Driver to drive?

They also claim "In addition to the Saville payout, the county already has had to fork over more than $43 million in lawsuit settlements and expenses to the families of jail-abuse victims during Arpaio's tenure as sheriff."

The county is getting ripped off big time by that joke. The elections have to be rigged.

 

[Greegor]

This was promoted as having a size
advantage but has no line isolation that
would pass safety standards.

One hint is that they never mentioned
line isolation which would be an
obvious problem.

By the time they add line isolation
this design won't be so very small,
will it?

 

On Saturday, December 28, 2013 4:35:14 PM UTC-5, Jim Thompson wrote:

As for the James Saville case... "four years in jail awaiting trial"

has a smell about it that someone other than the sheriff's department

was involved... sheriffs don't determine detention while awaiting

trial... Judges do.

The pre-trial detention lasted for four years because the suspect was indicted, no warrant required, and Arpaio's office was sandbagging the delivery of critical investigational and evidentiary reports needed by the prosecution and the defense.

Here's more info on that useless narcissist who needs to be kicked in the trash where he belongs:

"Controversy and criticism
To several organizations such as the ACLU and Amnesty International, Arpaio’s actions may be based less on a desire to serve the public and to lower crime, but more on demagoguery and grandstanding that does not serve the public welfare. Amnesty International issued a report critical of the treatment of inmates in Maricopa County facilities. The family members of inmates who have died in jail custody have filed lawsuits against the sheriff’s office. The lawsuits have cost Maricopa County more than $43 million in settlement claims during Arpaio’s tenure.
From 2004 through November 2007, Arpaio was the target of 2,150 lawsuits in U.S. District Court and hundreds more in Maricopa County courts; 50 times as many prison-conditions lawsuits as the New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined.
Arpaio is named in a class-action lawsuit, Hart v. Arpaio, brought by Phoenix attorney Debra Hill and the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of jail inmates. The lawsuit centers on the treatment of pretrial detainees, who are legally innocent until proven guilty. The lawsuit claims that Arpaio is violating the constitutional rights of those detainees. The trial in the lawsuit began on August 12, 2008.
By mid-2007, more than $50 million in claims had been filed against the sheriff’s office and Maricopa County.
In her book on prison policy The Use of Force by Detention Officers, Arizona State University criminal justice professor Marie L. Griffin reported on a 1998 study commissioned by Arpaio to examine recidivism rates based on conditions of confinement. Comparing recidivism rates under Arpaio to those under his predecessor, the study found “there was no significant difference in recidivism observed between those offenders released in 1989-1990 and those released in 1994-1995.”

 

[mike]

On 12/28/2013 3:35 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2013-12-28, mike <ham789@netzero.net> wrote:
On 12/27/2013 3:58 PM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:

The nasty thing with that configuration is that the inductor will also
carry DC, requiring a quite big choke with an air gap (size comparable
to the output transformer in audio applications). Putting the
inductance prior to the rectifier and you do not have to handle the DC
current and no air gap needed.


If the inductor is sized to carry the peak current without saturating,
why does it matter which side of the rectifier?
What am I missing?

wind-up

Thanks, that helps a lot.

 

[Robert Baer]

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 21:16:17 -0800, the renowned Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Tim Williams wrote:
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/C4532X5R1C226M230KA/445-3928-1-ND/1923435

Which one? Digikey has four alone, and there's probably more on their
website. A direct link would tell us what you're talking about.

I haven't had problems viewing their datasheets in Chrome's built-in PDF
viewer, nor Foxit Reader (which is free, and less buggy and less evil than
Adobe). I haven't tried printing, but I doubt "fit to page" won't do as
it says.

Tim

All i have is Adobe Reader 4.05 (too old to accept file), and GsView.
Digikey seems to not have datasheets (at least for the TDK caps); try:
http://www.mouser.com/Search/Refine.aspx?Keyword=C4532X5R1C226M230KA


Seems to open fine in Acrobat 10 for me, and prints fine. Other than
it being landscape, I don't see anything unusual about it.

