Driver to drive?

[amdx]

On 10/25/2013 6:31 PM, fredander503@gmail.com wrote:

WHAT? pray tell does any of this political nonsense have to do with eletronics ????? This is ALL SPAM ! !

It's all my fault. I added sed to the discussion/name calling.
I wouldn't call this spam, maybe off topic, but not spam.
Although maybe there is some shilling going on for Omamacare.

I do think the Obamacare facts are important, but this is mostly name
calling.

I mentioned I had a 44.5% increase in my premium in 13 moths.
Someone said I needed to shop, then said he had less than 50% increase
in the last 10 years. When I called him on the facts, it turned out he
had a 160% increase in those ten years.
BTW, I have shopped.

Then Bob F. said he went on the Obamacare website and in 40 minutes
got a $356 reduction in his premium.
I have ask him 4 times for something to back that up, or tell me the
reason his previous premium was so high. (possibly some expensive health
condition) Or a different deductible or lower Max Out-of-Pocket.
Obamacare does not increase your premium for any health ailments.
It charges extra to the healthy to subsidize those in poor health.
And then it subsidizes them again if their income is below $94,000.
I don't know where the subsidies are taken from.
Anyone know?

Bob F. never responded to my repeated requests for info to back up his
boast.

Mikek

 

[RobertMacy]

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:48:37 -0700, <bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com>
wrote:

...snip....

No question, it is now the law you have to have insurance. It's been
that way with automobile insurance for a long time, minimum coverages
too, this is absolutely nothing new.

God forbid the government should require people to budget responsibly!

Bad allegories. House insurance is mandated by the loaning entities, which
absolutely makes sense. And auto insurance? I don't NEED a car, but I NEED
my health.

I really prefer that this much effort, and govt expenditures, go back into
having the govt 'provide' us with good living conditions, like food
supply, water, air quality, energy, education, 'level playing' business
fields, and jobs. And, stop mucking about. It seems insane to, on the one
hand, demand insurance for health care and on the other allow/encourage
poisonous food supply. That just makes the citizenry pay twice. As in, eat
THIS, oh you're sick/overweight? pay for THAT!

 

[RobertMacy]

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:16:13 -0700, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

On 10/25/2013 6:31 PM, fredander503@gmail.com wrote:
WHAT? pray tell does any of this political nonsense have to do with
eletronics ????? This is ALL SPAM ! !


It's all my fault. I added sed to the discussion/name calling.
I wouldn't call this spam, maybe off topic, but not spam.
Although maybe there is some shilling going on for Omamacare.

What is sad is that the one of the few reliable sources of information and
true insight into the thinking of the population is through monitoring
threads, as OT as they are.

Links to impartial information helps, or even partial since it is still
more information, even slanted.

Misinformation [some people call lies] still abound. But a little
investigation and personal discernment pretty much culls those bad aspects
out.

Comments from people are basically incredibly intelligent! Throw out
posturing, name calling, etc. and LISTEN to what people have to say yields
some hope that the US will come through that subtle change pointed out by
Stormin'' Norman:

"I've noticed, about a generation ago. The folks in DC changed from
"elected representatives" to "our Nation's Leaders". They did not get my
permission to usurp power like that." - Christopher A. Young

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

piglet wrote:

Tim Williams wrote:
highly localized and loosely generalized heating methods. In order
of HAZ (heat affected zone) size, smallest to largest: e-beam,
laser, spot, arc, torch, friction, induction, forge. (Give or take
various considerations

To Tim Williams list I would add "parallel gap resistance" welds.
Used during the Apollo era to connect flat pack IC leads to printed
wiring instead of solder.

That sounds like a winner!

Not sure though where parallel gap resistance welding would fit in
the HAZ ranking.

If it was used on IC leads it must be near the top.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing remove the last word.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, 28 October 2013 03:33:19 UTC+11, Robert Macy wrote:

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:29:04 -0700, F.O.A.D. <noway@jose.com> wrote:

...snip....
My guess is that if we don't get some income equality back in this
country, and if the rich don't stop their looting at the expense of
the middle class and the poor, we're going to see Republican heads on
pikes.

Someone posted the results from an organization that analyzes wealth
distribution in countries. The US was way behind most European countries
and very shockingly, behind China AND Russia?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

The World Bank's list of Gini-indexes puts the US at 0.45, worse than Russia at 0.401, but marginally better than China at 0.47.

Most advanced industrial countries come out around 0.3, and advanced industrial countries that are serious about social responsibility - mostly Scandinavian get down to about 0.25. Germany - at 0.283 - has a booming economy and provides excellent support for the working class and the unemployed.

