Thought I'd take one 'source' and test it just to see what it's like: [quote] Thou shalt not discriminate against thy neighbor unless they are conservative, Caucasian, or Christian SOURCE <span style="font-family: Georgia,Times New Roman,Times
If you're fat you're more likely to need health treatment than if you're thin. So having healthcare cost fat people more than thin people should help both to encourage them to address their weight problem, and also provide money to treat them if they don't. Whether you have government provided healthcare/insurance or privately provided insurance, it makes sense to have a 'fat tax'. Why should thin people have to subsidise the fat (which is what happens if both are charged equally)?
[quote] UHC is more geared to smaller populations [/quote] How/why?
[quote] I actually think the supply of Doctors will decrease [/quote] Lets assume for a moment you're correct, that even with an increasing demand for doctors, the number of doctors decreases. What would that mean? Well since healthcare is typically something you need (and hence can't cut back on as easily as various luxuries), you will have an excess demand where a doctor has say 2 people they need to treat, but only time to treat 1. In a private system that means those people can ge
[quote]Obama’s plan would be N+40 million with the same number of doctors. That doesn’t sound like a good deal to me. [/quote] The demand for doctors may increase, but so too would the supply over time, meaning it would only be a short-medium term problem.
[quote] I really wanted a kindle before, but now? never! [/quote] What did they do that was so terrible? They made a mistake, and corrected it - they removed the offending material, and compensated those affected.
It can help improve the economy by generating demand and thus helping reduce or even prevent the negative spiral of people cutting back on spending causing firms to make less money, cut back on workers/pay, causing people to reduce spending even further etc.; As for some of the specific items, the food can help stop people starve, or provide a cost efficient means of remuneration (for staff) or reward (e.g. for an event). Cleaning vegitation can help make the roads+pavement cleaner an
[quote] $2.2 million to the Seneca Foods Corporation in Marion, NY for "fruit, canned; [/quote] You'd have prefered it if it was $4m for "fruit, fresh;"?
[quote] Why do Democrats, knowing there are cameras and mics present, say one thing today and then later claim “that is not what I meant”? [/quote] For the same reasons that republicans do it?
[quote] 13 : The number of teeth that British veteran Ian Boynton pulled out himself with pliers “ because he couldn’t find an NHS (National Health Service) dentist … [he] could not afford to go private for treatment so instead took the drastic action to remove 13 of his teeth that were giving him severe pain [/quote]</
Am I right in understanding you need to be connected to the internet constantly while playing, as opposed to connecting to the internet say to activate the game, and then being able to play it from then on without needing internet connection? If so, I just don't understand it - I mean they eventually realised that needing internet connection every 5-10 days for activation was a bad idea, and now they've gone about 100 steps further and required it constant at all times?! I mean online
[quote] Then he wasn't a born again believer [/quote] So no matter how strongly someone believes, no matter what their actions etc. that further demonstrate this, they're not a born again believer if at any point in their later lives for whatever reason they lose their faith?
[quote] The bankers did not risk anything [/quote] Right, they were the model examples of non-risk takers [e digicons]:rofl:[/e] . If bankers didn't risk anything, why have they lost so much? Since they have lost things (many have lost their jobs and/or bonuses) from problems resulting from their own actions, they have clearly taken risks.
[quote] where is the hyporicy? [/quote] I see hypocracy as saying one thing but doing another - here's a quick example from these very forums: https://forums.joeuser.com/357605
[quote] I got the usual “Not everyone has the luxury of living only a few miles from work, I can’t afford to live any closer.” Awww. See, it doesn’t matter that she’s burning about 8 gallons a week of gas because she cares . It’s not really about saving the planet. It’s about feeling better about oneself [/quote] It's not that practical to try and make people only travel a certain number of miles to work since there are a scarce numb
[quote] Someone could do things without thinking of themselves [/quote] It can still be considered to have a root in selfishness though - you will benefit from something that benefits you directly, but also likely have at least some benefit (but not to as great a degree) from something that benefits someone else. Whether from a feel good factor, or just the knowledge that they're better off. For example I would be happy to know my relatives are happy, and it would make me sad if they
[quote] The reality is to be a success you have to fail most of the time. You have to risk it all. [/quote] Like the bankers did? You don't have to 'risk it all' to be successful and you don't have to fail much either - you can play it safe and be a success, and you can risk it all and be a failure. Risking it all makes it easier to achieve 'great success' (if measured by money), but also mak
[quote] The companies might go under and new ones rise, that is the way of the world. But (and I am not an economist but that is not hard to grasp) You really really need banks no matter what or everything would have crashed [/quote] Not necessarily, it would depend on the severity of the problem - if you're talking about a couple of banks, even big ones, then you would probably be able to avoid a complete crash by allowing them to fail. If every single bank is likely to go under then
What I want from an OS is something that will work - i.e. will be compatable with the various programs and games I choose to run. Unfortunately it sounds like google is pitching this OS at those people who don't care about such things, so I doubt it will prove any real competition to MS - my only hope is it acts as a small incentive for them to improve on windows more than they otherwise would.
My favourites (based on how long I played them and how much I liked them): 1. Warcraft 3 2. C&C: Yuri's Revenge 3. C&C: Zero Hour 4. Dawn of War/Dark Crusade 5. Rome: Total war Honourable mentions: Sins of a Solar Empire (wish it could've had a single player campaign) and Tiberian Sun (great fun, even if a bit dated)
I've still gone back and played tiberian sun(+firestorm) from time to time, but the original C&C+Red alert are too aged for my liking for me to want to replay them. If you're intending to play them all, I'd play them in order of age though, since once you're used to the fancy new graphics you'll hate the old ones even more (not to mention there will be some gameplay features that you'll be used to on the later ones that will be missing on the earlier ones, making it even harder to adjust)
Back in time - easier to reflect on past mistakes and how they could've been avoided than to guess at future ones and how to position yourself to benefit best. Also going forward in time could potentially mean aging more (depending on whether it's a 'fast-forward/rewind' or a 'time-jump' movement, hence meaning less time to live, or conversely more time to live if you go back in time. The knowledge of future events from going back in time is also incredibly valuable - you could make enough mo
[quote] I'm less likely to buy a game that I know will release pointless DLC for above it's worth (Oblivion) [/quote] I'm willing to bet that most of the sales will occur prior to such stages though, meaning it's effect isn't that noticeable. If a sequal is planned by the same developer+publisher on the same game, and within a moderate to short time scale after the first one, then it could have a beneficial impact on the second, but not only are those scenarios less usual for stand a
[quote] There is no need to rush to conclusions about a topic that only has come in the fore front in the last 10 to 15 years [/quote] Just because it wasn't a prominant issue say 30 years ago it doesn't mean it should be ignored. [quote] You're statement again isn't logical. You're assuming that there is a chance so we need to act now! [/quote] Please detail what is illogical about saying we should determine whether the cost of reducing our impact on gl
[quote] And another moron falls in the trap. Point made. [/quote] Yes, insults make for a very convincing argument...
JoeUser Forums
GalCiv2 Forums