It was produced from Excel (why do Asians use Excel as page layout
software?) in Adobe PDFMaker 11 (Japanese version), and should be
compatible with anything after Acrobat 6.0 (PDF V1.5).

Acrobat 6.0 was released more than a decade ago, and your 4.05 is
probably late 20th century software. Acrobat 9 is probably the newest
version that will play with Win2K.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

Verified; ver 9.0 is newest.
Screws up my Adobe 4.05 viewer/writer so i ripped it out.
Using GsView 5.0 instead for viewer if the Acrobat reader barfs.

 

[Robert Baer]

Fred Abse wrote:

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 21:41:14 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote:
On 27/12/2013 8:51 AM, Robert Baer wrote:
Take the TDK datasheet for their C4532X5R1C226M230KA.
It bloats the scree (easy fix, just "-" a few times).
BUT it is too big to print on ONE sheet of paper.
HOW can one get it to fit?

Select "fit to paper" at printing?

Absolutely NO such thing in GsView!

There certainly is in GSview 4.9.

And every older version I've had.

Screenshot of the dialog box posted to a.b.s.e.

Alternatively, you can "print", to a file, using the pswrite device,
which should give you a pdf 1.4 (Acrobat 5) file, then print from Acrobat.
That actually puts a 1.4 wrapper around the later format. Useful for
people who don't want to install the latest, bloated, Acrobat.

OK; i have tried everything.
One: I have GsView ver 5.0 and GhostScript ver 9.10; both the most
recent versions (Win32-bit) i can find and they are written for each other.
Two: That dialog box exists nowhere in GsView; there certainly is no
"fit to page" function in GsView.
Three: If i set GsView to Landscape mode first, then Convert with
pdfwrite at 300DPI (not the default 600DPI that i had been using), then
and only then do i get a document that shows everything (one page).

So, i ask again, where, oh where did that come from?

 

[Robert Baer]

Greegor wrote:

Surfing away from news stories about the
30MHz to 300 MHz switching power supplies
the first time I ran across a story that
the United Nations wants to standardize
wall warts across many different brands
of similar equipment to make replacement
and recycling easier and to cut back on
e-waste.

Supposedly it's been warmly received by
cell phone makers so far.

But weren't these wall warts already on
the way to being standardized because
of the option of using USB port power?

Then I remembered that lots of these wall
warts are inferior quality fire hazards.

Do you think the UN will get into
regulating the QUALITY of wall warts
to cut down on e-waste? LOL

Is the UN trying to become a government
itself or a government regulator?

* YES!!
It is all about power.
Greed breeds more greed.
Just look at the US "peace"keepers.
And how we have been raping South America countries since (at least)
FDR (remember that guy that stole our gold).

Do you think they'll standardize computer
printer ink jet and laser toner refills?

I'd actually like to see them end the
refill scams with "chipped" cartridges
and support refilling.
That would also cut down e-waste.

But why the United Nations?
* Like i said. It is all about power.

Aren't there already international
organizations to standardize things
like that?
* And what does that have to do with the price of rice in China?

>

 

[Robert Baer]

Fred Abse wrote:

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 21:41:14 -0800, Robert Baer wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote:
On 27/12/2013 8:51 AM, Robert Baer wrote:
Take the TDK datasheet for their C4532X5R1C226M230KA.
It bloats the scree (easy fix, just "-" a few times).
BUT it is too big to print on ONE sheet of paper.
HOW can one get it to fit?

Select "fit to paper" at printing?

Absolutely NO such thing in GsView!

There certainly is in GSview 4.9.

And every older version I've had.

Screenshot of the dialog box posted to a.b.s.e.

Alternatively, you can "print", to a file, using the pswrite device,
which should give you a pdf 1.4 (Acrobat 5) file, then print from Acrobat.
That actually puts a 1.4 wrapper around the later format. Useful for
people who don't want to install the latest, bloated, Acrobat.

Tried the pswrite; same problem.
But.. here you mentioned a newer GsView version; will try that.
hanks.

