OCinBuffalo

Racism, or, finding the really stupid thing, and posting it? Also, Meals Ready (to) Eat are known stereo-typically as "3 lies in a bag": 1. They are not meals 2. They are not ready 3. You can't eat them No distinction is made between one MRE and another in this characterization. ALL MREs are called "3 lies in a bag", or worse, just "lies". However, Meatballs with Sauce is a fine meal. You can squish it right out of its bag into your mouth like an astronaut, or use the spoon that comes with, so it's ready. But, Pork Loaf is like eating a ceiling tile. Nothing is ever going to make pork loaf ready...to do anything other than dehydrate you completely, and then prevent you from taking a dump for 2 days. When it is "ready" for that? Look out. "Duck and cover" solves nothing, not for you, or your buddy. Pork Loaf re-entry to the atmosphere must be treated as though it was an NBC attack. The wise squad knows this, and therefore does it's best to ensure none of it's members are issued any of the "loaf" MREs. If they are, the wise squad waits until nobody is looking, and switches their MREs with the unwise squad's. So, MREs are definitely a mechanism by which the standard vehicles of Racism, pretending one = all, are supported. And, now MREs have hot sauce in them, and we know who likes they hot sauce: The Asians! And, MREs always have peanut butter in them. We all know what that means: farming subsidy. So, they are racist against white hick farmers, and the South as well. MREs are definitely racist.

I don't know, perhaps around the same time lawyers started calling themselves a "cost of doing business"? I'm thinking the 1600s. Perhaps you should ask the lawyers, and see if they know their history? The answer to all of this lies in your question: am I responsible for "corporations are people"? I don't recall doing that. Who did? How about you stop trying to pretend that lawyers working for corrupt politicians/kings, all the way back in the 1600s, DIDN'T CREATE THE NEED for corporations to exist in the first damn place. I tell you the obvious: and your reaction to it...is to call me dumb. Notice, you didn't deny what I said at all did you? Specifically, you didn't deny that your own regulations, and the agencies that "manage" them are the vehicle by which government becomes "captured". You don't seem to understand that you can't dig yourself out of a hole. Put the shovel down. Or, better, take the shovel out of the hands of the very people who keep digging the hole: politicians. Again, if your friends in government have nothing to sell, ADM et al, has nothing to buy. It really is simple, isn't it? Perhaps when you stop supporting legislating bribery? And stop creating the vehicles for lawyers to sue everybody, all the time? You just might get it? How about we get some rational legal reform in this country and "capture" the majority of the utterly useless lawyers in this country, thus taking away the stimulus for corporations to hire their own lawyers, and continue this game? That's precisely how "corporations became people". (And really, the context of that is long gone: people have jobs at corporations. They work there. Therefore, corporations are "people".) Then, we'd be getting somewhere. We have skin because of sunlight's ability to damage us. We have corporations, because we have lawyers. Both are natural responses to damaging stimulus. Talking about corporations, and not lawyers, is like pretending skin just came out of nowhere, on it's own. It's childish.

I think they haven't thought it through, because yet again, denial of reality is keeping them from doing it. We are supposedly living in times where the Republican party is merely a "regional party", and the "demographics" say that Republicans will never hold national office or statewide office in majority ever again. This is what they wish to be true. Just like with them "believing" in Obamacare, or ESPN believing in Mark Sanchez. They would have gone on denying every event that suggests their wishes aren't happening. But, the Buttfumble/Obamacare happened. IF the Rs win the Senate, you'll see a floor vote on Obamacare...something. You'll see some D Senators, who just ran on repealing and replacing Obamcare as the only way they stayed in office, added to the Rs. This can only happen if the Rs get rid of Harry Reid, which means they need 51. Then, all they have to do is use the same shady tactic that was used AFTER the President signed it into law to modify it = Reconciliation. "What's good for the goose". What are the Ds going to say? "Whaaa you did the same thing we did?" It's defunded, dismantled, separated by state, left to the states to decide if they want to participate. Whatever. And, ALL of this happens...because the fillibuster rulers have been changed now, and that prevents Barbara Boxer or Harry Reid from stopping it. In all cases, all the Rs need is 51 Senators in 2014, and Harry Reid will just have signed Obamacare's death warrant today. Obama won't be able to stop it. He didn't stop the Senate from rewriting the law he signed, 3 days after he signed it. So, what legal/moral ground does he have? And, if the Rs have 51 or more Senators? 2104 was a lost election. If I was Harry Reid? This is the last thing I'd be doing with my time. But, I'm not living in delusional world, where the R party can't beat me ever again, am I?

