a vertical solution where native plant life would be unsustainable. But I wouldn't count on it any time soon.

Time to water the spider plant.

-Rick

Most starters aren't strong enough to bust up a wrench or socket. Take out a plug maybe, possibly bend a valve, but in all likelihood, the motor would turn the engine till contact and stop.

That is assuming you are hitting the engin with the starter before hooking up the fuel and plugs. Which is usually a good idea to get the oil pump primed and heads lubricated firing it up.

That said, I have a number of wrenches that could easily fit in a cylinder with the piston at BDC. A GM 350 for instance, has a 4" bore and 3.48" stroke. On the diagonal that gives you over 5 1/4" clearance at BDC, not including the combustion chamber in the head.

9-11mm wrenches and 1/4" wrenches are common tools under the hood. Wiring brackets, trim plates, grounding lines, battery terminals, oil pan bolts, valve cover bolts, etc... They all fall into that size range.

-Rick

21 year olds are still covered by their parent's insurance (Assuming the parents have insurance). 26 is the new cut off age. If you turn 27 and get diagnosed with cancer, you're likely not going to have great options.

New job means crap benefits, but too much income to qualify for state plans.

-Rick

I would admit that there are too many people who fail to acknowledge their responsibilities, but I would venture that there are even more people who make a living by convincing/tricking people into failing to acknowledge their responsibility.

-Rick

You say that as if you think Obama is some sort of left leaning political figure. I can see where you would get that impression, but it's pretty far from accurate. The left only likes him because he isn't as far right as the GOP.

-Rick

And how does that indicate a "left" leaning political ideology?

-Rick