 

[John Fields]

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 11:09:11 +0530, "Anand P. Paralkar"
<anand.paralkar@gnospammale.com> wrote:

Hi everyone,

I am trying to build a relatively high voltage-high current DC source.
The scheme is simple and uses no regulation (therefore no feedback
control). The scheme is as follows:

Utility mains supply => Variac => Three full wave rectifier bridges in
parallel => Huge capacitor bank => Load.

Variac: something similar to this one:
http://orgchem.colorado.edu/Technique/Equipment/Communityequip/Variac.html

Bridge: KBPC3510

Capacitor bank: 6800uF, 400V

I could not find a full wave bridge rectifier with a sufficiently high
current rating and therefore, I thought of paralleling three that were
readily available.

I start (slowly) increasing the output AC voltage of variac so as to
increase the DC supply to the load. However, the variac fuse blows-up
at around 10V AC output!

Paralleling three bridges may not be the most elegant way to build a
high-current DC source, but I do not understand what could cause the
fuse in the variac to blow-up. (Please note, everything works fine with
a single bridge rectifier. This ofcourse limits the amount of load
current I can draw out from the source.)

Thank you for your help and greetings for festive season. Wish everyone
a new year full of good health and prosperity!

Regards,
Anand

---
Here's what you'll have with the 240V VARIAC cranked to 100% and
ideal diodes:

Version 4
SHEET 1 880 852
WIRE -464 48 -640 48
WIRE -304 48 -464 48
WIRE -464 80 -464 48
WIRE -304 80 -304 48
WIRE -464 192 -464 144
WIRE -416 192 -464 192
WIRE -304 192 -304 144
WIRE -304 192 -352 192
WIRE -640 208 -640 48
WIRE -464 240 -464 192
WIRE -464 240 -544 240
WIRE -544 288 -544 240
WIRE -464 288 -464 240
WIRE -432 288 -464 288
WIRE -304 288 -304 192
WIRE -304 288 -352 288
WIRE -464 352 -464 288
WIRE -304 352 -304 288
WIRE -640 448 -640 288
WIRE -464 448 -464 416
WIRE -464 448 -640 448
WIRE -304 448 -304 416
WIRE -304 448 -464 448
FLAG -544 288 0
SYMBOL voltage -640 192 R0
WINDOW 3 24 104 Invisible 2
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 2
WINDOW 39 0 0 Left 2
SYMATTR Value SINE(0 339 50)
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMBOL cap -352 176 R90
WINDOW 0 0 32 VBottom 2
WINDOW 3 32 32 VTop 2
SYMATTR InstName C1
SYMATTR Value 6800ľ
SYMBOL diode -320 80 R0
SYMATTR InstName D1
SYMBOL diode -480 352 R0
SYMATTR InstName D2
SYMBOL diode -448 144 R180
WINDOW 0 24 64 Left 2
WINDOW 3 24 0 Left 2
SYMATTR InstName D3
SYMBOL diode -288 416 R180
WINDOW 0 24 64 Left 2
WINDOW 3 24 0 Left 2
SYMATTR InstName D4
SYMBOL res -336 272 R90
WINDOW 0 0 56 VBottom 2
WINDOW 3 32 56 VTop 2
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 3.39
TEXT -626 474 Left 2 !.tran .2

 

[Greegor]

I've flushed out and disassembled a handful.

I flush thoroughly, use a plastic bristle
brush to get keytops between keys but
complete disassembly and meticulous
drying with a terry towel.

Only do it on my own or as a big
favor for somebody else.
Not economically viable "on the clock".

I've never seen the "silicone oil"
mentioned here, but believe it.

 

To the OP
I think you mentioned that the application is to charge a battery.
Is this true?

Also, the others are trying to tell you that the reason the variac is blowing the fuse may be that one of the diodes is now defective.
Just because the fuse is in the variac and the diodes don't get hot does not the diodes are good.

Do you know how to check the diodes with an Ohm meter?

Happy new year
Mark

 

[Anand P. Paralkar]

On 27-12-2013 11:09, Anand P. Paralkar wrote:

Hi everyone,

I am trying to build a relatively high voltage-high current DC source.
The scheme is simple and uses no regulation (therefore no feedback
control). The scheme is as follows:

Utility mains supply => Variac => Three full wave rectifier bridges in
parallel => Huge capacitor bank => Load.