birdog, from the time you've arrived here it's been clear that you've never understood any of my posts RE economics. Each approach to economics = just tools in a toolbox. There is no universal tool that serves as the Swiss Army Knife of Fixing Everything. Events, and what you are trying to accomplish, dictate what tools need to be used when. Thus, saying "supply side is dead" or "Keynesian is dead" are equally dumb. Both tools have gotten results in the real world. It all depends on how you use them. However, one thing we know for sure, if we know our history: Socialism sucks. It's sucked everywhere it's been tried. Churchill was right when he said "Indeed it has been said that Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried". You can say the same thing about free market capitalism. IF you knew anything of the real history of the New Deal, you'd know that 80% of it destroyed itself, long before we even got to the 1940s. So I ask you to tell us, what ever happened to the: 1. National Recovery Administration 2. Civilian Conservation Corps 3. Agricultural Adjustment Administration 4. Works Progress Administration ? These things represent the bulk of the New Deal. Where are they? You said Republicans have been dismantling them for 60 years. That = 1950s. I didn't realize that the NRA or WPA was still around in the 1950s, and that we've been dismantling them for 60 years. (Hint: both declared unconstitutional...20 years before the 1950s). You want to "defend the New Deal"? You go right ahead. Start now...please...do it.... Nebulous isn't the right word. Obvious is the right word. For example: it was Obvious to those of us who know the material, that the Stimulus was doomed to fail. To use your dopey liberal parlance: "What if they gave a stimulus, but nobody got a multiplier?". If you do the coursework I gave you? You'd know it too. Don't want to? Then suffer a long post! Let me explain how we knew. This is just the straight up truth of the matter: We knew it was going to fail, because there wasn't anything in it from "Keynesian Stimulus 101". Did we "invest" in any "machine tool"-like operations? No we "invested" in contrived green startups. The whole point of a multiplier = You manufacture demand in an already established market. You don't act as venture capital, which by definition, has a 10% success rate. You do the opposite: you are looking to maximize the multiplicative effect, not have it die when the startup dies. Example: buy new computers from Dell, buy software projects for government outfits. Dell hires new people, and the projects need new people. Add new computers to new software projects. Viola! You have new demand for goods and services, and what happens? The Hotels, restaurants, and pizza joints all suddenly see an uptick in their demand. So, they hire some people. The airlines, the rental car places, and especially airport bars, all either need new people, or now have a reason not to lay off who they have. All these new hires pay taxes, and if this can be sustained(here's right about the time that GG tells us both to F off) they will pay you back for your investment, via those taxes. EDIT:(here's where I tell GG to...consider: Keynesian stimulus can at the very least serve as a holding action in some industries, giving the other damaged industries, like housing, time to hit bottom and recover.) Now, was any of that in the stimulus? No. What wasn't wasted on green nothing, were payoffs for failing city governments, who promptly spent the money, and still went bankrupt. Did that stimulate anything? No. Hence, why are we still where we are, despite a trillion wasted? Bad tactical application of a tool. Nothing more. Paul Krugman distorted this. He said the stimulus needs to be bigger. What he didn't say: "the "bigger" part is a real Keynesian stimulus, to go along with the not-Keysian political pay-off money we are going to waste on Democratic strongholds and Green Douchebaggery." See? To those of us who are educated? This isn't nebulous at all. It's obvious. If it's nebulous for you: that's your problem, and, I've already posted a link for you to solve your problem.

The title of this thread wasn't mine. It's the title of the article. The article was supposed to be about a liberal columnist, who used to be a "journalist" coming to terms with the fact that he never actually processed candidate Obama: as a viable President. He wished for it all to be true...and so it was. The hilarious part: the man, even though he subconsciously knows he's empirically wrong, still goes out of his way to defend his wish, and there goes the article. It's like watching a fly struggle in a web, but there is no spider. The fly made the web, and the way out is clear: but, he doesn't choose it. Instead he keeps struggling into the web, making it worse. Consider: It's the same thing that happened with ESPN and Mark Sanchez. ESPN's "fan based" approach used to be a strength. But, now it sucks, because the writer's and analyst's cubes in the back rooms, are all dominated by Jets fans. That's how you get skewed coverage. That's how Mark Sanchez vs. Tony Romo on Monday Night Football gets touted as a "QB battle for the ages"....and ends up being laughable. That's how our offense can go put up 20 non-turnover points on the Jets defense, and nobody says a word on live TV. Not on Monday either. 20-14, the Bills still win, and that's if you include the 7 the Jets got from Moorman's grubby kick, or whatever that was. Rather than doing their jobs, and maintaining the integrity of those jobs, which supposedly entitles them to "access" and asking the tough questions? They look at their jobs as though they are merely selling influence. And, whoever coddles them, and their personal wishes, the most gets the best treatment. The writer of the article, if he wasn't then, has now been confronted with the empirical evidence that says his wishes aren't real. Just like the Jet fan boi who works at ESPN, he was rooting for his "team" when he said Sanchez was the next Brady. This guy gets confounded by Obamacare, fan boi? Buttfumble. The point is: You aren't going to get a Jet fan to stop being a Jet fan, and you aren't going to get a liberal to stop being a liberal. The solution is: stop pretending these people are the source of "news". Start understanding that these people are the source of "analysis", and that they aren't entitled to the terms "expert", or "expert opinion". They'd have to be objective and know something, for those terms to apply. They aren't ever going to be. The real solution is: we need more balance of perspective, both in the media, and at ESPN. If you have all stripes of "fan" then you don't have groupthink. It always amazes me that: for people who love "diversity", they refuse to diversify their own place of business.

