champu

I'm not familiar with the C-27j Spartan program, but there's a bit in the article that makes the situation clear as mud... And earlier in the article... So are they claiming that the C-27j had an ill-conceived mission but was just purchased anyway directly to mothballs, and now they are trying their best to make use of them? Or are they saying the C-27j was the right plane for the job but Lockheed convinced the military to buy more C-130s displacing the new C-27j aircraft from their original purpose? This story doesn't make any sense. They don't explain what Lockheed and the C-130s have to do with anything. In either case though... too many planes. This is the kind of thing you get when congress stops providing critical oversight of spending at the pentagon and instead just dictates spending to the pentagon.

I find roads, bridges, schools, water, sanitation, the military, disease control, the national weather service, the national park service, air traffic control and a few other things the government does pretty valuable. Right, but apart from roads, bridges, schools, water, sanitation, the military, disease control, the national weather service, the national park service, air traffic control and a few other things, what have the Romans ever done for us? Brought peace?

Yearly average we use 0.24 W/sqft of electric energy and 0.42 W/sqft of natural gas energy. (1700 sq ft, gas water heater, dryer, stovetop, oven, furnace, grill, and fireplace... no A/C) I paid more than a $15/sqft location premium to be able to say that though... My figures were for resistance heat in the Water Heater, Stove/Oven, Dryer, and Vent Fans. Right, I converted from therms/mo to watts for my gas bill above, so all told I'm at 0.66 W/sqft. That wouldn't change drastically if I had all electric appliances (it would go up a bit.) I was just giving a data point of a house with basically no energy spent on climate control and making a joke that that is one way to get well below 1W/sqft but that it costs more than $15/sqft to put your house next to an ocean.

Yearly average we use 0.24 W/sqft of electric energy and 0.42 W/sqft of natural gas energy. (1700 sq ft, gas water heater, dryer, stovetop, oven, furnace, grill, and fireplace... no A/C) I paid more than a $15/sqft location premium to be able to say that though...

You can applaud, you can not applaud, you can stand and applaud with everyone, or you can sit and not applaud with everyone standing and applauding around you, or you can sit and applaud with everyone standing around you applauding. You can grimace when no one else is doing anything, you can grimace when others applaud, you can look at people near you and then grimace in consensus, or you can grimace in solitude. You can smirk. You can smirk and then lean back or you can smirk and then lean forward. You can smirk and then give a thumbs up and then applaud and then adjust yourself in your seat and then nod and then applaud. When does the next season of House of Cards come out again? Much better acting.

You know who else capitalized "Nazi?" Hitler.

Actually, fiscally (or economically anyway), extra money given to the poor gets spent and put back in the "main street" economy. Extra money given to the wealthy will go into savings / "Wall street". I think it would only be much of a difference if the poor spend said money at small private businesses where you can get a few "hops" out of it, or if they invested in themselves through trade school or something to improve their future economic chances. If a poor person buys disposable / consumable items from big national companies or pays rent with it (driving up rent costs) then a month down the road the poor person is right where they started except now the economy has grown around them, so they're worse off and need more money to make it through the next month. You can argue, "Yay! We kept them alive for a month!" But you can't just keep giving poor people money and saying, "Here, you give this to a rich person." It may get them through the month, but now they're just a month older and in a worse position economically.

I think it's time Speakers Corner makes the leap to allowing inline images.

The cost calculus is screwed up indeed, as most people who have had a medical procedure know. What gets billed and what gets paid are complete madness. Hospital: "Oh you had a CT scan? That'll be, uh... $10,000..." Insurance Company: "Nah, we only pay hospitals $1,500 for that..." Hospital: "Close enough, that works. Oh and there is the IV fluids we gave the patient, how about another $1,500?" Insurance Company: "How about no?" If individuals could pay hospital bills like insurance companies pay hospital bills, then I could see holding people to it if they chose not to purchase insurance.

Have you seen the size of these electric motors that pull slot cars? Now think: "...and anywhere in between."

F0:C0:FF:1A:55:11

...so a new law is interacting with an old law in a way that might cause new problems for some people. I'm not sure of the point in drawing attention to how old the old law is. If you were on medication A for 20 years and a doctor comes in, sees you're on medication A, adds medication B, and you die because medication A and B don't play well together, how long you had been on medication A (or who prescribed it) is irrelevant. Alternate analogy I also like, "So what if I threw the guy off the Golden Gate Bridge? That thing has been around since the '30s!" That all being said, is the scope of the issue overstated and is the title of this thread alarmist and silly? Absolutely on both counts.

I smoked for about 9 years... around a pack a week. Some people call themselves "social smokers" and I thought of myself as an "anti-social smoker." It was my excuse to go outside, to get away from what I was working on, to get away from groups of people at parties when I needed a break, etc. Then I dated someone who also smoked for about two and a half years. Over that time smoking kinda morphed into something different, I'm not sure how to describe it. It was no longer a solitary activity that I did for any of the reasons I enjoyed it when I started. Shortly after we broke up I unceremoniously stopped smoking... that was about three and a half years ago. I don't miss it at all, but I do understand the appeal.