Variac: something similar to this one:
http://orgchem.colorado.edu/Technique/Equipment/Communityequip/Variac.html

Bridge: KBPC3510

Capacitor bank: 6800uF, 400V

I could not find a full wave bridge rectifier with a sufficiently high
current rating and therefore, I thought of paralleling three that were
readily available.

I start (slowly) increasing the output AC voltage of variac so as to
increase the DC supply to the load. However, the variac fuse blows-up at
around 10V AC output!

Paralleling three bridges may not be the most elegant way to build a
high-current DC source, but I do not understand what could cause the
fuse in the variac to blow-up. (Please note, everything works fine with
a single bridge rectifier. This ofcourse limits the amount of load
current I can draw out from the source.)

Thank you for your help and greetings for festive season. Wish everyone
a new year full of good health and prosperity!

Regards,
Anand

Thank you everyone for your replies. My replies to some of the posts:

1. I did check each one of the bridges and the capacitors for faulty
devices, incorrect polarity, short circuits and open. Didn't find
anything there. Also, the three bridges are identical.

2. I would doubt that inrush current is an issue here. Each time that I
ran this experiment, I was careful enough to increase the variac output
voltage very slowly. (Ofcourse, connecting an uncharged capacitor bank
to full output voltage of the variac would surely trip the circuit
breakers on the utility mains line.)

3. Not that it matters, but we use a 230V/50Hz mains supply with the
installation capable of handling 15A of current. (The variac fuse would
blow somewhere around 10V AC output with no load connected to the output.)

4. I am not sure, but I get a feeling that some of us reading this post
have "registered" this as "bridge blowing-up". No, it is the variac
fuse that blows-up. Infact, there was no heating on any of the bridge
(or capacitors for that matter).

I didn't know about the balancing resistor scheme. As already
indicated, it may not be the solution for this problem, but, thanks for
the idea, simple way of controlling current hogging.

I guess, monitoring the variac current with a clamp meter (or may be
even an oscilloscope may be a good idea).

Thanks once again to everyone.

Regards,
Anand

 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 15:08:53 +0530, "Anand P. Paralkar"
<anand.paralkar@gnospammale.com> wrote:

On 27-12-2013 11:09, Anand P. Paralkar wrote:
Hi everyone,

I am trying to build a relatively high voltage-high current DC source.
The scheme is simple and uses no regulation (therefore no feedback
control). The scheme is as follows:

Utility mains supply => Variac => Three full wave rectifier bridges in
parallel => Huge capacitor bank => Load.

Variac: something similar to this one:
http://orgchem.colorado.edu/Technique/Equipment/Communityequip/Variac.html

Bridge: KBPC3510

Capacitor bank: 6800uF, 400V

I could not find a full wave bridge rectifier with a sufficiently high
current rating and therefore, I thought of paralleling three that were
readily available.

I start (slowly) increasing the output AC voltage of variac so as to
increase the DC supply to the load. However, the variac fuse blows-up at
around 10V AC output!

Paralleling three bridges may not be the most elegant way to build a
high-current DC source, but I do not understand what could cause the
fuse in the variac to blow-up. (Please note, everything works fine with
a single bridge rectifier. This ofcourse limits the amount of load
current I can draw out from the source.)

Thank you for your help and greetings for festive season. Wish everyone
a new year full of good health and prosperity!

Regards,
Anand


Thank you everyone for your replies. My replies to some of the posts:

1. I did check each one of the bridges and the capacitors for faulty
devices, incorrect polarity, short circuits and open. Didn't find
anything there. Also, the three bridges are identical.

2. I would doubt that inrush current is an issue here. Each time that I
ran this experiment, I was careful enough to increase the variac output
voltage very slowly. (Ofcourse, connecting an uncharged capacitor bank
to full output voltage of the variac would surely trip the circuit
breakers on the utility mains line.)

3. Not that it matters, but we use a 230V/50Hz mains supply with the
installation capable of handling 15A of current. (The variac fuse would
blow somewhere around 10V AC output with no load connected to the output.)

