StrangeSox

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 08:37 PM) Here's the issue with that...almost all of those other factories have started within the past 20 years or less. If I were to compare the number of retirees they have per vehicle produced that they have to cover, they are naturally going to be dramatically lower than the number for a factory that has been operating for 50+ years, because very few of the people originally hired will have worked to retirement age. And given that health care expenditures also rise dramatically as people begin to retire, there is every reason to expect that those same plants will in the future have to assume substantially more costs as their workers approach retirement and have their health care costs go up and begin to actually draw on their retirement plans. Basically, your argument there is that we can just have the companies go out of business every 30-40 years or so when their health care costs get too high, and no one will mind having a large new number of uninsured elderly folks out there, because Medicare will take care of that. The issue with that is even in the future, as retiree costs rise, they still won't be nearly as ridiculous as the UAW costs are because they never signed the ridiculous UAW contracts. Their contracts are universally cheaper, for those working and for the retirees. Your argument is that somehow centralized health care would be cheaper for US consumers in the end (because that is who ultimately pays for the higher UAW costs through increased product prices), which it almost certainly would not be.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 08:27 PM) I agree. So you're now willing to support my government run healthcare plan. I accept your apology. Or how about they just get paid the same that all of the US-based Toyota/ Honda/ Mercedes/ BMW/ Subaru employees get paid, which is still pretty damn good for assembly line workers?

I didn't really know where to stick this, but I found it funny. http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/74932 ECO WARRIORS SNITCH ON BEAVERS FOR 'ILLEGAL LOGGING'

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 07:52 PM) Maybe I'm just too used to the current administration, but I really don't like how this smells, where Axelrod was a few weeks back saying the PresE and Blago had spoken regarding the Senate seat and now is saying he "Misspoke". I'd feel worse about it though if it weren't for that little clip of Blagojevich, um, talking in a less than polite manner about the PresE. Conservative blogs/ pundits were all over this earlier today. I don't see Obama being tied up in this, but that still looks a little suspicious.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 04:08 PM) Frankly, it's probably one of the better uses of that money that we've managed to come up with. Let's just agree to disagree, then.

And there goes a small chunk of the $15B.

None of the tin foil haters will give up this line, though. There is a massive amount of evidence showing him to be a natural born US citizen, but it still isn't good enough for these internet document/ immigration/ naturalization/ Supreme Court 'experts'.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 9, 2008 -> 08:46 AM) Wow - a sitting governor taken into federal custody. Yikes. But, good. Blago deserves it. By the way, I'd be this isn't just about the Senate thing - too quick. This is from years of investigations. Must have missed it -- what senate thing? edit: NM. Tribune's article detailed it.

Bank of America has great reasons to remove the credit. Forcing businesses to keep extending failing businesses credit is profoundly stupid. Then again, we're talking about Blagojevich. I think he honestly believes that money grows on trees.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Dec 7, 2008 -> 03:11 PM) Finite amounts of value of many pairs of combined variables, when taking into account position and movement, cannot both be known with absolute precision. Why are you bringing quantum mechanics into this?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2008 -> 10:41 AM) Yes, W was an awful film. How anyone could give it 4 stars, unless they are incredibly shallow and/or incredibly politically biased in their flim views, is beyond me. Inconvenient Truth was an OK film as documentaries go, at least. Haven't seen Expelled, or Farenheit 9/11, and frankly have zero desire to do so in either case. I wonder what Ebert gave The Day After Tomorrow, which deserves an award for one of the worst films made this decade. That film was laughable from the get-go, while helping destroy the environmental causes it sought to promote by making them wholly unbelievable. "The temperature will drop 10 degrees a second for the first 10 seconds!" That movie was hilariously awful. I agree with bmags. You really need to read Ebert's reviews to get a good sense of what he feels about a particular movie.

I thought the 2004 Punisher movie was awful. The second Futurama movie was funny for the first 30 minutes or so, but really boring after that.

I just read a short synopsis of The Day the Earth Stood Still remake. It sounds absolutely awful and nothing at all like the original.

Can't happen soon enough. I'll be so proud to be from a state with back-to-back convicted felon former governors.

QUOTE (mreye @ Dec 5, 2008 -> 11:47 AM) I'm glad he bashed other movies found to be riddled with inaccuracies. The awfulness of those other movies has nothing to do with the awfulness of this movie. And it really is awful.

I see a distinct difference between the auto companies and steel or airlines, though. Those items don't come with 5-10 year warranties like an automobile does. I think the fear (whether rational or not) that GM won't be around in 6 months will keep most people from choosing them when shopping for a new car. Flight tickets are a much smaller expenditure and, while it may be a huge inconvenience, your airline going bankrupt isn't going to effect you for years to come. With steel, you buy it, and you're done. You couldn't care less if they're around in a week because you have your material.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 5, 2008 -> 09:20 AM) More solar news! Summary: Sun + Water = Fuel. With catalysts created by an MIT chemist, sunlight can turn water into hydrogen. If the process can scale up, it could make solar power a dominant source of energy, with a cheap reliable way to store the energy created by solar power for use at any time. http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21536/ Tree hugger! That's interesting news, though.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 5, 2008 -> 04:43 AM) Left 4 Dead = Amazing. I played it last weekend at a friend's house. It was really fun, but I still held off on buying it because it seems like it would get old fast.

Even significant chunks of the creationist movement distanced themselves from the movie because of how awful it was. It's funny how roundly every point in that movie was shown to be very misleading or just outright false. It was also outperformed by Maher's "Religulous," for whatever that's worth. I've heard his movie wasn't much better. Best line from the review: "The more you know about evolution, or simple logic, the more you are likely to be appalled by the film" This issue tends to get me worked up and ranting for pages on end. http://controversy.wearscience.com/

I know Balta had originally mentioned this in another thread, but it looks like the Bureau of Land Management is backing off the sale of a lot of that land around the national parks. http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-na-...0,2563954.story

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 03:00 PM) I will fire back from Wikipedia on the "Gun Show loophole" which allows people to purchase weapons from anything that can be classified as a private collection at a gun show without a background check and without informing the local governments. Here is an example from last year stating how weapons purchased at gun shows in the U.S. were reportedly a major contributor to the raging violence that is currently tearing Mexico apart. The media also tends to be very inaccurate when it comes to any sort of gun report, so I'd be skeptical about their claim that full-automatic AK-47's are being purchased in significant quantities from the US. There is just a ton of red tape to buy one, and they are not sold at gun shows. Also, gun show guns account for about 1% of guns used in crime.http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/fuo.htm -> acrobat file on the bottom.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 02:49 PM) Not in this country. Especially not after the assault weapons ban expired. That is completely incorrect. The assault weapons ban did not affect automatic weapons in any way, shape, or form. It was, primarily, a cosmetic ban (limiting things like folding stocks and bayonet mounts) and a limit on the size of magazines. It did not regulate cartridge size or style. Older weapons were grandfathered in, anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban Automatic weapons have been under strict control since 1934, and no new ones can be manufactured for private ownership after 1986. The "AK-47's" or "AR-15's" you see people owning are not automatic rifles, but just another rifle no different than any hunting rifle aside from the fact that it looks like a military weapon. I'm sorry, but there's usually a large amount of ignorance behind the support of the AWB. Those were not machine guns, as automatic weapons are very heavily regulated in this country. They were .50 rifles, weapons completely unaffected by the ban. http://trinimansblog.blogspot.com/2005/03/...-hot-topic.html This is going off-track on this thread, but that's because they really aren't used in very many crimes. It's hard to conceal a rifle. They're also more expensive. It's easy to conceal a cheap handgun.

How many hotels have armed guards that could do anything to stop apparently highly-trained (Indian special forces commandos said they were using advanced tactics) and heavily armed attackers? It would also be very difficult for them to legally purchase any sort of automatic firearms. You have to go through an awful lot of red tape for that. They could buy semi-automatic versions and modify them using a few machined parts, though.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 01:22 PM) Let's assume you're correct, that this attack took months of planning. That doesn't necessarily mean that it requires months of planning to successfully pull off this level of attack. That could mean that they spent a lot of time working and training, and decided that with the resources they had, the simplest option, running through streets and hotels with guns, was the best. Just because highly trained people pulled off this attack doesn't mean a bunch of lowly trained people couldn't do so if they had the will. This wasn't just running through the streets, guns a-blazin'. Several Indian special forces operatives interviewed said that they displayed advanced tactics. Less skilled/ knowledgeable people wouldn't be able to hold out nearly as long. QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 01:23 PM) Yeah, but when you're sitting there buying plane tix and you have a choice on what time you were going to do it, why not pick the morning? That's not like something that required any extra coordination whatsoever. Just take the extra bonus of that day. I would think that there would be more people in those buildings during the early work hours on average.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 11:06 AM) I'm aware, but these attacks are relatively easy to coordinate, i'm sure they've seen. I've no doubt they'd one up, but I'm just saying, I don't know if a big explosion is the next big Al qaida thing. An explosion is sort of one and done. Imagine coordinated sniper attacks in cities, freezing the nation for a prolonged period of time. It'd appear they are in power. They'd have an upper hand. The numbers wouldn't matter. From what I heard this took months of planning and was a fairly complex operation.