First, what is the iPad? It's an oversized iPhone (or iPod Touch) without the ability to call people.
This goes back to the "Shreddies Diamonds" commercial, by not changing the product the slightest bit but pushing a huge marketing campaign surrounding the product people actually think something new has been created.
The sad truth is that people are way to gullible and don't see that these companies are great at marketing and that very little actually goes into R&D;.
What does "a keen scientist" mean exactly?
Considering that I'm actually studying Physics at a University Level, does that constitute "a keen scientist"?
Your argument is quite flawed. A technology working does not imply complete and total understanding of a technology. Think about this logically for a moment: did we understand the effects of radiation before creating radio transmitters/receivers? No. Did we understand the effects of fossil fuel burning before running gas-powered cars? Again, no.
My argument isn't that Nuclear Power doesn't have the potential to be the way forward; but that it lacks a fundamental understanding in order to be a clean and safe alternative at this point in time.
The facts speak for themselves: we have no long term plan to deal with the waste generated by these facilities. It's pretty simple.
Also, running around telling people you are "a keen scientist" doesn't mean anything. "Finding this insulting" is just plain stupid.
Come to Canada, talk to me after you've seen when public health care truly is.
And besides, in my view, the role of Government is to offer the services that would be unprofitable to any public/private corporation and that are deemed necessary by the community at-large.
Arguing is fun, if done right. I enjoy all arguments Religious, Political, Philosophical, they all required the defense of a certain stance, and contain the ability to change stance.
As long as the rebuttals are intelligent, I'm good either way.
"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong." -Gandhi
Those of us who, even slightly, adhere to Catholicism are taught to "forgive and forget".
Although we can seek forgiveness, the best approach (according to the church) is allow God to make any final judgments. Simply turn the cheek.
Although I do agree the Cost of the system and wages for the average citizen are the problems, I have to disagree with how to fix them.
With many of the problems of our time, they come from either extremely lax regulation or no regulation at all. This is an extremely sad statement on human nature.
The another (unmentioned) part of Socialism is that society helps you when your in need. Sure the Baby Boomers are going to be literally siphoning money out of the US tax payer, I know they are in Canada. But what happens when you reach that age? Are you going to be able to pay medical costs? Are you going to enjoy paying medical costs?
It's a tit-for-tat situation. Sure your covering the costs of others now, but someday others may be covering your costs. And I'm pretty sure, unless your secretly Bill Gates, you, nor your family, have an infinite money source.
First punctuation is something to be learned. Second stereotypes and racism tend not to created strong arguments.
"[...] gets its hands into old hillary tired it failed this will fail too obama get your cotton picken hands out of it and create jobs [...]"
Public Health Care means government regulated Health Care, prices are tightly regulated, costs are tightly controlled. Because it is government regulated, one, Jobs are created and, two, Job security is created. You can have many Jobs, but you would probably prefer to have Job security.
And in case your confused; Job Security means that I don't have to stand in an unemployment line every couple of months. It also means I can read and write.
Being from Canada, I can tell you first hand the pros (and cons) of Public Health Care.
I can tell you that because Health Care is free for everyone (this is a generalization, actual costs vary by province (or territory)), one, I break my arm and call an ambulance without a very strange bill appearing later. Two, the financial burden of Health Insurance is taken off the plates on the individual families, many of whom could not afford it. Instead Health Care is paid for through the province in which you reside. Should you want Private Health Care, it is available.
I can also tell you that often Hospitals are backed up. Not enough staff is usually the case. Lots of the infrastructure (buildings, etc...) are getting older, and may not be being maintained effectively. This is a typical effect of placing, one, health care costs on a single party and, two, in the hands of elected officials. Often the budget doesn't allow for many of the things that are required by the Ministry of Health, or the politicans charged with making decision don't understand the pros and cons.
All in all, I would not change the system, just amend it. Socialism (one of the governing philosophies in Canadian politics), allows for the freedom of the individual while taking care of the needs of the community. Any person in the Province of Ontario (for example) has the right to education, health care, etc... And the province provides these rights to the province. Education is free until Grade 12, and Health Care is almost always free.
"6.7 million Americans out of work, 12 to 20 million Illegal aliens at work in our country. You do the math."
I have. Dare I say it, there are Americans out of work with no intentions to return. Many others have psychological issues, barring them from adapting the lifestyle.
"The argument for uncontrolled immigration was 'they do the jobs we don't want to do and if we kick them out it will hurt our standard of living'."
That's not necessarily true. In fact that could even be considered a tad elitist.
"We need the jobs now and they server no purpose any more. Let them go work hard at home where they can help raise the standard of living of their own countries."
Besides the spelling mistake (serve), the reason why they came here in the first place is that either they can't find meaningful work at home or the work they can find does not support the family they have.
Again, dare I say it, Part of the reason for the low standard of living within "their own countries" is the actions of many of our ancestors, and our continued ignorance to their negative effects. The Fact of the matter is that European (and even American) Colonialists settled many areas, without permission. They began to profit off of those areas, and when they finally left, left social chaos and a lack of natural resources.
The Americans and the British (French and Spanish by proxy), have been among the worst for this profiteering. We have, one, created huge countries on Native lands without permissions and do not show them even the slightest "thanks", and, two, Countries we once occupied have become overcome with corruption and anarchy. Proofs? Somalia (as well as other African Nations), Lots of South America, and Most of the Middle East.
I say "We", because I am of Scottish Ancestry (part of Great Britain), and do understand the negative effects of the choices of the country of my ancestors; as well as my current nation. I try not be ignorant to the global poverty our ancestors caused.
Let's Look at the inanity of this concept. If we were to kick all illegal immigrants out of the USA; only the Native Americans would be left. The Majority are immigrants from Europe, Asia, etc... (the old world), who came and settled here without permission from the Native American tribes. Grant it, this phrase isn't 100% true, but close enough to, that that's irrelevant.
Besides, I don't usually hear about Illegal Immigrants who are unwilling to work.
I have two issues with the Problem of Evil Argument.
One, define evil without good. Try. I dare you.
Evil and Good cannot be defined without each other. If one cannot exist without the other, than do either really exist? If Good and Evil are inseparable, how can you say that a Good God would cause no evil?
Two, At the most, this argument strips away the characteristics of God. This argument doesn't Strip away God, but rather the Concepts associated with God by Organized Religion.
I offer an alternate theory for those who may dislike my argument, for it being to much based on concepts and language. If "God" is formed from everything in the universe, forever, if "God" is not centrally conscious, then all of the parts of "God" may not be moving towards the same end. And, if the parts of the whole do not move towards the same end, then disagreement and "evil" are most certainly likely.
Listen: Fat people are fat because of lifestyle choices. Period.
Heres an absolutely retarted situation that occurs far to often: A man drives to the gym to work out.
The Problem is that if they were to walk or run to the gym before a workout; they would end up exercising more, and being more healthy. (Obviously cases exist where they would have to drive.)
Eating is the second problem. Eating out frequently has you eating more calories than you require.
We began by burning wood, then coal, then fossil fuels. Next we move to splitting atoms? A technology we don't fully understand? Extremly hazardous waste that has no means of disposal?
Why would we want to try creating nuclear generating stations (either fission or fusion) and endanger lives, when we have a rather large one sitting above our heads day in and day out.
Solar, Wind and Hydro-electric power stations are the next step, as we don't fully understand the concepts begin nuclear fission, nor the implications it may have on future generations.
Solar is just harnassing power created by the largest nuclear generation plant we will probably ever know, anyways.
The issues arises from the principles that guide the development of each hardware and software combination.
Apple develops hardware and software together, thus Mac OSX is meant to run on specifically designed Mac Hardware.
Microsoft develops software to run on any hardware, thus Windows is meant to be universal.
So why is Mac better? Because the software and hardware is designed to work together, whereas PC's are designed to allow for universality. PC's will have more issues arise from this.
Answer me this: Where does Knowledge come from?
Without Imagination would we have conceptualized things like geometry, mathematics, sciences?
Would we have discovered the physical applications of these concepts? Would we have built the pyramids?
Imagination drives knowledge, they are inseperable. We imagine our world in order to know how to both interpret it and mould it.
My proof? The Revolution of the Personal Computer. People like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs (amongst others), imagined that one day there could be a computer in every home; a Personal Computer.
Imagination has contributed to innovation and revolution the world over, now and forever.
Knowledge is a purely human concept (as far as we know); animals follow patterns and learn the causes and effects of actions, but we cannot say they fully understand the action to begin with.
In order for the boat to have been "created", first, we acquired knowledge of water; how water flows, wind and air flow around water, depth, etc... Second, we took these concepts and created a "tool" to ride on the surface of the water, efficiently. But, without this knowledge, these concepts (ideas), we would have never ridden on the surface of the water in (what we call today) a "boat".
After, we have ridden on the boat what remains isn't the physical boat. It's the idea of the boat that we remember. Our subjective view of that boat is what remains entrenched in our mind for the rest of our lives.
To begin, I am a self-described Pantheist. However, as with many philosophies, what I believe is far to complex to be summed up in one word.
Logically, we cannot choose much of who we are. We are born into a specific family, we carry specific genes, we are named and we are raised in certain environments. This is one factor that can be used to describe who we are, and why we are who we are. The other factor is the human potential. Potential which we all carry, yet may not know. Some of us have potential in the pure and theoretically, the applied, or the inane. However, we all have potential.
God is a complex topic, one without a prove-able answer. I believe that "God" consists of everything that ever was, is and will be (otherwise known as "God" is the every changing universe). Part of my proof for this is the complex relationships (both conscious and unconscious) which occur and are (relatively) subject to every object currently in existence (and arguably that had existed and will exist).
By this point, most of us are tired of reading seemingly random points. These points are not mutually exclusive. The do occur together, daily.
My definition for the meaning of life, is that each individual human co-exists with the rest of his/her environment, will attempted to discover who he/she is (with happiness being a bi-product). And, potential is not a definitive discovery, in fact, most of the time, in the end we discover what we wanted to discover; we are who we wanted to be.
1) Teenagers already have full-time jobs, education. The old saying "less learning, more earning" doesn't apply here. In the province of Ontario (just as an example) many post-secondary scholarships are offered for provincial standard or higher level marks. The harder you work at your full-time job, the better off for any post-secondary.
2) Post-secondary;
a) Has beneficial Co-op placements, meaning you study and work for an employer. You gain both knowledge and insight into the academic community and the current working environments related to your field of study (if you so choose).
b) Leads to far better jobs in the future. Now I'm not talking about anomalies, but the majority of the middle class is educated to some degree at a post secondary institution.