Variacs are usually auto transformers and auto transformers work best
when the output is +/-30 % from the input (70 - 130 %) voltage. Trying
to get out only 5 % of the input voltage may cause some problems to
the autotransformer. If there are some advanced protection mechanism
on the variac, this might be triggered at such low setting, even if it
might OK around the input voltage.

A no load full wave rectified 230 Vac will generate about 325 Vdc and
your capacitor bank will be charged to that potential at the top of
each half cycle. As a back of the envelope calculation, assuming the
voltage is allowed to drop to 300 Vdc during 8 ms, until the diodes
starts to conduct again during the next half cycle, with 6.8 mF the
load can consume more than 20 Adc or 6.2 kWavg, quite lot for a single
phase feed.

If only possible, I would use a three phase 230/400 V feed and with
standard 6 pulse rectifier, 480 Vdc(avg) will be generated with 4.2 %
rms ripple _without_ any filtering capacitors. Reducing the ripple,
quite small capacitors would be sufficient. If the 480 Vdc is slightly
too much/too little, a small autotransformer will handle that change.

4. I am not sure, but I get a feeling that some of us reading this post
have "registered" this as "bridge blowing-up". No, it is the variac
fuse that blows-up. Infact, there was no heating on any of the bridge
(or capacitors for that matter).

I didn't know about the balancing resistor scheme. As already
indicated, it may not be the solution for this problem, but, thanks for
the idea, simple way of controlling current hogging.

Get three 12 V car headlights and connect each in series from a
rectifier to the variac output and increase the output voltage slowly
and monitor the illumination levels of each lamp. The illumination
level should be quite similar and they definitively will even out the
current in different bridges.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 15:08:53 +0530, the renowned "Anand P. Paralkar"
<anand.paralkar@gnospammale.com> wrote:

I guess, monitoring the variac current with a clamp meter (or may be
even an oscilloscope may be a good idea).

Use an RMS-reading meter to see what the fuse is "measuring".


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

OP is that same eternal-september troll sicko harassing sed with stupid ignorant posts for quite some time now. Don't waste your time on "it."

Spehro Pefhany

--

"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"

speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com

Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

On Saturday, December 28, 2013 11:33:59 PM UTC-5, Greegor wrote:

This was promoted as having a size
advantage but has no line isolation that
would pass safety standards.

One hint is that they never mentioned
line isolation which would be an
obvious problem.

By the time they add line isolation
this design won't be so very small,
will it?

Dunno. Inserting a transformer after the switched-cap
stage would do it. At many MHz it could be pretty small.
Crudely suggested below, Fig. X.

========
FIG. 6 (from patent)
========
|<------- Charge pump --------->| . |<--- Synch. Buck --->|
(~1MHz) . (5-300MHz)
.
/ .
.-----------o o-----------. .
| / | .
| .----o o----+ .
Vin | C1 | C2 | . Lbuck
>---o<-o-+--||-+--o<-o-+-||-+-o<-o-+-----+----o\ ======
| | . | o--' '--+---> Vout
o o . --- o |
\ \ . --- | ---
o o . | === ---
| | . === |
=== === ===


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
========
FIG. X
========
/ .
.-----------o o-----------. .
| / | .
| .----o o----+ .
| C1 | C2 | .
>---o<-o-+--||-+--o<-o-+-||-+-o<-o-+-----+---. .--o\ ======
| | . | )|( o--' '--+---> Vout
o o . --- )|( o |
\ \ . --- )|( | ---
o o . | | | ---
| | . === |
=== === . ===


The patent talks about low-voltage uses too. In col. 8, lines
38-45 it mentions inputs of 1.5-5vdc, 6-12vdc, and 10-14vdc.

The darn thing rambles all over the hills and into a few
creeks--in lawyerese--so it's kind of hard to know where
they're really going. It sounds like they didn't know
either.

The picture showed a line-operated "plug," which suggests they've
got galvanic isolation.

Cheers.
James Arthur

 

On Saturday, December 28, 2013 6:23:59 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

On 29/12/2013 2:22 AM, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2013 10:38:32 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 28/12/2013 5:55 AM, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

snip

I think it's more basic. #1, they don't understand it, #2, they're afraid.

