Punko

Registered bored user

Flew three times over the Atlantic before 1st birthday. What did you do before 9 a.m. today ?

punko wrote:
daegog If I was choosing, ditto. As a note, this study only tracked shots that hit.  the shots that miss weren't counted.  so if you use a type of weapon that requires more skill to strike with, then make sure its one that takes fewer hits to incapacitate.  To me, and I freely admit that I lack any experience firing handguns, the shotgun is the way forward for defense.  It takes fewer hits to stop someone.

Oh, and you can use those dragon flame shells to roast them zombies with, as well.
punko wrote:
Gratz, Mississippi, I'd like to shake your ha . . . well maybe not.
punko wrote:
agurney The original Olympics didn't allow women, and several events had to be competed in while wearing full armor.
punko wrote:
dm2754 You are right - its not the same thing.  When universities spend money on scholarships for athletes to go on to the NFL, NBA, MLS, NHL, MLB, pro golf, etc., etc., there are organizations in bidding wars to get the top talent.  there are organized drafts to keep things organized.  When medical graduates make it out of medical school, there is no organized league of teams snapping up prospects.  they have no agents who know the markets, there are no magazines with draft editions dedicated to ranking the best anesthesiologist grads in the Big 10.

The desire to cap salaries in sports isn't ever going to work. the best you can do is what they've done in hockey and basketball and I believe NFL football (I'm more than willing to stand corrected here)  is put a salary cap on a team as a whole.  MLB isn't capped (it's America's game, after all)  Several jurisdictions have (versions of) caps on doctor salaries. I know, I live in one.

So if sports scholarships are such a bad idea, why do they exist ?  Right, because college sports (in the US) are enormous money makers for the schools.  I says something about society, when having a great basketball team means more to a university than graduating the best medical class it can.
punko wrote:
wellsy57 Fortunately, only 92million.  Not even the Orange One would chuck 100 B on a parade.
punko wrote:
dm2754 meh.  simply increasing military spending budget by 100M for one year would be wiser than spending a shit ton of money for crowd control for rolling military vehicles down the road, and showing off the costumes for space rangers,  err  potential uniforms of the Space Force.
punko wrote:
fancylad ???? Sigh.  My error was that I thought your comment was rather clever quip.  I apologize for overshooting.
punko wrote:
fancylad open heart surgery is like performing a head gasket swap on a car engine.  but while the engine is still running

punko wrote:
Because the Olympics are about spectacle and not sport?  Because eyeballs for advertisers are more important than integrity and performance?

remember, the Olympics originally wanted female soccer players to be playing in skirts.
punko wrote:
fancylad The phrase "its not libel if its true" was a rallying cry for newspaper journalists when there was open discussion about reporting on the rich and famous - who tried to shut up reporters if they didn't like what was being reported.  

I had assumed your phrase of "its not span if its true" was a clever attempt to echo that slogan.
punko wrote:
fancylad I did not say or suggest you being banned.  Did your responses go against the standards? I believe so. See my response below.

When I exchange with anyone, I post to them in the manner I believe I deserve to be posted back.  So I have done so with many on this site, so I have done with you.

If a crotchety, old, semi-retired engineer can do it, anyone can.
punko wrote:
fancylad Amusing, but incorrect.  Its not libel if its true, but repeating 2+2=4 ad nauseum is certainly spam.
punko wrote:
squrlz4ever Deletion, perhaps not. A simple reminder visible to the readership that a lot of folks are spending emotional and cognitive resources to moderate the discussions and keep the tone as level as they can, and that "letting loose" on his own site runs contrary to his own stated goals and their valued efforts.
punko wrote:
dm2754 100M spent wisely isn't a problem.  100M for a parade to celebrate what, exactly? 100M to put on a parade because the Commander-in-chief needs his ego stroked?  this is the kind of stuff you'd expect from a tin-pot dictator, not the publicly elected leader of an advanced society.
punko wrote:
spanz A parade will stop a war?
punko wrote:
squrlz4ever I'd smack him down.  Setting the desired tone starts at the top.
punko wrote:
dm2754  highest paid profession - you mean like professional athletes getting scholarships ?  Scholarships exist to attract the best talent.  by having a very desirable medical school program, the school is increasing the quality of their students.  Besides, you still have to go through an undergraduate degree (usually in biology) program at a university to qualify for medical school, so you're already paid for 4 years of university.  So not a free ride, not entirely.
punko wrote:
gohikineko Hmmm.  Communism? Dont be silly.  Exaggeration does nothing to advance the discussion.  

Is the environment is improved by abolishing environmental regulation?  Drilling in wildlife reserves helps whales how?  Logging in national parks helps biodiversity how? Eliminating minimum efficiency standards across many industries helps air quality and water quality how? 

Lower taxes does not guarantee a better life.  Yes, it means more money on your pocket, but let me know how Detroit is benefiting lower taxes this time around.  Oh, I'm sorry changing regulations allowing American companies to chase lower wage points by out-sourcing car production to other jurisdictions  is helping Detroit.  I'm so 100% sure that all those jobs are coming back to Detroit now.  Certainly the profits are coming to a few shareholders.

Shake your head.  Lower taxes means more profits in the hands of those at the top.  Trickle down economics is a lie.  Tell me again how we're returned to the golden era where all families can survive on one income, like they did not even 30 years ago.
punko wrote:
gohikineko it will cost $600 million raised, to pay for itself in perpetuity.  This is what Endowment funds are for.  Basically, the funds will generate about 30 M a year. so perhaps 300 students getting 100k or 600 geting 50k.  Most universities have several endowment programs, specific to certain policies, funded primarily by alumni.

so if $600 M means 600 new professionals per year debt free (so free to spend their new income boosting the economy instead of paying debt back to private banks) then for a million doctors per year, this would be approximately $1T for it to be funded forever. Probably too many.  How about 100,000 doctors per year. $100B for 100,000 new doctors debt free in the US per year forever. How much national debt is the US piling up every year because they can't balance taxes against spending? 

In regards to the Saudi students, they were studying here with the intent to return to the Kingdom.  They were not immigrating (and SA would be been royally pissed if they all did)  The SA program was to get their students the education that could not get at home, so they could bring those skills back to SA.  None of those students had scholarships/bursaries or Canadian gov't funding.  Their fees were paid entirely by the SA gov't.
punko wrote:
gohikineko Treat others how you to desire to be treated.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Damn, I had a point by point rejection of your post. However, it got eaten.  Suffice to say we disagree on this case and point E is insulting.
punko wrote:
gohikineko Short term benefits, laddie.  Reducing environmental, employment, and fiscal regulations will cause short term benefits for portions of the economy.  Long term impacts (like environmental degradation, increased wage gap and income disparity) will come home to roost in time.  By then, of course, the politicians will direct public money to fix those.

Privatizing the profit and using public money to cover costs is populist, short term economic thinking.
punko wrote:
gohikineko Oh, and several countries have state sponsored post secondary education. They tend to rate quite highly on the human development index, too.
punko wrote:
gohikineko I believe the intent here was suggesting that instead of focusing on "confrontational" issues the MAGA supports appear to be clamoring for, the idea of supporting local talent is a good alternative.

It was not intended to say "free university for everyone"; just focusing on the talent that appears to be in short supply - critical human resources - in this case.

Most universities do have bursary and scholarships for varying programs.  I dare say that perhaps redirecting the sports scholarships that simply provide talent for profitable professional sports organizations (which could bloody well pay for it on their own) into expanding other scholarships  might be effective.  Of course, that is for private universities to decide.  It would certainly be something that if the federal gov't provides any funding to American universities (I have no idea if they do) they could require that a certain amount of that funding go toward supporting critical professions.  

the downside, of course, is this would be decided by American politicians, so the only courses that would get bonus funding would be law.
punko wrote:
gohikineko yes, the "sober driver" should be questioned.  Taking the person back to their vehicle to drive it home was particularly stupipd. As for charge, I'm not sure there is a charge.  Certainly their common sense should be questioned, but I don't believe she could be charged as the driver was not a minor.

I believe it is just the way the summary was written.  I'm sure it was meant to be "20 minutes after being released, the same officer saw her . . .".
punko wrote:
daegog You forgot about the Contractor blaming the engineer