What the US needs is constitutional reform, not heads on pikes - both the Republicans and the Democrats are too willing to serve the interests of the top 1% of the income distribution, and insufficiently interested in the good of US society as a whole, to the extent that even the top 1% would make more more if the country were run more equitably.

Normally you have to starve some of the population to get a revolution, but the US has had two rebellions - the War of Independence and the Civil War - which were driven by the economic interests of the upper classes rather than working-class desperation.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, 28 October 2013 11:09:47 UTC+11, k...@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 09:33:19 -0700, RobertMacy
robert.a.macy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:29:04 -0700, F.O.A.D. <noway@jose.com> wrote:

...snip....

My guess is that if we don't get some income equality back in this
country, and if the rich don't stop their looting at the expense of
the middle class and the poor, we're going to see Republican heads on
pikes.

Someone posted the results from an organization that analyzes wealth
distribution in countries. The US was way behind most European countries
and very shockingly, behind China AND Russia?!

Why do you care what other people make? Too lazy to work for it
yourself?

Nobody much cares what other people make, but the Germany economy beats out the US economy in part because Germany puts more of it's work force through some kind of tertiary training than any other country, and pays for it by taxing higher incomes more heavily than the US does.

Nobody much cares what other people make, but if they are making more money and paying more taxes, your own tax burden is lower, and you have access to better government support (including - in Germany - health care that is roughly as good as the best available to the fully insured in the US, though it only costs about two thirds as much per head).

It isn't laziness to want to be part of a system where everybody is working close to as effectively as they can.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Greegor]

BS > It isn't laziness to want to be part
BS > of a system where everybody is working
BS > close to as effectively as they can.

Coming from you, Slowman, that's funny.

 

On Sunday, October 27, 2013 8:14:01 PM UTC-4, k...@attt.bizz wrote:

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:19:50 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoo..@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Saturday, October 26, 2013 3:22:59 AM UTC-4, Greegor wrote:
bloggs.fred wrote

God forbid the government should require people to budget responsibly!

A government that can't budget diddly
intends to advise citizens on how to
budget?

Not advise, overrule.

Command.

Yes, but that's not as punny.

Kinda the opposite of "by the People," eh?

 

On Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:56:28 PM UTC-4, dave wrote:

On 10/27/2013 11:40 AM, Martin Riddle wrote:
On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 12:40:35 -0500, amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote:

Dear Bob F.,
snip

I had taken my mother to the doctors the other day and a woman was on
a cell phone in the waiting room. We came in in the mist of her
conversation, this is what she said: "I'm gonna kill him, He said we
could keep our existing plan..."
I glanced at her while we were hanging our coats up, she looked like a
really pissed off democrat.

How could you do that to your constituents, I'll never know.

Cheers

What is your point? If you get insurance like most people your employer
tells you whether you can "keep your doctor" or not. Most of the
"cancelled" policies are good for another year and the carriers may have
compliant policies by then and getting all verklempt at this point in
time is indicative of a mental defect.

So, you're saying if your government--in this case, specifically
and exclusively Democrats--takes people's plans, that's okay?

Obama didn't think so. He promised you could keep your
plan, over and over, so apparently he thought people
needed to hear that. But it's not true.

He also said it would cost less. That wasn't true either.

So, one party has outlawed people's plans, after promising
they wouldn't, substituting plans that cost more, after
promising they'd cost less, and forcing people to find
new doctors.

When you upset people's lives, they're upset. That's only
natural. And when they've been lied to, they're furious.
That's natural too.

Last week, nearly four years down stream, more than half
a million people finally found out the President's promises
weren't true. They--people who had plans and liked them--
found out their plans were outlawed by the Democrats'
health control law. That's perhaps 10x more people
losing coverage in one week than who have successfully
bought DemOcare so far.

Worse, the states report so far that more than 2/3rds of new
enrollments are Medicaid, not real insurance. IOW, mass welfare
expansion.

HHS? Refuses to say.


Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 09:33:19 -0700, RobertMacy
<robert.a.macy@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:29:04 -0700, F.O.A.D. <noway@jose.com> wrote:

...snip....
My guess is that if we don't get some income equality back in this
country, and if the rich don't stop their looting at the expense of
the middle class and the poor, we're going to see Republican heads on
pikes.


Someone posted the results from an organization that analyzes wealth
distribution in countries. The US was way behind most European countries
and very shockingly, behind China AND Russia?!

Why do you care what other people make? Too lazy to work for it
yourself?

 

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:53:46 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 9:00:13 AM UTC-4, k...@attt.bizz wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:14:36 -0700 (PDT), dag... wrote:
On Friday, October 25, 2013 6:04:59 PM UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:

My guess is that if we don't get some income equality back in this
country, and if the rich don't stop their looting at the expense of the
middle class and the poor, we're going to see Republican heads on pikes.

