“Absolutely incorrect. He charged it to where it said it would take him 31 miles and then attempted to go 50+ on it. Then he claims they told him to do that,”
Patient Zero on Feb 16, 2013 at 03:01:41
“Why would he do this if they did not tell him to? This makes no sense. The endless conspiracies that people engage in for every news story is tiresome. It's far more reasonable to assert he did what he thought they told him to do. ”
“He claims they told him to do a lot of things. None of which would make any sense. I tend to side with the company who wants to make their product look good in telling the reviewer to do things they know will help that happen rather than things that don't make any sense and are a hindrance to that goal.”
Patient Zero on Feb 16, 2013 at 03:03:12
“I tend to side with someone who is basically impartial and who has no axe to grind or product to promote. ”
May 14, 2012 at 19:03:53
“I don't think you understand Hollywood Accounting. Going with a sister company that charges outrageous fees for production support to inflate the price of a production is much different than just flat out lying on paperwork about how much a production cost to get a better tax credit. What he did wasn't Hollywood Accounting, it was fraud.”
“You're still missing what he is saying. A majority voted in our government. The people who don't want the leaders we have still have to abide by what they do and pay taxes to keep them in operation. That's how democracy works. And you're 100% right, with a private company, if you don't like something and enough others don't like it (unions) they have the complete power to vote them out. That is, if a majority decides to do so.”
zipowitz on Jan 18, 2012 at 23:12:11
“I understand and there are parallels however government and a private company are two different things entirely. A new President, I may not have voted for, may or may not increase my taxes or could even decrease them. A union just by it's mere existence in a new company is forcibly taking money from me and reducing my paycheck and not representing me. They are also taking that money and using it for political purposes. Great point here was in CA when the CA Teachers Union gave huge sums to fight Prop 8. My teacher friends were very upset that their union was giving money to an effort they wanted nothing to do with. In addition, this was my tax money that was being funneled to unions via "dues" without ever even making it into the teachers hands. It's confiscatory by nature.
But again, the difference in our government is our laws and the fact that I have no choice unless I want to go to jail.”
“Your grammar is lost, my friend. I understand perfectly. I was raised to believe a democracy was the greatest thing in the world. If the majority of the country decide upon something, the other 49% have to abide by it. There are also countless other ways to circumvent paying dues. Those who whine about people who didn't vote for the union being forced to pay dues, that's democracy at work.”
rogergoldkin on Jan 18, 2012 at 20:52:28
“It destroys unions. People who work in a union shop must be represented by that union even though they pay no dues! That's "right to work". Why would one want to pay for the benefits achieved by a union when they get those benefits for free? That, my friend, is what they believed in the old USSR. Why should I work, when I get things free!”
“You obviously have no idea how a workplace operates. It's a takes a majority of workers to vote in a union. It doesn't get more democratic than that. If, at any time, workers are unhappy with the union, they can vote them out. It's unfair to free-ride the representations unions give and vote in laws that aim to kill the democratically elected unions.”
“No judgment on my part. I know fellow men donate sperm all of the time. I just just personally don't think $8k or any amount of money would be enough to have a child biologically linked to me in the world that I couldn't be with.
I will, however, judge your expectation that your parents should support you because you went for a lib arts degree. Grow up.”
desifrau on Dec 17, 2012 at 13:03:30
“Indeed. As an adoptee who know no1 related to her, this would NOT be a good option for me.”
“As I said in my response above, I'm right in the middle of my average weight range for my height. Cholesterol and Triglyceride were great last time it was checked. They were actually great all throughout middle school and high school, which was checked twice monthly for six years. My sibling is a D1 football player with a body fat percentage of 11%.
I never said I didn't eat vegetables. I just didn't eat them at school. For one, they were disgusting and anything but fresh or satisfying. Which having a satisfying meal was very important, as I participated in sports year round and spent time after practice running the neighborhood until the street lights came on.
I just don't think it's the USDA's place to make this decision. Lobby for a healthier option if that's what you want. Most schools already have that. But don't argue that a parent doesn't have the right to regulate their child's diet as they see fit. To a reasonable level anyway. Because here's the sad truth that most parents know. You can keep increasing the amount of vegetables on a kid's lunch plate in place of the things they prefer and do you know what you have? You have an entire school of hungry kids. But that's fine. I guess next we'll just mandate rules that the kids actually digest the food or face penalty.”
cwebster on Nov 19, 2011 at 21:41:24
“You don't think it's the USDA'a decision, fine. But why are you okay with it being the decision of Congress aka Corporate toadies?”
“You missed my entire point because you don't know how to interpret things in any way other than one that will help you believe you are right. I was perfectly healthy as a child. I still fall right in the center of the idea weight for my height and body frame. As a teenager I was on a really serious medication that made it necessary for me to get blood labs twice a month and my cholesterol and triglyceride counts were better than most.
