pirana

Been eating a lot of Chinese Takee-Outee? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I agree, but that's not the quiet religious types I'm talking about, that crosses the line. I think abuse like that occurs at kids all the time and in other areas: How about that Grand Canyong guide asking Junior how he thinks that bear feels about global warming - or teachers getting their kids to write letters to Congress asking for universal health care - or teachers getting kids to hand out literature for voting on school funding bills I think we should send the teacher to interview the bear; naked and with honwy smeareed all over their nakedness. Also, I meant 4000 years. Sloppy me, " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Some good logic; but the flaw (not a logical one but a practical one) is that logic holds it's own regardless of content, and even with no content. Logic is the study of structure, and without any content is mental masturbation. (Kind of how math relates to physics). You can run equations until the cows come home, but they are meaningless until applied to something outside the world of mathematics. So yes, you can prove that A or not A is a true statement. It's only purpose is to show that you can prove an abstract statement. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

They are all a bunch of self-serving fucks. If they do not get serious about economic reform as a whole (maybe treating the cost of health care as a subset of that) we are all gonna be toast soon - like when our nation's debt surpasses it's assets; or gets close enough that we can be bought for pennies on the dollar by someone holding our notes. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

the whole post resonates with my thoughts. but a portion.... I'd had the same question, but I'd throw this out: a rational person would, deep down, understand that the reward/punishment system is a myth, so therefore, the concept of this reward is really just the subconscious providing an external stimulus to be a decent person so, therefore, the individual is truly acting from personal responsibility, not just acting in fear of the myth - even when they don't consciously realize it I'll give credit to actions, which, in the end are always personal/individual choices, and leave the whole intent thing as a weak philosophical exercise. in other words, I still with the pragmatic viewpoint for philosophical reasons as well edit: one could argue that the individual is weak since they need subconscious motivation to be moral. One could also argue that the individual is exceptionally clever in that they provided themselves with a subconscious motivation to be moral. I suspect it varies from individual to individual. personally? my moral motivation is recollection of my Dad kicking my ass if I didn't act morally stimulating a conditioned response well into my adulthood - one of the best techniques yet invented by mankind And ironic that it somewhat mirrors the foundations of religion. Fear of the tribal elders in life, evolving to fear of the tribal elders in death. People behaved (for the most part) because of fear that some long dead entity would punish them in life, then in death. Ergo, your father is your God (in a way). " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

a - Religion is a human construct and, in the best case, is equivalent to a moral code. If it works for someone, great, it if doesn't, one can find another construct to hang morality on. Why belittle the tools another individual uses if that's what it takes for it to work for them? Aren't you tolerant of another's life choices? b - Noting that religion is used to exploit others is interesting, but it's naive to think that in the absense of religion, that some other structure wouldn't emerge to exploit the same in an even worse fashion (clubs, politics being the most equivalent to religion, IMO). Fanaticism leading to exploitation, self righteousness, etc - is found in all areas, not just religion - and the fanatics are the ones I'm worried about most - be they religious nuts, enviro nuts, public health care, cheerleading moms, people that using tanning salons, etc. as far as the judgmental/selfrighteous people - I find that a lot more with people with strong politics than I do with the religious people I know who tend to be quiet and personal about their beliefs. But it's all anecdotal and you run with a much more judgmental crowd, so I'd suspect you see more of the extremes than I would for all type - including the religious. I'm good for people doing what works for them. Kind of like diets, they are all gimmicks, but if one helps you out - good for you. Until it crosses the line into the propogation of ignorance for the purposes of maintaining control. Such as a sticker in a text that urges exploration of Creationism as an alternative to evolution. Or a Grand Canyon guide telling Junior High students that God created the canyon roughly 400 years ago when He created Earth. And so on and so forth. On the other points I'd agree that nutcases will find something to be nutty about, or violent about, or whatever; but it does not reduce my desire to see ignorant fanaticism reduced overall; regardless of the flavor or the vehicle. Except for green beer on St Patrick's Day. There is a really stupid habit that I'm OK with. Mostly because it can't be done with any good beer, only with the piss-colored watered down flavorless crap. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I think you hit on an even more fundamental issue. You are happy paying your share. Do you question how your own costs, along with the costs of others, became "your" share? When somebody foregoes preventive care to purchase material goodies, then comes down with an expensive illness and part of their bill becomes "your" share, you do not question that at all? I do. Granted there are those that do not have the ability. By my standards that is a very small percentage. My completely uninformed guess is that we have a society that is composed of about 25% freeloaders. They have the ability; they choose not to contribute, or have connived certain political factions into exempting them from contributing. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Very good point, and another politically incorrect topic that they are not daring to go near. Haven't looked at those numbers in a while, but the percentage of health care dollars spent at the end of life (not from accidents or injuries) is very high. Of course there is going to be more expense as you get older; but a hospital stay at the end of life is ridiculous - and personally - I find it highly undignified. Go home to die; in a place you love surrounded by people you love. As an aside; another business that is incredibly overpriced - funerals. Saw an article in the NYT about home funerals, and even home burials if you live in a rural area. That is definitely the way to go. When it's time, regardless of condition, I want them to haul me down to the stream, pour me a beer, call any friends I have not outlived, and so on and so forth. Dying in a hospital and being processed like a side of meat by a funeral home are both ridiculously expensive, totally unnecessary, and lacking in dignity. OK. Flame away. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