The only rich people looting you are companies doing it
at the government's request, like the Obamacare developers,
green energy, G.E., Buffett, Wall Street, etc.

But Obama will never kill the elite--they're essential. Obama's
whole liberal model is that poor people are inferior, incapable,
and the only solution is to force patrons to patronize them.

So, O has to cultivate a patron class, and encourage it. Not
kill it. He needs them to support all the dependent
voters^H^H^H^H^H people he's creating.

But he's actively killing those who have the most to steal (small
businesses). GE doesn't (lawyers). Google doesn't (accountants).
Ma-n-Pop hardware store does (can't afford them).

That's part of the package. Regulations miniscule to G.E.
kill off their would-be tiny competitors.

No matter--they didn't support O anyhow.

The ones that have gone out of business and the ones who didn't start
don't support his agenda either.

 

On Sunday, October 27, 2013 9:32:57 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:

On 10/27/2013 11:56 AM, dave wrote:

snip

What is your point? If you get insurance like most people your employer
tells you whether you can "keep your doctor" or not. Most of the
"cancelled" policies are good for another year and the carriers may have
compliant policies by then and getting all verklempt at this point in
time is indicative of a mental defect.

The issue here is that when Obama said that people could keep their
existing plan he should have quantified it by stating that he was
talking about employer plans that at least met the minimum requirements
(of which nearly all do).

Obama was very specific, and very emphatic--he said if you
like your plan, you can keep it, no matter what. Period.

Here is a series of his cringe-worthy assurances:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfl55GgHr5E&feature=player_embedded#t=31

He also said it'd cost less. That wasn't true either.

What we're seeing now is people paying themselves for very poor
insurance being told that their rates are going up, or their policies
being cancelled, because the polices don't meet even the bare minimum of
coverage offered in the "Bronze" plan.

False.

You know that the Republicans have lost the battle when all they have to
complain about is a web site that's unable to handle the demand and the
complaints of people that are going to have to change to an insurance
plan that's actually a much better deal for them.

You know someone has a poor argument when they sell
what's essentially a welfare program on untruths, and
have to hide the realities for more than four years.

You know they have a weak argument when they have to
modify their "free market" website at the last minute
to specifically prevent shopping and browsing, so that
people can't see real prices without their welfare
subsidies, lest they be rate-shocked.

The honest, best estimates[1] are that Obamacare costs 32%
more (national average) than the care people already had.

[1] The Society of Actuaries, a scrupulously neutral nerd-herd
devoted to estimating insurance costs.

That's not a solution to health care costing too much. It's worse.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:19:50 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 3:22:59 AM UTC-4, Greegor wrote:
bloggs.fred wrote

God forbid the government should require people to budget responsibly!

A government that can't budget diddly
intends to advise citizens on how to
budget?

Not advise, overrule.

Command.

 

[Greegor]

Martin Riddle wrote:
MR > I had taken my mother to the doctors the
MR > other day and a woman was on a cell phone
MR > in the waiting room. We came in in the
MR > [midst] of her conversation, this is what
MR > she said: "I'm gonna kill him, He said we
MR > could keep our existing plan..."
MR >
MR > I glanced at her while we were hanging
MR > our coats up, she looked like a really
MR > pissed off democrat.
MR >
MR > How could you do that to your
MR > constituents, I'll never know.
MR > Cheers

"dave" wrote:

What is your point? If you get insurance like most people your employer
tells you whether you can "keep your doctor" or not. Most of the
"cancelled" policies are good for another year and the carriers may have
compliant policies by then and getting all verklempt at this point in
time is indicative of a mental defect.

James Arthur wrote:

So, you're saying if your government--in this case, specifically
and exclusively Democrats--takes people's plans, that's okay?

Obama didn't think so. He promised you could keep your
plan, over and over, so apparently he thought people
needed to hear that. But it's not true.

He also said it would cost less. That wasn't true either.

So, one party has outlawed people's plans, after promising
they wouldn't, substituting plans that cost more, after
promising they'd cost less, and forcing people to find
new doctors.

When you upset people's lives, they're upset. That's only
natural. And when they've been lied to, they're furious.
That's natural too.

Last week, nearly four years down stream, more than half
a million people finally found out the President's promises
weren't true. They--people who had plans and liked them--
found out their plans were outlawed by the Democrats'
health control law. That's perhaps 10x more people
losing coverage in one week than who have successfully
bought DemOcare so far.