My point is, if you want a healthy option, fine. However, there is still a large portion of the population that has a very different beliefs when it comes to dieting and exercise regimen and it's not really up to the government to tell these people they are wrong. They pay taxes just the same.
It's just sad that a vocal minority feels the need to tell other people what is best for their kids. But you go on and keep believing that everyone who doesn't buy into everything you believe is ignorant. It has to be true because you said it. It's not like my parents dieting beliefs helped produce a kid with a body fat percentage 10% lower than what is considered low for a person of his size....”
cwebster on Nov 19, 2011 at 21:39:43
“You may think you are healthy, but don't be surprised if you have a lot of problems when you are older (like obesity, diabetes or diverticulitis) if you continue eating like that.”
GreyAlaska on Nov 18, 2011 at 19:50:06
“I respect your opinion, but I agree with modjoe. Kids aren't going to buy the healthy option, even if they badly need it, as long as the unhealthy option was right there. At the very least, we need to have better healthy options available, because (at least at my school) the "healthy options" aren't edible and do not contain enough food to constitute a meal, whereas the pizza and burgers are semi-edible and filling.
Also too, I know that at schools with better nutrition plans kids tend to perform significantly better even taking into account socioeconomic differences.
I don't mean to argue, I'm just posting another side to the argument”
saplayer on Nov 18, 2011 at 19:08:55
“By your argument, would it also be ok for children to smoke or drink alcohol?”
“Your assumption that kids lack the ability to think and decide what they like for themselves is insulting. At 23 I haven't been out of school long. I remember Elementary and Middle School when I was in the same situation. I didn't ditch my vegetables into the trash because of some conspiracy involving the frozen food industry convincing me that wasn't what I wanted. It just wasn't what I wanted. I tasted vegetables and pizza and everything else they had to offer and I preferred the pizza. It's not rocket science.
To this day I go out of my way to buy school pizzas in bulk for lunch because I love them. I was healthy as a kid. Thankfully for school children they have the choice to decide what they like instead of having overly-obsessive control freaks decide what they think every school child should eat.
This especially rings true for me because my younger brother was overweight as a child. It didn't have anything to do with his diet, that's just how he was. He had to endure several meetings with his teachers and our parents where the teacher, with no real knowledge of his medical history or any facts to support their opinions, telling my parents he was unhealthy and that they needed to do something about it. Now he's a 6' 8" Division 1 football player being scouted by professional football teams and an all around beastly specimen that is healthier than anyone I know.”
econsheep on Nov 18, 2011 at 16:19:27
“If kids have not been taught about nutrition and the consequences of the lack of good nutrition, then yes, they lack the ability to make good decisions. That is why they have parents and adults to guide them. We are responsible for the health and well being of those entrusted in our care. If we are poor decision makers, we can be taken to court over this. Crazy but true. If you think frozen pizza is healthy, let's just see how that works out for you in the end. Food is way more processed and chemical and unhealthy these days than when you were in school, no matter how old you are.”
krisisme on Nov 18, 2011 at 15:32:01
“Just because kids can doesn't mean that they should be allowed to eat whatever they want, because they don't always know what is actually good for them. I've heard of a kid who refused to eat nothing but mac and cheese, and his parents didn't have enough of a backbone to force him to eat his vegetables. And then the kid got scurvy.
In middle school I ate a lot of junk food during lunch, like brownies, pizza & candy. I was thin, but I was probably pretty unhealthy. I definitely didn't know what was good for me, but then again, my public school hardly had anything close to healthy options.
I'm also opposed to a "nanny state", but I refuse to let our gov't force schools to serve processed food like frozen pizza. Not only is it more expensive, but maybe you don't realize how important it is to eat real food. I'm 23 too, and I've eaten my fair share of fast food AND home cooked meals. For a while I ate only fast food or frozen food because I liked the taste and convenience, but I felt like crap (physically and mentally). It was not natural. It was not healthy.
I still don't like vegetables, but I eat them because I know I have to. I don't have the patience to hear young or old kids complain about eating healthy when there are millions dying from starvation.
I'll bet that eating healthier will affect kids' behavior, too.”
modjoe23 on Nov 18, 2011 at 15:03:18
“There not much anyone can say in response to this ignorant post.
In your first paragraph you're basically saying that it's ok that you ditched vegatables for pizza, just because they didn't taste as good. Well isn't that a grown up concept...."Not everything that is good for you will come with melting cheese and wrapped in sugar"
Your second paragrah shows that you have continued to be ignorant even as you've gotten older. And you've convinced yourself that you're doing the right thing because you "love me". Well love makes it all ok for you to not eat heatlhy, right?
And as for your third paragraph, well, it seems your parents and teachers are just as ignorant...
I'm sorry to sound harsh, but I'm not ok with you posting that it's ok to be unheatly just because it tastes better and you love it, and not all fat people are necessarily unhealthy.”
