ShcShc11

I knew tunnel inst. wouldn't get a large pay, but is it really approx 10$/hr? Less than the minimum pay in certain places

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/08/campaigns-health-care-comments-become-opponents-opportunities.html

I can't comment on how to flare well... but it does seem like you have a bit too much internal fighting with yourself. The question of whether to keep jumping or not with the injury should be based on: "What are the risks of me getting injured more and am I willing to take that risk/consequence?" instead of: "Am I being a wimp for not jumping" (which translates to: I think I'l feel like shit if I don't jump because I've seen others do it so I TOO should be able to") Very often, the more you try to compare yourself with others, the more destructive it can be because you keep saying to yourself: "why the fuck am I not good as them? I've put X amount of work and effort and I'm still not half as good as them!" (which wrongly leads to self-blame) And it makes it harder to enjoy the process of getting better because you constantly put more pressure on yourself. Maybe I'm off with the psychology, maybe I'm completely right, but just my 2 cents :) Shc

haha. so naive Gravity

if we coupled his proposals with a 50% defense cut, we'd be in decent shape in a decade. Shac - in contrast to his proposal, the status quo adds much more debt (not deficit), so your headline is a bit dishonest. there is not 50% defense cut. he will augment defense budget. And show me the stats on your 2nd assumption (which is false btw)

http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/pathtoprosperityfy2012.pdf According to Paul Ryan, he will increase deficit of 4.5 trillion $ to the U.S. This will be "revenue-neutral" by closing tax loopholes, but doesn't specify which one. Is anybody taking him seriously? Just magic numbers and magic asterics. Shc

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1001628 http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001628-Base-Broadening-Tax-Reform.pdf Read it (this one is about ROMNEY'S proposal). Another display of false economics and magic asterics and numbers. Romney is claiming: "Closing 450B$ worth of tax loopholes" = Nice fairy tale for people who doesn't understand economics.

Why don't you try reading and understanding what he is proposing instead of parroting left wing talking points. You might actually learn something. Gravity, HAVE you read the Ryan budget? I have. It makes an extraordinary claim that it can spend 4,6 TRILLION $ in tax cuts, but it will "be revenue neutral by closing loopholes". It doesn't specify any loopholes and I've spoken to the economic community. Nobody knows what looholes they are talking about. Gravity, do YOU know how Ryan is going to make his budget revenue-neutral? What is he going to close to save 4.6 T $? Cheers! Shc

oh God. Ryan??? Really?

Ryan is an awful choice. I've spent weeks looking at his budget proposal and nobody in the economic community seems to understand where all his asterics numbers are coming from (which is supposed to make his plan offset any debt).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFEN7BQ7Zus (after 5mins 30sec- perfect song) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER1PGYe9UZA (wingsuit base) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJmgCtEpRrg&feature=player_embedded#! Summerfest 2012 Cheers! Shc

Good move by the Romney Campaign. Hopefully he'l choose a good one. My bet is on Rubio- an aggressive bet while more conservative bet than Paul Ryan. I'm not sure what the heck Joe Biden contributes to the Obama campaign. In 2008, Obama should have went with Hillary and she would have substantially helped the Democrats. Anyway, Place your bets folks! Cheers! Shc

Check EnglishJohn's videos. They are always really good. Cheers! Shc

Federal government spending matters more. There is too much of that going on. lol. Scooby, your whole premise seems to be based on "Gov spends too much". http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/07/31/government-cutbacks-separate-this-expansion-from-others/?mod=WSJBlog The WSJ (yes even the WSJ) knows this is bullshit. Its a little sad to see how anti-intellectual economics became. It used to be about real-life models. Economic models that proved to be reliable time and time again (especially with the 2008 Great Recession). People worried about hyperinflation and U.S bonds going to "skyrocket" yet 10 years U.S bonds remain at a HISTORICAL LOW (as predicted by economic models). Yet people persist on imaginary fiscal cliff (or too much gov spending) when the datas point to a lack of demand being the problem. PRIVATE SECTOR simply has too much debt. Cheers! Shc

Only if the climate alamists consider themselve to be Gods I'm curious. What makes you SO sure that its not happening? Its odd how you can be 100% sure that its a hoax... Only thing I am sure of it that it is not as bad as the alamists say People on this site like to refer to the experts Well here at least, it seems as if the ice experts have taken NASA down a notch Let me reverse the question How can you be SO sure it is happening? The cost of you being wrong is far more costlier and thus the burden of proof should be on you. Saying this is "normal" because it happens every 150 years isin't proof. The agricultural disaster in the U.S because of drought that suppose to happen every 75 years isin't proof. The major forest fires in California and Russia in 2011 that happens only every 120 years isin't proof. What makes it "denial" isin't because you chose this side; its because there is a sincere lack of concrete numbers to back it and any "alarming" numbers are countered with: "oh its normal" Cheers! Shc

The scale in the WHO is adjusted to include cultural variations. So if you have a country that has more "weight", they take into consideration of this in order to have more fairness. So no, it is not misleading. And there are other reports that indicate the same. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Fund-Reports/2010/Jun/Mirror-Mirror-Update.aspx I can understand you had good experience, but the point of the debate is to find an objective truth. And even then, again, we are talking about a cost of 18% of GDP for the U.S. Except they know the cost. And its half of what the U.S is spending. Massachusetts spends substantially less as well. Cheers! Shc

ugh...we've debated the value of these rankings so many times. Empirical datas are far more important than stories of "someone I know". And I'm not sure how you can -at all- defend spending 18% of GDP on healthcare. Its amazing that people are SO concerned about ACA costs yet OK with spending 18% of GDP with the old system. Romney really summarized it well when he said: "even our military cost 4% of our GDP"

Only if the climate alamists consider themselve to be Gods I'm curious. What makes you SO sure that its not happening? Its odd how you can be 100% sure that its a hoax...

