Recent comments by Cinco-X

burnside wrote:

I think in absolute terms, though, people in poverty here have harder conditions than their European counterparts.

It's probably unfair to make the comparison without including the value of free socialist healthcare...

shill wrote:

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: Most of the Households in the Bottom 20 Percent Have Nobody Working

FTL: Most Americans living in "poverty" have air conditioning, a motor vehicle and other amenities, including more living space than the average person in Europe — not the average poor person in Europe, the average person.

Outsider wrote:

That article wasn't about unemployment rates tho.

I stand corrected.

Outsider wrote:

Yup, and there will always be a segment of the population that can't work - elderly, disabled, etc.

If you can't work, you aren't looking for work and as such aren't really unemployed...

Rob Dawg wrote:

The $100k is exactly why they will be automated. They already depend upon AI systems for drug interactions. It is way too complex to keep in your head.

I wouldn't be surprised if mail order pharmacies already are automated. OTOH, if you go to a retail pharmacy, you may be doing so because you want to speak with a person.

Firemane wrote:

as far back as Carter, 8 million total unemployed was unremarkable. (Clinton's 2nd term is the ONLY Presidential term that was not above 8 million unemployed at some point). The 15.35 million unemployed during Obama1 easily tops the Reagan 12.05 peak (which ironically was identical to the 12.05 "W" peak that he exited the office at). So, historically, 8 million would be "normal bad". But, we aren't at 8 million - we're at 10 and a half.

How many of those administrations had 10 million UE 4 years after a recovery began?

shill wrote:

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: Most of the Households in the Bottom 20 Percent Have Nobody Working

EconomicPolicyJournal.com is stating the obvious...if nobody in your household is working, then the odds are that you're at the bottom of the income ladder...

BarleyReturns wrote:

But of course. And they have adopted a national hairstyle, too.

Stare I think youse guys are Just Pullin' Yer Leg ... Nytol

Rob Dawg wrote:

Both elected their leaders.

NK elected their leader?

Rob Dawg wrote:

What? Not delusional?

VB must be OTR or something...

Rob Dawg wrote:

a crazy old man running around a field without his jerkin

Jerkin off?

Vonbek777 wrote:

marginalizing people who disagree with your grade school locker room name calling.

:pot-kettle:

Outsider wrote:

When wealth is in the hands of the poor, a quantum tunnel opens and due to the intrinsic wealth entanglement effect, is instantly transferred to the coffers of the rich.

String theory?

Time-Wealth Dilation...

Rajesh wrote:

Not according to the quantum theory of wealth. I would explain it to you but no one actually understands what its about.

..but I'm sure it involves spin and plenty of funnily named units...

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

Oops that was a shart I think

Shart Tank...a good name for a reality TV program...

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

  • improves reception AND shields the tv from harmful mind control rays from the stealthed LEO satellites and rebroadcast towers disguised as power poles.

Savvy!

Mike in Long Island wrote:

What if you connected them in series? Wouldn't that effectively lengthen the antenna? For that matter how do the various indoor antennae's work like the Mohu Leaf which by all accounts is an excellent antenna that rivals larger outdoor antennae's?

Aero is (according to what I read yesterday) getting around copyright issues by having a single antenna per subscriber, allowing subscribers to effectively rent an antenna from them. If you have more that one subscriber per antenna then that argument no longer holds...

Rajesh wrote:

It wouldn't necessarily be the same antenna for each show. They can have more subscribers than antennas so long as they have enough antenna's for peak usage. That allows them be make better use of their capital.

It gets dicier then, but your argument makes sense...

Wilberforce wrote:

Really, all Aereo is doing is letting you rent their slingbox.

Yup.

NateTG wrote:

Rebroadcasting for non-commercial purposes = ok.

So if I lease an antenna from Aero, and bandwidth to forward the signal to me, how is that commerical?

That's Aero's argument (I think). The networks are purportedly looking at lost revenues so they're playing the IP/copyright card...

NateTG wrote:

... [unless] dime sized antennas can't be full BW ...

Do you mean data throughput, or frequency response? I'm not sure it makes sense in either case.

These antennas use RF spectrum, and that's the bandwidth I'm talking about. If you look at a typical rooftop antenna you'll note that the longest elements are basically your arm span. To receive those frequencies on an antenna the size of your thumbnail wouldn't be very efficient. data throughput should be a function of your internet pipe, not the antenna itself.

Rajesh wrote:

It's a time share, you're only renting antennas by the show. Buying an antenna means you're paying for the dead times you're not watching anything.

It may actually be that you're buying an antenna in a primo location. I can only get a few channels with my current set top HD antenna because I live in the boonies. I'd presume that for $8/month I'd be getting an antenna that could receive ALL of the Boston stations and perhaps a few from the surrounding metro areas. These signals would then be streamed to me via a high-speed internet link. I'll probably look into a roof top antenna this summer as a backup for cable and for 2nd & 3rd TVs...

Bubblisimo Gerkinov wrote:

Why rent ... can't you buy the antenna?

You can buy an antenna; you must rent theirs. Otherwise, it messes up their business model.

What's BW?

Bandwidth.

Blackhalo wrote:

NBC, CBS, ABC, etc. Are a bit miffed at Aero renting antennas to folks. Very inconvenient for sports team blackouts, when you can just watch the video feed from another market. Or worse, the fees charged to cable co, to rebroadcast.

The networks would like you to think that Aero is stealing their IP...Aero would like you to think they're renting you an antenna...I lean towards Aero for now, unless it turns out that their dime sized antennas can't be full BW, and in fact subscribers are in fact sharing rented full BW antennas .

Mr Slippery wrote:

Contraction is how muscles get stronger. Same for economies?

Yes. See: Creative Destruction

Blackhalo wrote:

Oh come now, what poster did you have on your wall when you were 11?

None. Zero. Zilch. Goose egg...

shill wrote:

Justin Bieber alienates billion fans

There's not much hope for a world where this moron has a billion fans...

vtcodger wrote:

Saw some trillium this morning.

Curious...I have that back past the creek but it hasn't popped up yet...my wife was asking about it just this weekend.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

Funny, my community consists of fat slob on the dole Tea Party members.

Someone needs a new community!!

It's odd that she chooses that community and chooses to watch Fox News 24/7 and then constantly complains about both...

Rob Dawg wrote:

I checked. Your INTJ score is not in the lower left quadrant. That means you are expected to "take it" not "dish it out" on HCN.

  1. I usually do, and
  2. I'm an INTP FWIW...

Vonbek777 wrote:

Very mature. Very.

Call people delusional and then cry when they push back...Jeez...maybe you should go back to your private thread...I'm certainly done with you.

Vonbek777 wrote:

Cinco, really...I'm glad you have your delusions to keep you warm at night.

Blow me.

Vonbek777 wrote:

I've watched 7 men in my family waste away in nursing homes, and trust me, none of them, self reliant mountain men or not, were singing the virtues of self reliance and conservatism by the end.

EOL care doesn't HAVE to be provided by the government...if they were signing the praises of socialism, they were probably socialist leaning all of their lives...

Outsider wrote:

I thought people became more socialist the older (and weaker) they got?

Get off my lawn!

Outsider wrote:

If Chimps where this smart they could have hired Gorillas for the Dirty Work...

They don't want to work dirty. I guess you don't get it.

Despite their size, gorillas are even more reticent and passive...that's why they're basically confined to a few remote areas now...

Outsider wrote:

I don't think that's Hudson's premise.

None of them will admit it...

Vonbek777 wrote:

At some point, everyone is.

Many will eventually grow up...

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

The primate has indeed tried everything. There is even the amiable chimpanzee who seems to found his society on nothing very much but his own good nature.

... only to find itself quickly annexed to a country run by angry, militant asshole [baboons]chimps?