According to their website Vestas has 2 MW, 3.3 MW, and 8 MW platforms, but the 8 MW / 164 m diameter rotor platform is for off-shore applications. A kW is about 1.34 hp and I would wild-ass-guess the conversion efficency to be 93% so you'd be talking around 2900 hp, 4700 hp, and 11,500 hp at the shaft respectively.

Perfectly understandable by anyone who's ever had a job that pays so poorly that they barely squeek by from month to month, and need a credit card as a buffer for sudden, necessary unexpected expenses. Ever been broke and then lost your only pair of glasses? If you've been fortunate enough never to have lived on the edge like this financially, lucky you. Understandable? Sure, I guess. Appealing? No. This one and the one about living far from your place of work and having a long drive could both have the added clause, "...if at all avoidable" but I thought that went without saying.

Except the difference is broadcast TV (free, over-the-air), is using a public resource. It's like the difference between indecency laws for a public park and a privately owned strip bar. I understand the chain of authority, that wasn't really my point though.

American football has become a mess in my opinion, I only really watch it out of compulsion. All the "this is reviewable, that isn't", challenging, and making calls to maximize reviewability just makes the whole game feel like I'm watching a lawsuit. I can't remember the last game I saw where there wasn't some new idiosyncrasy of a rule uncovered. To the OP: -Another vote for not getting Fantasy Sports Leagues -Carrying balances on credit cards -Las Vegas -Choosing a home and work location that involves a long driving commute -Over-priced clothing -Celebrity news magazines/TMZ/etc.

In America we want both, which is why the Internet is the perfect invention. Non-stop crap talking, and unlimited boobies. The internet has rendered FCC regulations of obscene/indecent/profane broadcast content rather silly, in my opinion. I think sponsorship agreements create enough self-regulation in both venues where the FCC could ditch the policy and you really wouldn't see a sudden or drastic change to programming content.

The chiding that republicans (who are all assumed to be pro-life, which is its own problem) are receiving is because of pro-life people who insist on passing legislation under the banner of women's health and that has a very thinly veiled real purpose of stopping as many abortions as possible. You can't insist on using that avenue to achieve ulterior motives and then complain out of the other side of your mouth about the ACA because the government shouldn't be involved in healthcare. One that's been in the press lately is about doctors in Texas being required to have admitting privileges at a hospital within a certain distance of the clinic. This caused a dozen or so clinics to shut down. Take a wild guess who's supporting that and who's calling it BS. I'll give you a hint, it's not pro-choice people choosing to have that health care argument. While I'm sure many people have more tempered attitudes about abortion when you ask them, that doesn't matter much if they just vote "R" and assume who ever it is will represent them reasonably on the matter. It reminds me a bit of a recent press conference held by California Senator De Leon about his SB-808 where he holds up a rifle (that has been illegal to manufacture without registering it with the Feds since 1934) and cals it a 30 cal (which it was not) says it can fire off a 30 round magazine (He actually called it a "30 magazine clip" but I'll let that slide, the important part is they've been illegal to purchase or manufacture in CA since 2000) in half a second (holy crap, that's up in M134 territory... not bad for a semi-auto). And he said without his bill people can just order up everything online, slap that thing together with no background check, and have themselves a murderthon. The point is, I'm sure many democrats would probably just like to figure out a non-intrusive way to keep firearms out of the hands of prohibited persons, and they wonder why discussions break down about semantics and complaints about what an "assault weapon" is. Well, when you just vote "D" and assume he's got your back on gun control, you end up with clowns like De Leon dragging the discussion that way, because he's the one putting pen to paper.

Of course all these prints need to be entered into a national database, matched to a name, for it to actually do anything.... Whoa, whoa, whoa... who said anything about actually doing something?

I think an index finger print and a note that reads "has no thumbs" is a fairly positive form of identifying someone. With appropriate use of commas in the note, this solution scales to injuries of varying magnitudes.

Maybe it's not as funny as you think. I think I insinuated that Californians wouldn't get it. Oh wait... I missed it the first time... He sucks with a shotgun. Now I get it, that's hilarious.

You could try turning him off and on again... Go back to the genius bar, hippie.

In general I can appreciate the sentiment, particularly regarding things like prop 65. No one pays attention to prop 65 warnings, they're everywhere, from the Chevron station to yoga studios in Venice Beach. Some people, however, apparently don't find the humor in it and went for round two a couple years ago because they wanted their grocery store to be slowly overrun with warning signs as well. But bonfires in your back yard? Well... There's a pretty damn good reason that's not allowed. And while I can't shoot skeet in my back yard, I would also be hard pressed to throw a football and not have it leave my property, so I kinda get that too. And the whole "the family just works better 'cause religion" is kinda interesting. I think a religious family is kinda like having a house full of Apple products, "it just works (tm)", so long as all you have are Apple products and you keep buying the latest crap. And your friend with an Android phone comes over and wants to share a new song with you, but you're not sure how to connect anything to your stereo any more, and you just start talking about how your Apple stuff works. Then one day you can't find the right printer driver for your gay son, so you endlessly keep trying to flash the firmware until he won't talk to anyone anymore.

On the bright side, I can appreciate the irony that, in the same thread where I'm trying to explain to kallend that it's not always the fault of the reader when an implication the author hadn't intended is perceived, someone would respond to a post of mine like this.