Worse, the states report so far that more than 2/3rds of new
enrollments are Medicaid, not real insurance. IOW, mass welfare
expansion.
HHS? Refuses to say.
Cheers,
James Arthur

The emperor is wearing no clothes but
all of his sycophants refuse to see that.

Will they realize that they have been
lied to disastrously before things
are damaged beyond repair?

 

[josephkk]

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:22:53 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
<td_03@verizon.net.invalid> wrote:

piglet wrote:
Tim Williams wrote:
highly localized and loosely generalized heating methods. In order
of HAZ (heat affected zone) size, smallest to largest: e-beam,
laser, spot, arc, torch, friction, induction, forge. (Give or take
various considerations

To Tim Williams list I would add "parallel gap resistance" welds.
Used during the Apollo era to connect flat pack IC leads to printed
wiring instead of solder.

That sounds like a winner!


Not sure though where parallel gap resistance welding would fit in
the HAZ ranking.

If it was used on IC leads it must be near the top.

I saw plenty of that on Hughes combination radar, sonar, and computer
displays. It is a variation of spot welding very like a battery tab
welder. HAZ is quite small.

?-)

 

On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 18:47:34 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, 28 October 2013 11:09:47 UTC+11, k...@attt.bizz wrote:
On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 09:33:19 -0700, RobertMacy
robert.a.macy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 15:29:04 -0700, F.O.A.D. <noway@jose.com> wrote:

...snip....

My guess is that if we don't get some income equality back in this
country, and if the rich don't stop their looting at the expense of
the middle class and the poor, we're going to see Republican heads on
pikes.

Someone posted the results from an organization that analyzes wealth
distribution in countries. The US was way behind most European countries
and very shockingly, behind China AND Russia?!

Why do you care what other people make? Too lazy to work for it
yourself?

Nobody much cares what other people make, but the Germany economy beats out the US economy in part because Germany puts more of it's work force through some kind of tertiary training than any other country, and pays for it by taxing higher incomes more heavily than the US does.

You're lying, again, Slowman. Germany's economy is completely
irrelevant, as is everything else you say. You are irrelevant.


>Nobody much cares what other people make, but if they are making more money and paying more taxes, your own tax burden is lower, and you have access to better government support (including - in Germany - health care that is roughly as good as the best available to the fully insured in the US, though it only costs about two thirds as much per head).

More taxes, thanks to lefties like you Slowman.

>It isn't laziness to want to be part of a system where everybody is working close to as effectively as they can.

Bullshit. It *is* about laziness. You are about as lazy as they
come, Slowman. Speaking of which, just how *is* that oscillator
coming?

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, 28 October 2013 13:38:19 UTC+11, Greegor wrote:

BS > It isn't laziness to want to be part
BS > of a system where everybody is working
BS > close to as effectively as they can.

Coming from you, Slowman, that's funny.

It's actually sad. I'm perfectly certain that I'm not working as effectively as I might, and I'd love to be a member of a system which could manage to offer me a job. Sadly, most people think that if you are 70 you should be happy to be retired.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Greegor]

BS > It isn't laziness to want to be part
BS > of a system where everybody is working
BS > close to as effectively as they can.

G > Coming from you, Slowman, that's funny.

BS > It's actually sad. I'm perfectly certain
BS > that I'm not working as effectively as
BS > I might, and I'd love to be a member of
BS > a system which could manage to offer me
BS > a job. Sadly, most people think that if
BS > you are 70 you should be happy to be retired.

The reason you're so very fond of socialism
is that you are not a producer, and haven't
been for many years. Under actual socialism
however, you would be sweeping streets or
cleaning toilets.

Capitalism wouldn't insult your huge ego by
asking you to do such lowly tasks, Slowman.

 

On Monday, October 28, 2013 4:15:25 PM UTC-4, Greegor wrote:

Under actual socialism
however, you would be sweeping streets or
cleaning toilets.

I've thought of doing that--something menial, possibly
out-of-doors. There's no shame in it--all honest labor
is honorable.

We could take former Speaker Pelosi's advice and all become
artists. Few late nights, free Obamacare, EBT, etc. Steady
money, for just being the fabulous people we already are...

IOW, WIJG?

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Greegor]

JT > I think I'll just become a wino >:-}

Have the socialists come up with a job code for that yet?

Having grown up in family businesses
and having managed small businesses
I was quite accustomed to menial duties.

Then I worked at one company where
I was asked to collect the garbage
one day and I thought nothing of it
until I noticed that other people
at the company sneered and acted
snotty, even asserted that I must
not be a professional since I was
willing to do trash rounds.

Under capitalism, Slowman is known
for the worthless putz he really is.

Socialism appeals to Slowman because
he thinks socialists would make maximum
use of his enormous ego, but even they
would recognize what a putz he truly is.