[quote] I don't think MS can really compete. They have no exclusives. [/quote] The advantage MS has is certainty that if you buy a game from them in 10 years time they should still be standing. You can't say that with as much confidence about any of the others out there.
[quote] If it makes you happy to think that then by all means. As I said you're free to wallow in your premature victory celebration. [/quote] Is it something about JU that brings out this side of people, or is it just the interent in general I wonder?
[quote] the real question is where do you think you're actually going with this? Are *most* of you folks really deluded enough to think that this will make the least amount of difference in the consensus scientific opinion of AGW or in any global warming policy? [/quote] No delusion it appears: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100018003/climategate-five-aussie-mps-lead-the-way-by-resigning-in-disgust-over-carbon-tax/ http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/g
[quote] Because the BBC does not report supposition [/quote] The emails are legitimate, and clearly of interest to the public. The university itself has also commeted on some of the emails, and offered their own explanation, so there is nothing to stop the BBC publishing the content of the email, and also the university's explanation alongside it. They don't need to give an opinion themselves, but I would expect them at the very least to report the basic facts+evidence.
What I've found most concerning about this is how some media outlets I trusted to at least try and appear impartial (even if they aren't fully) have just ignored this issue completely. For example the BBC devoted an article about it, where all they said was that the emails had been hacked, and refused to spend 1 line discussing their content. Contrast this to the telegraph (linked from the OP's link) which gives you content of some of the more eye catching emails. Not to say the telegraph is
[quote] What I and most other reasonable people believe... Making anyone who disagrees with you by definition unreasonable. How nice. [/quote] Since when did most mean all?
[quote] Adjusted for inflation, in what year did the average North American worker bring in the most money? The answer, is 1973 [/quote] Source please.
[quote] The bulk of the money is coming from income taxes. [/quote] The majority of the income for the federal government is not from income taxes (although they are the biggest single source)
There are more sources of revenue than just income taxes though - in theory, the government could function (albeit with greatly reduced services) without any income tax - people would still be paying other taxes though, and hence would still have 'skin in the game' and an interest in how the money was spent. Assuming it's accurate the %s on income payed by the top 1% and bottom 95% were interesting though.
[quote] the auto-manufacturing sector in Germany and Japan is fully unionized and they're doing a hell of a lot better than their American counter-parts...... hmmmm, I wonder why that could be.... [/quote] What about France? It suffers routinely from strikes in numerous industries. Unions can have a positive influence if they work to make the company better (which benefits them by making their futures more secure), but can also be a negative influence if they try and force their wages
It should've been removed because it caused the introductory section to be contradictory: All special operations units in all branches of the U.S. military and the CIA's Special Activities Division [ 14 ] employ the use of a form o
My views on a few strategy games I can remember playing moderately recently (with the main focus on the game's single player since I have a strong preference for single player campaigns over multiplayer skirmishes) Battle for Wesnoth - I'd probly give it an 8 (9 if you factor in it's free price) - good gameplay, acceptable graphics (it's free afterall), overall good fun. Galactic civilizations (+ expansions) - probably an 8 from me. A good game with loads of content with the e
[quote] What was the solution to the financial sectors problems? Conservative ideology states that they should have "pulled themselves up by their bootstraps" and sank or swim on their own credit. But that didn't happen! Instead, the private sector received a massive bailout of public tax dollars. They used that money, largely to rebuild their little house of cards and start up the predatory casino all over again. [/quote] I'd agree there, what should h
[quote who="Leauki" reply="17" id="2444260"] Moron! [/quote] I guess it was a bit moronic for me to expect someone on JU to actually back up one of their claims...
[quote] Bye bye REAL economy. Actually, it's the other way around. [/quote] Remember where the problems with the real economy started though - it was with the financial sector (that is, they suffered problems, and then those fed through to the rest of us). Also the financial economy does perform a very valuable service of making sure money is invested where it is needed. That is, the good business investments are sorted out from the ba
[quote] Excuse me? I'm supposed to prove 45,000 people a year are not killed by lack of insurance? [/quote] You're meant to back up your assertion that it is "A wild ass guess based on worst-case estimates grounded in all sorts of false assumptions". Looking at the 'evidence' you gave though you've failed to do any such thing.
[quote] So you are saying that nudity and sex scenes do not influence behavior, but depicted violence does? [/quote] Actually he's saying the opposite... [quote] how many times have you heard about somebody watching a violent action movie, then going into a killing rampage? and conversely, how many times have you heard about a couple watching a porn movie, then having sex? [/quote] Ok lets compare a horror film and a romantic film, the first with strong bloody violence
I simply can't understand it myself. I'd have thought that between love/nudity and hate/violence I'd much rather my children were exposed to the first instead of the second. I'm much more concerned about a computer game that would let my children go around shooting people, hacking at them and spraying blood everywhere than a game that would expose them to nudity. When I hear of the fuss made by some people over sexual content in a highly violent game, I shake my head in disbelief - do such pe
[quote] I want to tax the FINANCIAL economy [/quote] Bye bye REAL economy. [quote] Under this system, if you're buying stock with the intent of holding on to it for awhile (as it should be) you've got nothing to worry about. If you're a day trader who buys at 1 PM with the intent of selling at 2 PM, this will take a bigger chunk out of your pocket and discourage such practices. [/quote] Such practices should (with some conditions/exceptions) be en
[quote] If these people are getting "free" health care now (and it is being paid by the taxpayer) and the price is nowhere near 1.2 trillion dollars. Where is the benefit? [/quote] Because it can be fairer and also more efficient to only make those people who might need such a service pay for it, as opposed to everyone - that way you encourage them to get coverage and no longer need supporting, cutting the costs for the government.
[quote] H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax. [/quote] What's the issue with this as a principle? If the government already has to provide healthcare to people who can't afford it (in effect an emergancy insurance), then it should
JoeUser Forums
There will be very few people who 'take' and don't give anything either directly or indirectly, lots of people who take and then give some back, and somewho take and give much more back - it's what you'd expect in almost any tax system, since even a flat tax on everyone would achieve this result (the exceptions would be a head tax where everyone gives equally, and a regressive tax where the rich pay less in absolute terms than the poor). To look at just one form of tax and use this to classif
[quote] aeortar...it turns out he's really just a moderate conservative He might beg to differ! [/quote] No, this was one of the rare cases (on JU) of someone taking what I said, and repeating it accurately rather than saying something completely different. By most people's standards I'm a conservative. I think it rather telling of where JU lies that I'm considered a staunch liberal/socialist here. To use Leauki's 'policy summary':
JoeUser Forums
[quote] Essentially it's decreased (consumer) price-> increased demand You seem to be arguing that the price for the insurance (free?) translates into the price for the service. [/quote] I'm arguing that 1) people want more of something when it's cheaper and 2) Suppliers want to supply more of something when it's price rises [quote] I don't think you can make a difference between supplier price and consumer price. [/quote
JoeUser Forums
[quote] I understand, you just pretend that I don't to attack strawman arguments...Oh look, the bill decreases price. therefore DEMAND goes up (as you said), and SUPPLY goes down... what a novel idea [/quote] Nice try to switch the topic - if you look up I was referring to government provided health insurance in general. The reason I deliberately kept it general rather than focusing on one specific bill was because I don't have the time to go through the entirity of it and determining
GalCiv2 Forums