Thank you. That is exactly what I wanted to say. Of course there are many more studies on health care- the point I wanted to use from the WHO report is that Israel quality isin't lacking behind U.S in spite of spending a lot less (in fact it can be argued that it has better quality). It is to refute the notion that "because we are paying more, there should automatically have more quality". This just isin't true. All Western countries pay substantially less for health care than the U.S (U.S is an outlier). France uses approx 9-11% GDP on Health Care while we the U.S are paying 18%. Whatever the case, this isin't about Israel vs U.S. Cheers!

http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/whr00_en.pdf World Health Organization ranked Israel 28th in health quality while the U.S ranked 37th. Israel's health care quality definitely matches the U.S (if not surpassing it). Cheers!

-Mitt Romney in Israel 30th July 2012 Mitt Romney summarizes my position on U.S health care quite well by going off-script (again) and accidentally telling the truth. People keep defending the old U.S health care system (and trying to repeal ACA) when the old system spends a whopping 16-18 percent of GDP to inefficient private insurance bureaucracy. Far higher costs, lower quality and many are not covered. Utter madness. Israel health care is a single-payer system with very intense government involvement (more so than Canada and Germany). The Israeli Gov sets a budget per capita and nonprofit plans are forced to set priorities for treatment and negotiate hard over provider payments. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/30/romney-praises-health-care-in-israel-where-strong-government-influence-has-driven-down-costs/ Cheers! Shc

You keep referring to "smart weapons" and their "potential to kill hundreds" and be "devastating" and I'm curious what you're on about. ...not sure if you're being sarcastic. In a way, I was referring to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War The 2006 Lebanon War. It didn't involve any smart weapons, but it did expose glaring vulnerabilities to Israel. A small (vastly underfunded) group such as Hezbollah were able to launch hundreds of missiles in important cities such as Tel'Aviv. They were dumb missiles so very few of them got into heavily populated areas. Many were duds. There are reports that one of the biggest concerns of IDF Generals are smart weapons. How do you defend yourself against missiles that can be easily directed in heavily populated areas? If those dumb missiles happened to be just a little more sophisticated, then 2006 Lebanon war would have been very different. So no, its not sarcasm. Its a real concern that doesn't have any solutions apart from prevention. And this is what Israel has been trying to do for the past few years: preventing the enemy from getting sophisticated weapons. Palestinian borders are rigorously checked to the point where even trucks with medicine weren't able to cross. Raids are conducted regularly on ships that are suspected of having "weapons" (think about the controversial Gaza Flotilla Raid where IDF boarded ships that had no weapons). Cheers! Shc

Its lovely that you're downplaying Palestinian plights and finding ways to justify their current treatment. "Moderate winners out of Allied guilt". Israel didn't come out of Allied guilt. It became into existence because the British were seeking influence into the U.S and Russian administrations. Wilson's closest advisers were pro-creation of Israel while Lenin and Trotsky were also for a creation of Israel (though not as much as Wilson's advisers). Britain absolutely wanted is to break the WWI stalemate and needed the U.S to come to war (while hoping for the Russians to stay in the war). In Churchill's memoir by Martin Gilbert, it is said that "quite a significant resource of British military" was spent in occupying the Middle East territories after WWI in order to honour their words. The whole Nazi paranoia of "World Jewry conspiracy" originated from this. The Weimar Republic relied on U.S businesses such as JPMorgan to cancel war debts imposed by France (Allied) and became VERY pro-Israel as well because they hoped to get help from Jewish members to have businesses more intertwined with the U.S [see wages of destruction book by Adam Tooze]. So to say Israel came out of "Allied guilt" isin't true. Its far too simplistic and there's whole history behind it (negociations, treaties, deals, etc...). It madly drove a non anti-semitic country (Germany in the 1920s were considered less anti-semitic than France) to doing what is considered the most heinous racial genocide. So again, in a way they are victims and in another perspective, they're not the victims. They fought bravely (and very impressively) in the Six Days War for their survival, but Israel wasn't given out of "guilt" and its legitimacy is very grey. IDF should be unapologetic with their military actions because they are trying to protect Israeli kids and hope they can live a peaceful life. People against Israel doesn't seem to acknowledge how devastating smart weapons can be hence harsh border controls necessary. But Palestinians too are justified in what they are doing because they are being oppressed through Israeli harsh military actions. Cheers!

In all honesty, both Palestinians and Isralis are both the victims and the aggressors. If your people's fate had been decided in WWI during the Balfour Declaration, I think its a little more than "playing the victim"... They are the victims and they've been occupied quite brutally and many imprisoned in concentration camps (according to human rights watch reports). On the other side, you have Israli cities that could potentially be bombed (and have been bombed) by mortar. A development of smart bombs by Palestinians have the potential to kill hundreds and we've seen in 2006 that cities such as Tel'Aviv is easily in range. Many criticized the IDF for "exaggerated attacks"; but really, I don't think any Western nations would tolerate a fraction of what Israel already did. I've always found it odd that people "took sides" in this discussion when both countries are right in their assessment of self-defence. Cheers! Shc

According to Mr. Romney, a nation's culture should be judged based on per capita $. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/30/palestinians-protest-romney-statements-as-racist/?hpt=hp_t2 Hmm.. what do you guys think Cheers! Shc