How convenient for not being able to nail down specifics. Are you sure you also don't know what all of the other terms mean. BTW - generation has a very specific meaning. Look it up. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Started at 39. Had a few years with few jumps (one year with none), but am now averaging about 120 per year. 53 now, and still picking up steam (in some reagrds)! " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Hogwash. Actual claims payments constitute 90% of premiums taken in. You are getting it from the horses mouth. This is what I do. The numbers you are getting are propoganda, twisted facts at the least, outright lies at worst. Some states have actually passed mandated loss ratios; MN is one of them. The books are open for the regulators and AG's to peruse as they like; and they love to find shit and come down hard. Been that way for at least 15 years. They caught a couple companies and forced board seats to be occupied by appointees of the commissioner's office; and continue with oversight to the extreme. We actually have had a few instances of no increase and slight decrease when cost containment programs have paid off. When costs go down, premiums go down. Unfortunately, health care costs have been going up at 2 to 4 times the rate of inflation for about the last 25 years; and every provider negotiation I have ever been involved in they have asked for double digits. Granted, it is because their costs keep going up - for some of the reasons mentioned here (malpractice, the shitty rate of reimbursement on governement programs, deadbeats that simply do not pay, etc). That is their problem to solve; and their solution is to try to play hardball when negotiating with insurance companies. Where do they think that money comes from? Their solution is to lay it all off on the insurance companies, who in turn have to pass it on or go under. You are correct, we are already spending lots of money; but you are wrong in thinking it is OK to keep spending this amount but just shift the burden. We need to spend less. Everybody does not need a Ferarri; hell, everybody doesn't need a Cadillac. Get everybody a Ford Taurus, subsidize where necessary; and whoever wants can buy their own Cadillac or Ferarri. The insurance companies (at least in some states) have been thru housecleaning with mandated loss ratios, mandated benefit sets, strict reserve requirements, AG's watching like hawks, no stakeholders allowed, etc. Time to subject all insurers AND providers to the same treatment. They can't seem to take care of their costs themselves. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Not-for-profits, (and nonprofits) do not issue stock. A good reason for it to be a requirement (as is the case in MN). " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Insurance is fast becoming unaffordable only because cost of care is becoming unaffordable and employers are laying more and more of the cost on employees. As goes cost of care, so goes cost of insurance. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

How to deliver healthcare so that the costs not only stop rising, but actually are reduced, is the issue. Get rid of insurance as we know it, find someone to do all the administrative work for free, and you knock a whopping 10% off the top. Big deal! Care would still be unaffordable for most of the people for whom it is already unaffordable. Cost of care IS the issue. But the politicians are pussyfooting around the issue and instead of trying to figure out how to drive the cost of care down, they are going to provide everybody the standard brand of outrageously expensive care and charge it against a small enough minority of taxpayers that as a voting block will be insignificant. Your understanding of the roles is twisted. Insurance companies are in the health care financing business. They do not deliver care. They are a pass-thru of whatever the providers charge, minus the discounts they negotiate, minus on average 10% in admin costs. Without the negotiated rates, the average bill from a provider would be about 30 to 40% more; which would be out of the patients pocket if they are not insured. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Get other insurance. Any plan worth the paper it's printed on should provide generously for preventive care, routine screenings, vaccinations, etc. It is very firmly established as the best medicine for keeping future costs down. As additional incentive, many plans with deductibles now even waive the deductible for preventive care to motivate people to use those benefits. Is it an employer sponsored plan and the employer thinks they are saving money by not covering preventive? Is it a plan of last resort issued under the auspices of some state or county agency? Or did you buy the plan on your own and just decide not to get coverage for that? Whatever the answer, why did your employer or the government furnish or purchase coverage without basic preventive care as part of the package? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

That post is a winner for sure. "I'd like to thank the academy, . . ." " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