Think about that--under Barack Obama, and all his promises of openness and
big, friendly Big Borg Brother--we now live in a country where the people
are afraid of their government. Indeed, our friends across the world are
afraid of it too. And probably should be.

People across the world have been afraid of the US for quite some time
now. "Banana republics" preceded the CIA-orchestrated replacement of
Mossadeq in Iran - by the Shah, who was a bit too far towards your side
of the political spectrum to last - as was Pinochet in Chile, ditto.

McCarthy is the poster-child for far-right-thinking people of your
description, and anybody not afraid of his reincarnation in the US
hasn't been paying enough attention to Tea Party propaganda.

A magnificent display.

So, if Barack "You can keep your plan" Obama spies on Merkel--and
defends it in court[1]--it's the Tea Party's fault. Or Joe McCarthy.

[1] http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/nsa-phone-surveillance-ruling-101569.html

The court defense was of meta-data collection, rather than the
collecting of the details of the actual telephone calls, which was what
Dubbya initiated on Merkel.

Gawd, what a troll. Obama spied on Merkel, period. Obama's
first defense was "everybody does it."

The US decline into far-right paranoia hasn't got much to do with Obama,
and has got a lot to do with the kind of shoddy right-wing selective
thinking that you regularly exhibit here.

You blamed Obama's spying on the Tea Party because you're a
delusional partisan hack. Next, you declare everyone else paranoid
for blaming Obama's spying on Obama. It's pure, deranged idiocy.
Gobbletygook.

If you'd spend more time thinking and less time testifying about
your dim appraisals of other people's intelligence, you'd
understand more. But you'd lose the comfort of magical, emotional
thinking, which is so much easier anyhow, isn't it?

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 7:59:39 AM UTC-5, Bill Sloman wrote:

On 29/12/2013 2:44 AM, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, December 27, 2013 10:50:40 PM UTC-5, bloggs.fred...@gmail.com wrote:
People were saying the same thing about the first peace time federal income tax, and PPACA is not nearly as earth shattering. Get used to it, it's here to stay.

The PPACA is the theory that the government can make the People
do anything. Not just regulate what citizens do, but compel them
to actively do things, contract private parties against their will,
etc. And, by lying to them to pass it if necessary.

That would parallel conscription - compelling citizens to join the army
and get them to march off and fight - and die - in foreign wars. Vietnam
comes to mind. Did you protest against that? Many did.

It's a far bigger deal than mere income tax.

But scarcely novel or unique.

It *is* unique and novel in America.

It changes America from a nation of and by the People, into
one with an all-powerful central authority that decides
every person's most private particulars, and the power to
punish any diversity.

And it codifies the federal government's right to collect,
archive, and share all of every citizen's personal papers,
affairs, transactions and effects.

In short, it makes Americans subjects.

It's likely to kill fewer people than
conscription and the language you use is a little over-blown.

You've got no basis for that, and even if you did it's an
irrelevant, callous standard. Is anything that kills fewer
people than war, then, permissible?


Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 11:02:25 AM UTC-5, Robert Macy wrote:

and then came the 'sound/video bites' justifying the brutal
actions, followed by, you guessed it, almost a box of warm puppies.

What's wrong with puppies? ANTI-PUPPYIST!!!

Grins,

James Arthur

 

[Bill Sloman]

On 29/12/2013 2:44 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Friday, December 27, 2013 10:50:40 PM UTC-5, bloggs.fred...@gmail.com wrote:
People were saying the same thing about the first peace time federal income tax, and PPACA is not nearly as earth shattering. Get used to it, it's here to stay.

The PPACA is the theory that the government can make the People
do anything. Not just regulate what citizens do, but compel them
to actively do things, contract private parties against their will,
etc. And, by lying to them to pass it if necessary.

That would parallel conscription - compelling citizens to join the army
and get them to march off and fight - and die - in foreign wars. Vietnam
comes to mind. Did you protest against that? Many did.

> It's a far bigger deal than mere income tax.

But scarcely novel or unique. It's likely to kill fewer people than
conscription and the language you use is a little over-blown.

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

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney