> Rising health care costs will bankrupt us in 20 years.
Health care costs will continue to rise until they become too expensive - at that point they'll level off. Supply and Demand.Comment Posted By Arthur On 28.07.2009 @ 13:19
What's the problem with requiring all future Presidential candidates to prove they meet the Constitutional requirements?Comment Posted By Arthur On 22.07.2009 @ 11:11
It is equally fanciful to blame “right wing hate speech” emanating supposedly from mainstream conservative media outlets for this guy’s actions.
It's peculiar how that works; Hollywood can corrupt our children with their images, and video games and music can turn teens into stonecold killers, but calling abortion doctors 'murderers' and saying the President is a terrorist-lover obviously can have no effect on anyone at all.Comment Posted By Arthur On 12.06.2009 @ 22:18
Too bad the Bulls couldn't bash the Celtics faces in their own mystique. However, it's rare for a rebuilt team to do well in it's first pressure playoff experience. Next year, those players will know what a Game Seven is like. Then you'll see what kind of team you have.Comment Posted By Arthur On 4.05.2009 @ 01:36
> Returning to “an economic cycle of bubble and bust” is, I’m afraid, historically unavoidable. If you are going to have free markets, you are going to have periods of prosperity and periods where the markets “correct” imbalances. If Obama wishes to repeal the business cycle,...
There we see the key to understanding Obama's mistake. He actually things the economy is simple enough that the government can manage it and control. It's not. It's too complex for any man or group of men to understand - much less manage effectively.
Sure, there are general prinicples that usually work - but you can't fine tune the economy enough to get rid of the peaks and valleys of the business cycle. I'm pretty confident you can wreck it, however.Comment Posted By Arthur On 25.03.2009 @ 17:57
> If Obama “fails” it will mean this nation will go into an economic tailspin ...
And if he succeeds I suppose we can look forward to "Great Depression II - This Time, It's Personal".Comment Posted By Arthur On 4.02.2009 @ 21:01
> The goal is to discover those planets in the “Goldilocks Zone” or habital zone, where water can exist in liquid form and planetary temperatures would at least give life a chance to arise. It’s called the “Goldilocks Zone” because the orbit would place the planet in a zone not too cold and not too hot but “just right.” This is a narrow zone indeed if you think about it. Of our two closest planetary neighbors, Venus is probably too close to the sun for life to have arisen (other factors like a runaway greenhouse effect also doomed life there) and Mars may be at the outer edge of the habital zone, having seen liquid water early in its formation ...
Don't get too dogmatic about this Goldilocks zone. A lot depends on the size of the planet. Make Mars 4 or 5 times more massive, it holds on to it's atmosphere and there'd be liquid water on it's surface today. Give Venus a big ass moon like Earth has, it strips off some of the extra atmosphere and maybe Venus ISN'T too close under those conditions.
Heck, Earth isn't in the Goldilocks zone. The daylight temps on the moon are far too high for liquid water - therefore, anything at Earth's distance is too close to the sun.
It's the combination of distance and the planet's atmosphere that you need to know. I don't know if Kepler is fancy enough to tell us that.
Still, it's worthwhile.Comment Posted By Arthur On 28.01.2009 @ 19:46
> Tony was injected with a ‘hyperthermic’ compound?
HYPOthermic. They lowered his body temperature (mainly his brain) until they could get him to place where they could do whatever surgery was needed. It's becoming standard practice on heart attack patients in New York city. (but I don't know about the injection part - that might be 24-tech-babble)Comment Posted By Arthur On 14.01.2009 @ 09:59
(ref Spanish Civil War)
> But we have the advantage of 20/20 hindisight and at the time, fighting on the side of those who supported liberal democracy was the correct moral choice.
Huh? Which side of the SCW supported liberal democracy?
Or are you saying that because some members of the ALB weren't commies that the ALB was on the right side?
> Fighting Franco was almost certainly the right thing to do.
I'm no fan of Franco but I'm not convinced that having Stalin (or a Stalinist puppet) running Spain would have been the "the correct moral choice".
I agree with all your points. At the time, however, it was a little murkier and you may recall that the commies were seen as a better choice than the fascists back then. Plus, we didn't know back then how the communists would take power by sweeping aside all opposition and ruthlessly crack down. That didn't become clear until after the war when it was repeated several times in eastern Europe.
ed.Comment Posted By Arthur On 3.01.2009 @ 14:41
> In short, the left is apt to unquestioningly take what al-Qaeda and Obama say at face value while dismissing the reports of their own government.
But, soon, they'll be accepting the reports of their own govt. CHANGE!Comment Posted By Arthur On 26.12.2008 @ 00:35