That is my approach if the area ia a little crowded; with a big emphasis on what you said about doing it only if everyone is still left with plenty of room. If it is too crowded (in my judgement and based on a pretty conservative comfort level), then land somewhere else. I also would be careful to give extra room to unexperienced canopy pilots. I have no problem going somewhere else (we have lots of easy outs) and will readily land out (but not by much) to not make a crowded area worse. Had to land down the runway just last evening. On downwind leg and ready to turn to base and somebody had just turned to final and was below me. Not enough room to turn inside them without getting too close for my comfort to the trailers. Let them pass below, and now here comes the plane. Didn't want to concern the pilot with my turn to base. Let him pass below. Now it's too late to turn at all (I would've flat turned had it been an obstacle avoidance issue; but not just to save a little walking). Ending up just riding it downwind down the edge of the runway. Fun little surf followed by a few hundred foot stroll. No problem; and very worth developing a reputation that you will take an easy out rather than put others at risk. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I agree. Understood that when doing more than 4-way higher breakoffs and more time between exits might be needed. For opening altitude on 4-way though; opening as high as 4K should be communicated to the groups following, and probably best put out last of the sport jumping groups. It's a bit unnerving to be in a track at 3K and be zooming past open canopies from the previous group out. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I know a guy that must be about 6'5", maybe even a touch more. His weight has to be pretty close to your stated ideal weight. Been jumpng a smallish tandem canopy; can't recall the harness & container mods that required. Big baggy suit of course. He just bought his first rig. I think it has about a 280 in it for a main. There must be other big guys out there that can relate directly. If you want, PM me and I'll try to connect you via email. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Insurance is not why health care costs so much (unless that reference is to malpractice). The admin fees paid to insurance companies (not-for-profits at least) are roughly the equivalent of 1 year's increase in cost of care (what the providers charge). And in all the negotiations I've been involved in, I've never ever seen a provider start out by asking for anything less than a double-digit increase in their reimbursement rates. It's absolutely ridiculous what they ask for - usually to make up for the abysmally low rates they get for Meidcare patients and for the indigent care they provide. In years when we had 2 to 4% inflation, the typical Twin Cities hospital starting point has been for about a 20% increase. That's fucking criminal! Very dissappointing to see that what this administration is addressing largely ignores the fact that cost of care continues to rise at 2 to 4 times the rate of overall inflation. Very politically incorrect though to go after actual cost of care. And the paperwork game is a myth. They can shuffle codes all they want, the providers are going to get paid for the services rendered no matter. If anything, fraudulent coding practices are the only thing added by that activity. The codes are very standard in their value and their intended use; playing with them to run up the bill is fraud - pure and simple. At least they seem to be discussing malpractice. Not sure how big of a component that is in doctor and hospital bills, but it must be significant. What the Obama approach appears to be doing is just shuffling the burden around. I do not see any effort to decouple employment from insurance. Much of what they are doing by burdening small employers with insurance mandates and penalties is going to hurt small business - simply assinine. Their version of reform appears to be to get the government deep into the commercial insurance biz, offering subsidized plans that commercial carriers are supposed to "compete" with, mandate that everybody play, tax the shit out of people to pay for it all, impose penalties on small businesses that already can not afford to offer coverage (that makes a lot of fucking sense), etc. Ignored is the need to regulate all insurance at the Federal level, decouple insurance from employers, and eliminate the loopholes afforded to large business/political subdivisions/collective bargaining units. That would be a good start. Yes, I understand that much of this appears to be in agreement with what you posted, with maybe a couple of points in opposition. It just boils me that we have this chance to get it right, and they are going to just play the usual bullshit political games and end up making it worse. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Fans of the welfare state must hate it when they want even more but the bottom line shows that so few are already taking care of so many. Or maybe they consider it evidence of their victory. Most likely they just ignore such information. Until those that can pay revolt, there seems to be no reason for the masses to change their behavior, (And has there ever been such a revolt?). But what to do? As a person closing in on retirement age, it's easy enough to see it thru for a few more years (and hope they don't get desparate enough to simply start lopping off big chunks of my nest egg). What about those just starting out? Maybe young adults are too caught up in the enthusiasm of where they hope they are going to think about the fact that about a quarter of their income for the rest of their lives will be spent providing for the professionally unemployed. A few close friends went off the grid a couple decades ago. I thought they were a bit kooky at the time. Could be they were wiser than most and a little ahead of the times. Interesting conundrum. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

See if you can find the cow. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Well for one the slope of the hypotenuse of the green triangle is not the same as the slope of the hypotenuse of the red triangle, so the two large triangles are not identical. So the big "triangle" in the top picture is not really a triangle at all, since its "hypotenuse" is not a straight line. Neither big "triangle", top or bottom, is a triangle for that same reason. Correct. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

ya i hear that when chuck noris tried this, he found out he could fly I hear Vin Diesel did it into a dead stick plane; prop started the engine on his way to the door, had sex with the pilot before he left the plane again, and did a kiss pass on an alligator during his 750' swoop, at night, in the rain. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Here's a fun little one to puzzle over. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley