And that's an insipid, despicable definition made by a nitwit that cheapens the impact of describing an actual weapon of mass destruction. By this definition I've launched weapons of mass destruction into the colorado atmosphere on a weekend... when I was 14.
Tell me more...
The way this administration works? Probably Ted Kaczynski.
What's Incitatus up to these days?
I don't know. Sure, Kaczynski has the bombing experience needed, but does he have enough experience at trampling on the constitution and performing expert security theater?
On the theatre side, maybe they'll cut out the middlemen and hire Andrew Lloyd Webber. Then it'll be just as effective (i.e. not effective at all), but more entertaining!
Oh, you can't get RID of the filibuster. It's an essential tool to prevent democracy from becoming two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
You know, if that asshole had done this at the beginning of the current Congress instead of waiting until now, it wouldn't have been so much whining as learning from the previous years. As it stands now, yeah, he's a whiny asshole.
Our postal system has been legislated to fail by legislators in the pocket of private carriers. It has obligations and decrees set on it that no other business has to deal with, nor any other arm of the federal government. More to the point, before these laws it was doing a great job all on it's own.
Fed-ex won't deliver to a military base in the middle east. Neither will UPS. Believe me, I've tried. They won't deliver to an APO or an FPO.
That's what I'm saying. Fed-Ex also doesn't do rural delivery, only to the POST OFFICE for last mile delivery in many areas.
And what makes you think Health Care would be any different, is my point.
So you're saying that since any successful program run by the government will inevitably be destroyed by the influence of private interests, it's better to give those same private interests (whom have already shown they don't have the best interests of the public at heart) our money because they are going to get it anyway?
You balance those interests against each other. This is why we have shitty postal service but awesome cell phones. At one time, AT&T held absolute monopoly over all telephony. Now we have more selection and options than anywhere on the planet for such things, and at lower prices - because we get more players in the game and force them to compete with each other. Monopoly is the enemy - a single monolithic entity controlling all, be it the government or a private company, or worst of all, the government under the sway of a private company. The greatest engine for human advancement and happiness is the free market, but it only works when there's more than one vendor. And the more vendors selling the same service or product, the better it is for all consumers. The proper role of the government is to ensure that choice. The last thing we should do is put all our eggs in one basket, especially since the entity holding this particular basket is well known for terrible customer service, bureaucratic inefficiency, and ineptitude.
It seems to me that graph would be very different if it was done by average income instead of locked to USD.We pay the most for phones in the world.
); they really haven't plastered masts all over the Endless Plain. I have crappy reception in some parts of Brussels, while there are about 5 masts per m² here (ever so slight exaggeration). More buildings and/or more geography are what kills coverage, not just more miles (which'll start to slow things down a bit eventually). Yeah, Denmark, Finland, Japan, UK, Sweden would definitely be even cheaper. Likely Hong Kong too.