“No. They get money from the government if they do things the way they do it. So they hardly renegotiate terms with people who aren't making their payments. But, in the end it's their property to do with what they please and people shouldn't make monetary commitments they can't keep. I know if someone owed me money for something they were financing from me I'd be swift about taking it back too. Can't fault anyone for that. So if they just mow their grass everything would be all square. But this article, although it implies the entire nation, doesn't really apply to everywhere. The foreclosures in our town are well maintained. That's because we have city officials who hold the banks to the law everyone else follows. Los Angeles should stop being a toilet and do the same.”
MisterCee on May 23, 2011 at 14:33:42
“That's true, it is the banks property and they can do whatever they want, but if they do take the property back, then they should at least keep it up and not let it become a blight in the community. I don't know what city you live in, but LA is not a toilet. I wish it was because then maybe so many people would stop moving here.”
“Across the nation? Every foreclosure in this town, no matter what bank owns it, is promptly mowed and inspected once a week by various mowing crews. Maybe LA should enact harsher penalties for homeowners that don't maintain their property. Here, if you let your grass get out of hand, or pile garbage in your yard, the city will send in a crew to clean the mess up and then bill you hundreds of dollars for doing so. Seems to keep everything in order pretty well. I know there's a foreclosed house across the street that has one of the best looking yards on the block.”
“Did you bother to read past there? You know, the part where he does speak out on KO's exit and the impact it will have on the company. Or before that, when he alluded to why KO's relationship deteriorated with MSNBC?”
“Yeah, the Mayan are able to predict something to a specific date that even modern scientists cannot predict.....
I thought the looney bin shut off the internet at night.”
InspiredByTruth on Jan 21, 2011 at 21:59:40
“..because we all know "modern scientists" would be allowed to go on tv and tell the world of an impending gamma burst, with no interference from governments....riiiight....are you naive, or just "simple"?”
anonymous reader on Jan 21, 2011 at 03:14:03
“nah but we don't mind you, even if you are arrogant & uninformed :-)”
“Could happen today. Could happen in 100,000 years. It's very uncertain because the evidence is shaky at best. The only known thing is that someday, it will supernova. (Or already has....) The only part I disagree with is the notion that it will be as bright as the sun.
Let’s suppose just for the sake of rough argument that when Betelguese goes it will be 100 billion times brighter than the sun. That’s not an unusual brightness for a supernova; they can often rival an entire galaxy.
On the other hand, Betelguese is a lot farther away. At the speed of light, the sun is 8 minutes away. At the speed of light, Betelguese is 600 light years away. I estimate that is is therefore approximately 2.4 trillion times farther than the sun (600 years converted to minutes, divided by 8). And the intensity of light falls off as the square of the distance. So while it is intrinsically 100 billion times brighter than the sun, it is at the same time going to be 5.6 x 10 ^18 times dimmer because it is farther. The net effect is that Betelguese will wind up far, far dimmer than the sun as seen from earth. Something like 56 million times dimmer when both factors are taken into account.”
Mimi ni Wewe on Jan 21, 2011 at 03:06:31
“You confuse us RBurns17, when you say, "At the speed of light, Betelguese is 600 light years away." Even at the speed of a tortoise, Beteulguese would STILL be 600 light years away. A light year is a measure of distance not time. Are we to suppose you meant to say Betelguese is 600 years away, at the speed of light?”
oldngrumpy on Jan 21, 2011 at 02:49:57
“The only possible hole I see in your calculation is that you use "light's" characteristics incorrectly. We don't know that the particles emitted from the super nova will behave in a similar manner to light, as we have never had a mass spontaneous emission source to measure before. If one is only interested in visible "brightness" then you are most likely correct. I am certainly not qualified to question your math.
If we knew what to measure, we might find that many particle types will arrive before the visible light, as the distance involved would give considerable separation between light speed particles and "faster than light speed" particles.”
Hitchcockcameo on Jan 21, 2011 at 02:17:34
“I think your analysis is faulty. And I know this empirically because the supernova in 1054 that created the Crab Nebula was visible during the day by Chinese and Arab astronomers, and that exploding star was something like 6300 ly away. Ten times farther away than Betelgeuse. Luminosity does fall off as the square of distance. Because of this, we can guess that Betelgeuse, being 1/10th the distance, will be 100 times more luminous than SN 1054. I'm guessing that's pretty bright. (this doesn't even take into account that Betelgeuse is about 5 times more massive than the star that created SN 1054).”
AmericanFool on Jan 21, 2011 at 02:11:19
“Guess I'll hold off on those solar company stocks.”
MochasMom on Jan 21, 2011 at 02:09:18
“I think I'm impressed. I have no idea what you said or if you're correct, but it sounds very good :)”
Jan 3, 2011 at 14:19:56
“If what they do is paid. Then what do you call a stay at home wife? They do the same thing. Have sex, don't work, yet collect a weekly allowance from their husband. Same exact thing. Welcome to life.”