Thread for orphaned comments
invite response
2005 Apr 11, 5:00pm 188,444 views 117,730 comments
by Patrick ➕follow (60) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 42,911 - 42,950 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
Wow, I am amazed at the lack of simple math skills on display. Some remedial education is clearly called for.
Curious2; "Many countries, probably most, do not have single payer" Really??? .
OK, let's start by clarifying "world" vs "1st world." I read a bit about the various definitions of 1st world countries, and the most neutral seemed to be countries with the biggest GDP. The top three are USA, China, and Japan.
Reasonable people define 1st world by GDP per capita not gross gdp. China doesn't qualify by that standard.
So by your definition places Luxembourg, San Marino, Norway, Vatican City, Iceland, New Zealand, Bermuda, Finland aren't first world because they have very small gdp's. I'm sure these countries will be very surprised to learn that..
The government regulates provider prices, and prohibits insurance companies from taking a profit on basic medical insurance. Everyone can buy insurance via either their employer or municipality. In theory, everyone is required to buy insurance, but there is no penalty for the 10% of individual persons who choose not to buy it.
Where did you get this 10% number from? The wiki article (that you so disparaged) says this, but the sources cited by wiki to back it up don't mention it at all.
curious2
2014 Feb 16, 9:33am
Where did you get this 10% number from? The wiki article (that you so disparaged) says this....
Where did I "disparage" the Wikipedia article? I have said repeatedly, as Wikipedia says itself, that Wikipedia is not a source. Do you count that as disparagement?
Anyway the 10% number is in the WHO article that I linked to, in addition to the Wikipedia article that you accuse me of disparaging.
Not really. That $5100 VW Rabbit could not be sold as a new car today. The Rabbits of yesteryear are unreliable, cheaply built deathtraps, the "same car" to the Rabbits of today in name only.
What a load of horseshit. I bought the car in 1980 (not 1976) and drove it 300k. It was quiet comfortable and very reliable. It was very well built and wasn't substantially less strong than the modern version, look at the impact ratings. From your wiki aritcle "In crash tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Mark 1 received five out of five stars in a 56 km/h (35 mph) frontal crash test for both driver and passenger protection". Not exactly a deathtrap it seems.
Modern cars have gotten quieter as engineers used computer simulations to work on NVH (noise, vibration, harshness) and electronics have much improved mileage and driveability, but many things really haven't changed that much. Brakes, steering, suspensions, exhaust, basic body structure really aren't much different, just more refined with 30 years of ever more sophisticated computer aided design. I've done all my own repairs for 40 years now and have seen the changes up close and personal.
The modern rabbit/golf version is superior, but also considerably bigger over 5 inches longer and 1000 lbs heavier. You are right, today's Rabbit isn't in the same class, it's very much upscale. So if there were a downscale model to compare to what would it run 14-15k? That's still almost triple.
Check out oppositelock''s list of the best cars of the 80's. Number one is Volkswagon Rabbit GTi. http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/the-10-best-cars-of-the-1980s-587587782 From the aritcle.
"The Golf GTI is the best car of the 1980’s because it’s built like a Panzer and combines the handling a golf-kart, the power of a sports car, the utility of a small wagon, and the operating costs of a moped. It was quite possibly one of the best-handling FWD cars of all time and had a very smooth, forgiving and durable manual transmission – which was great, since I learned to drive stick on a friend’s GTI, and so it was nice not to have to pitch in for a new clutch plate.
This was the hatch that launched a thousand ships: a classic formula that has been copied ever since. For North Americans, this was our first introduction to the hot hatch concept, and we’ve been buying them ever since. A major reason for this car’s popularity, then and now, is that it was economical to run, as it shared many parts and all of its body panels with its humbler Golf siblings, and its potent little four-banger was good on gas.
The one to have is the 1986-87 or later model with the 16-valve 2.0L engine from the Passat and Corrado. Double the amount of inlet valves as previous models, it was such a big deal that Volkswagen stuck a “16v†badge on the back of the car. Much like the BMW ‘M’ badge, lots of 8-valve GTI’s had this badge slapped on to compensate for their inferiority: buyer beware."
Or this 2014 Jetta for an MSRP of $16895:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Jetta
If I had 18k in my pocket then I would have bought a Porsche 944, and laughed at the jetta.
New Renter
2014 Feb 16, 12:29pm
What a load of horseshit. I bought the car in 1980 (not 1976) and drove it 300k. It was quiet comfortable and very reliable. It was very well built and wasn't substantially less strong than the modern version, look at the impact ratings. From your wiki aritcle "In crash tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Mark 1 received five out of five stars in a 56 km/h (35 mph) frontal crash test for both driver and passenger protection". Not exactly a deathtrap it seems.
By 2014 standards it IS a deathtrap.
No Airbags
No ABS
No ESC
No Side impact beams
No "advanced high-strength steel"
http://www.worldautosteel.org/new-volkswagen-golf-lightens-up-with-high-ultra-high-strength-steel/
1980 tires (as OEM)
Take your 1980 VW Rabbit and a 2014 Jetta and ram them together at 60 MPH. Which would you prefer to be in?
As to reliability I had a mid 80's VW myself. Not bad mechanically but lots of vibration (GTI engine), exhaust noise, the seat cloth ripped easily, and it was plagued by electrical gremlins. I was glad to be rid of it at 180k
If I had 18k in my pocket then I would have bought a Porsche 944, and laughed at the jetta.
To each his own I guess.
Homeboy
2014 Feb 16, 12:40pm
It's not stupid--it's illustrating a point that you are clearly doing your best not to understand.
God are you ever retarded. We understood your point that a 100 point change would be a different percentage if the total index value were different. Understood, commented on, and moved on, like about a year ago. Now, would you care to move on to the POINT?
Homeboy
2014 Feb 16, 12:41pm
I've shown why percentages are valid,
You have done nothing of the sort. And obviously you never will.
Homeboy
2014 Feb 16, 12:56pm
I don't accept that it's an impossibility any more than it would be an impossibility for the Dow to go to zero when it's at 250.
Well good thing I never said it was impossible, then.
The odds of both happening are (basically) the same. All the companies on the index would have to go bankrupt in both cases.
Not very likely.
By that logic, when the Dow is at 500, you should only consider the percentage above 250.
Well, no - I never advocated an arbitrary cutoff. I am merely asking you to explain how it makes sense to use the percentage of the ENTIRE index value, when the movement up or down only occurs at the upper reaches of that value. You still haven't explained it.
I guess there is no way of getting through to you. I am not advocating a system; I am suggesting that the system of percentages is not logical, and asking you to explain why that isn't true. But you continue to knock down straw men rather than address the issue.
If I had 18k in my pocket then I would have bought a Porsche 944, and laughed at the jetta.
And this relates how to the OP??
Not at all, what's your point?
No Airbags
No ABS
No ESC
No Side impact beams
No "advanced high-strength steel"
Learn to drive instead of relying on electronic nannies.
epitaph
2014 Feb 16, 1:32pm
This kind of speculation is ridiculous. I think I'd find better investment advice from tarot cards.
Take your 1980 VW Rabbit and a 2014 Jetta and ram them together at 60 MPH. Which would you prefer to be in?
That's moronic. A 1900 lb car vs a 3100 lb car. Since 50% more weight doesn't matter then why don't we run my 4400 lb e32 750 deathtrap (no airbags, no esc, no side impact beams, no advanced high strength steel, does have abs but I would prefer it didn't) into your jetta and see how things work out.
RentingForHalfTheCost
2014 Feb 16, 6:23pm
I would LOVE some deflation.
Who doesn't want a new Porsche 911 for $20,000, or a mansion in New York or Beverly Hills for $100,000?
It won't much matter because you'll be unemployed and broke.
Like almost half of this country now? Interesting...
New Renter
2014 Feb 16, 6:24pm
Take your 1980 VW Rabbit and a 2014 Jetta and ram them together at 60 MPH. Which would you prefer to be in?
That's moronic. A 1900 lb car vs a 3100 lb car. Since 50% more weight doesn't matter then why don't we run my 4400 lb e32 750 deathtrap (no airbags, no esc, no side impact beams, no advanced high strength steel, does have abs but I would prefer it didn't) into your jetta and see how things work out.
Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?
New Renter
2014 Feb 16, 6:25pm
No Airbags
No ABS
No ESC
No Side impact beams
No "advanced high-strength steel"
Learn to drive instead of relying on electronic nannies.
Get a horse!
Rin
2014 Feb 16, 6:27pm
Here's one more Debbie Downer on the next generation.
One of the brighter young adults I'd known in some time ... you know, the type with a 140 IQ/photogenic memory, wins essay contests, and all that jazz, well recently, he's disclosed his dream in life and that's to blog about Boston sports teams.
I mean WTF?! I do that on my free time and sometimes, even on the job.
Sure, he's not in the pipeline for the entry level management consulting (MC) or investment banking (IB) careers, like others with his academic accolades, but really, that doesn't qualify in my book as an aspiration in life.
So what's with this crowd? The guys with grades want to work for MC/IB or the Facebook/Google fluff 'net crowd. And if they're not in line for the fake monied careers, they opt to become another slacker.
tatupu70
2014 Feb 16, 8:49pm
Well, no - I never advocated an arbitrary cutoff. I am merely asking you to explain how it makes sense to use the percentage of the ENTIRE index value, when the movement up or down only occurs at the upper reaches of that value. You still haven't explained it.
My lord. I don't know how many ways to explain this.
1--the movement doesn't only occur at the upper reaches. Look at post 4 from BAO. Did it only occur at the upper reaches in 1929?
2--If you want to compare stock indices over two time periods to see if they are behaving similarly, then you should use percentages. That's the best way to normalize gains/losses. The goal is to see how the value of an investment has changed over a time period, and percentages tell that story.
3. You obviously use the entire index value because you are comparing to a set starting point. You want to see the change from that index starting point value.
Honestly--I can't believe you are calling me retarded when you can't even grasp this most simple of concepts.
It's high comedy
He may not be as silly in his decision as you think. If his talent is in content generation ("wins essay contests"), he may well be able to sell his popular blog in bits (via ad stream) or in whole for more money than punching in time every day at FB/Google.
IMHO, today's MC/IB jobs are just like the engineering jobs a generation or two ago: past rapid growth is no guarantee of future growth, contrary to many schools implying the promise while churning out thousands of candidates to bid down labor price in the field.
Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?
E32 by far, it's a tank. Airbags aren't a cure all. Being properly belted in is the best defense, airbags are a supplement that may or may not help or can actually hurt.. Airbags were implemented primarily because ralph nader's handmaiden joan claybrook at the NHTSA wanted to show she could order car makers around and congress saw it as a way to look like they were doing something about auto safety while avoiding mandatory seat belt laws.
Here's a pretty good ariticle on the cost benefit of airbags, although somewhat out of date. http://www.scienceservingsociety.com/ts/text/ch12.htm. From the article:
"The total number of driver and right-front passenger fatalities in cars and light trucks remained relatively unchanged from 1994 through 2002 even as the percent of drivers with airbags increased from 13% to 60% and the percent of passengers with airbags increased from 3% to 50%."
Where are all the lives saved by airbags? Going from almost no airbags to half of the people having them didn't make any difference that anyone can measure.
zzyzzx
2014 Feb 16, 11:10pm
By 2014 standards it IS a deathtrap.
No Airbags
No ABS
No ESC
No Side impact beams
No "advanced high-strength steel"
You really don't need any of these. I survived the 80's just fine without them. No cellphone either. I should have the option of not buying all this overpriced crap in a new car.
zzyzzx
2014 Feb 16, 11:13pm
Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?
I've managed to drive since 1980 without bashing into a concrete wall being an issue. I suspect that the overwhelming majority of drivers never happen to bash into concrete walls either.
Was E32 750 really 4400lbs? Is that with passengers? Did the extra bank of 6-cyl bring another 1000lbs? I had an E28 5 series for many years, and it was only 2850lbs, about the same weight as the Z3 roadster that I leased for an employee in the late 1990's.
Tenpoundbass
2014 Feb 17, 12:43am
Today's generation is being crushed by the burdens placed on them the self indulgent baby boomers (ashamed to say my generation). Pretty amazing the baby boomers that went to college for free or a couple hundred dollars a semester, the ones that drove real estate and rents to astronomical levels to heloc their toys, the ones who drove tax burdens through the roof to pay for big balls macho military, the ones who sent all the decent jobs offshore to jack their stock portfolios are complaining about the work ethic of the people stuck with the bills.
You're talking about less than 10% of the boomer population that were ever in a position to allow other people to be in the position to make those decision.
Let's be honest here, here unto now, those boomers were higher level executives, who through out the 80's and 90's allowed "Consultants" to recomend they cut all of the experienced people, and replace them young dumb and full of shit jackasses fresh out of college because they were fresh and had the pulse of the young market. Which 90% of all consumer products try to target, just short of Depends under garments, and erection enhancement pills.
These companies have been ran by 20 -35 year olds making almost all of the company decisions. You need to be blaming those that are now between 40 to 55, not those older than 55.
It was my generation that screwed the pooch, if anything I blame the baby boomers for being stupid enough to allow a generation that was duped by Nilly Vinilly to run anything.
The truth about this chart; http://finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-truth-1929-stock-market-162739080.html
New Renter
2014 Feb 17, 1:30am
By 2014 standards it IS a deathtrap.
No Airbags
No ABS
No ESC
No Side impact beams
No "advanced high-strength steel"
You really don't need any of these. I survived the 80's just fine without them. No cellphone either. I should have the option of not buying all this overpriced crap in a new car.
Well if that's your wish perhaps you can get one of these on the gray market:
Ok, let's make it even. Each car into a concrete wall. Would you prefer your loved ones be in the rabbit, jetta or your airbagless E32?
I've managed to drive since 1980 without bashing into a concrete wall being an issue. I suspect that the overwhelming majority of drivers never happen to bash into concrete walls either.
Yeah, but you don't hear much from those who DID bash into concrete walls.
Analyst Destroys The Stock Market Crash Chart That Wall Streeters Are Passing Around
New Renter
2014 Feb 17, 1:59am
Where are all the lives saved by airbags? Going from almost no airbags to half of the people having them didn't make any difference that anyone can measure.
From the NHTSA:
Safety belts and air bags have made our roads substantially safer over the years. NHTSA estimates that safety belts have saved 147,246 lives in the period 1975-2001, and air bags saved 8,369 lives between 1987 and 2001. Figure 1 displays the savings in the period 1991-2001, during which about 109,000 lives were saved by belts and 8,000 by air bags
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv18/CD/Files/18ESV-000500.pdf
Between 1991 and 2001 there were still plenty of airbag-free vehicles on the road and of those airbag carrying cars I'd bet most have first generation airbags.
Shaman
2014 Feb 17, 2:06am
It's so easy to take shots at parents when you have no experience at parenting. Every single person is an expert.
What is true about raising kids right is that it takes sacrifice: gut-bus tingly high levels of sacrifice. You don't get to do what you want when you want. Your needs, whether they be food, sleep, rest, or sometimes even taking a damn dump when you have to, your needs come second. It's not easy, but being a parent is the toughest job I've ever loved.
New Renter
2014 Feb 17, 2:08am
It's so easy to take shots at parents when you have no experience at parenting. Every single person is an expert.
What is true about raising kids right is that it takes sacrifice: gut-bus tingly high levels of sacrifice. You don't get to do what you want when you want. Your needs, whether they be food, sleep, rest, or sometimes even taking a damn dump when you have to, your needs come second. It's not easy, but being a parent is the toughest job I've ever loved.
And that's when they're relatively quiet.
zzyzzx
2014 Feb 17, 2:14am
Well if that's your wish perhaps you can get one of these on the gray market:
I only buy cars whose final assembly point is in the USA and made by a US based manufacturer. I refuse to send any more money overseas than I absolutely have to.
New Renter
2014 Feb 17, 2:20am
I only buy cars whose final assembly point is in the USA and made by a US based manufacturer. I refuse to send any more money overseas than I absolutely have to.
Well then I guess you'll have to put up with a safe, quality built vehicle.
Sucks to be you :P
New Renter
2014 Feb 17, 2:34am
Here's one more Debbie Downer on the next generation.
One of the brighter young adults I'd known in some time ... you know, the type with a 140 IQ/photogenic memory, wins essay contests, and all that jazz, well recently, he's disclosed his dream in life and that's to blog about Boston sports teams.
I mean WTF?! I do that on my free time and sometimes, even on the job.
Sure, he's not in the pipeline for the entry level management consulting (MC) or investment banking (IB) careers, like others with his academic accolades, but really, that doesn't qualify in my book as an aspiration in life.
So what's with this crowd? The guys with grades want to work for MC/IB or the Facebook/Google fluff 'net crowd. And if they're not in line for the fake monied careers, they opt to become another slacker.
Much of the over 30 crowd in the late 60s felt the same way about these kids:
Most of them got their shit together eventually.
Was E32 750 really 4400lbs? Is that with passengers? Did the extra bank of 6-cyl bring another 1000lbs? I had an E28 5 series for many years, and it was only 2850lbs, about the same weight as the Z3 roadster that I leased for an employee in the late 1990's.
Don't know never ran mine (iL with the extra 5 inches) over the scale, I've seen numbers from 1850 to 1990 kg so best bet low 4000 somewhere. Lots of duals with the 5.0. Maf, computers, intakes, batteries, ac, etc.. The 850 weighed right around 4000 and it was much smaller.
Robber Baron Elite Scum
2014 Feb 17, 2:39am
100% of those 65 to 150 years of age are rotting in nursing homes.
Except me of course.
Their children returned the favored back to their "parents" when they kicked them out after turning 18.
From the NHTSA:
Air bags are the NHTSA's baby, lots of paper pushers jobs depend on "proving" air bags saving lives. Gee I wonder what the NHTSA would say?
Over half the cars in 2002 had airbags yet the number of people killed PER YEAR was about the same as 1994 when almost no cars had airbags. What don't you understand about the math involved in this? I put up the wrong ilnk before www.scienceservingsociety.com/p/155.pdf
I've seen these sorts of reports before. Last time I looked we don't live in China, Hong Kong, France, or Japan. We live in the US and as such the price of housing is seriously unaffordable when compared to the local median incomes. That's all that matters and has zilch to do with what's happening in Mumbai...
This country was founded by people fleeing EVERYWHERE ELSE. To come to the US to stake your claim, and enjoy freedom and actual affordable housing. Its worth less than shit to compare US housing prices, to housing prices for the rest of the world, if one is hoping to demonstrate affodability
Your statist addled mind is trapped in the death - or - oogoo paradox
Homeboy
2014 Feb 17, 3:09am
My lord. I don't know how many ways to explain this.
Just one would do. I'm still waiting for you to even explain it once.
1--the movement doesn't only occur at the upper reaches. Look at post 4 from BAO. Did it only occur at the upper reaches in 1929?
My god are you ever thick. That's EXACTLY my point. Movement occurred over MUCH MORE of the range of the index in 1929 than it does NOW. NOW, it only moves at the upper reaches. Jesus Christ - how many fucking times do I have to say this??????????????????
This is what's so goddam annoying about you, Tat. YOU DON'T LISTEN! You only argue against strawmen.
2--If you want to compare stock indices over two time periods to see if they are behaving similarly, then you should use percentages. That's the best way to normalize gains/losses. The goal is to see how the value of an investment has changed over a time period, and percentages tell that story.
For the fifth time, that is what you SAY. I am saying I don't see the evidence for that being true. You do understand that simply SAYING something doesn't render it automatically true, don't you?
Perhaps it is true, but you have yet to demonstrate to me that it is.
3. You obviously use the entire index value because you are comparing to a set starting point. You want to see the change from that index starting point value.
The "starting point" would be zero, if you are using a percentage of the entire index value. My point is that zero is not in play. In the early 20th Century, the index fell down below 50. That has NEVER happened again. Why are you measuring movement on a scale from some fictional zero starting point that is for all practical purposes non-existent?
Look, if you think I'm wrong, just explain why. Don't explain why some strawman you made up is wrong, explain why *I* am wrong on THIS PARTICULAR POINT. I am perfectly willing to listen to your explanation; I just haven't heard one yet.
This is not "simple" at all. It may seem so to a simple mind like yours, but that is only because you haven't thought things through.
« First « Previous Comments 42,911 - 42,950 of 117,730 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,248,991 comments by 14,895 users - desertguy, goofus, PeopleUnited online now