But, why, given their obvious deficit in management abilities, do you think, they don't think it will work? I don't see this as unexpected at all. In fact this is right in line with what I've been saying: they have a psychological dysfunction that prevents them from perceiving the world as it is. Or, perhaps they just don't have any real world experience to guide their perception? I've never worked at a place, and my outfit would never leave any of this to chance a month ahead of time = right after the election. We tell you exactly what's going to happen, 6 months before, and it's all solved 3 months before. We can't afford distracted brains. Period. So, all this does? We'll have our answer out the door 5 months before the election, instead of 6. I fail to see how that helps Ds politically. If they delay 3 months, then, we'll have our answer out 3 months before he election. I doubt most principals are going to be doing anything much different. That's what will happen, in the real world. They seem unable to perceive that.

Again, we have to have yet another discussion on use the the word "working". "Working", as in "working as designed"? or "Working as in "working, from in a practical sense" = working...to F everything up? The only ironic thing here: in your quest, as an administrator-type, to finally get everybody who comes through the door to pay you something, you've only succeeded in having less doctors available in the funnel...to move less people through your doors, and....surprise! Most of these are the newly Medicaided...which means you now get slave wages for 40-50% of your day's care output, but ALL of it costs: the same. It all adds up to you having less aggregate revenue, compared to exponentially increased cost. But hey! At least somebody is paying...something, right? Idiocy. You could have just learned to accept 10% freebies, and 90% full pay. But, you had to have your way: and now you get the opposite of what you intended. That's what you get for going to the Ds for this. You should have gone to the Rs. They know about making deadbeats pay their bills. The Ds are going to make you pay the deadbeat's bill. Nice job Mr. Administrator: you just F'ed over your hospital using a half-assed solution to a short-term problem, that creates a long-term problem that is 5x the size. I go where I am needed most. Based on the "thinking" on display here, does anyone still wonder..why health care?... Given your posts here, I'd say you don't know much about business processes, business rules, or business process re-engineering either. You may know how to manage a process, but not how to fix it. You may be able to drive, but you can't design or fix a car. If you did, you'd have understood that the fix to "the emergency room problem"...wasn't a fix at all, and, in fact was a sucker's fix. Yeah, it's called competence. You're a manger. So, you know what delivering on a schedule looks like. You'd even include a "bow". You know what? So would the rest of us. It's called: being competent. Again, this is wishcasting. You don't "believe" this. You wish it was so. You have no evidence that any of this will be the case, so how exactly do you "believe" it? No. You wish this was true. I wish I won the lottery. I wish the Bills would win the SB this year. Or, I suppose you could "believe" in Fairy Godmothers who grant wishes, and, while you were at it, "believe" that people would get covered, and the law.... IF your state wants to be willfully stupid, that's fine. In fact, whether it is, or is not stupid, works, does or doesn't get every Colorado D voted out of office for the next 20 years? None of my business. All of yours. I'll thank you in advance for treating my business with the same respect I've just treated yours, and stay the F out of how I provide health care for my group, in many states, none of which are Colorado. Ha! Boy are you talking to the wrong consultant. First, let me correct the date: 1998. Don't you even think about lecturing me about insurance companies. I've lived it, 2 of them, for 18 months. This isn't something I read online somewhere. You want details? When have I ever been short on details?

I'm an optimist? Also, what did the Ds learn in 2000, 2002, 2004? Nothing. They ran the same crap as they did in 2006 and 8. And, they didn't learn again, in 2010 or 2012, because now they are facing a generational political obstacle in Obamacare, of their own making. The only difference is that in 2006 and 8, they had power handed to them by default, due to the failure of the incumbent. What do I, or Rs, have to learn, if history repeats itself? I already know history repeats itself.

I don't know. Perhaps they've learned? Perhaps this is so bad, that they default their way into power, no different than the Ds did in 2006 and 2008? (And when I say default, that's exactly what I mean. Did anybody vote for them because they wanted Obamacare?) Message discipline has to be better, as you say. However, I think the best way to kill the Ds is with positivity. Rather than talking bad about the Ds, assume it. Say things like "Well, we all know the problems and who is to blame, but, I'd rather focus on my/our plan to fix them. We have some exciting ideas that have a good chance of not just cleaning up the mess and fixing the problems, but putting us ahead of the game" That's what clients(voters) want to hear, especially when they had a hand in creating the mess. The want to hear it, because they need to hear it.

Hey birdog? Here you go: Free economcis and finance courses Perhaps some time spent here will allow you to actually have a rational discussion with the Jedi Council? I don't know what effect this will have with Darin however, so I make no promises. I assure you: those of us with business degrees have taken most of what's on that list, and many of us have taken a lot of things that aren't. But don't worry, we can move on to advanced Finance and some Accounting when you are ready. For example: I'd stay away from the ones that talk about "history". I smell BS. No. Stick to the ones say "Principles of". It couldn't be easier: 3/4 down the page: ECON 110(Macroeconomcis) and 120(Microeconomcis) are freely available. That's a good place for you to get started.

Ay yay yay! Now we have B-Large trying to tell us that "eventually" everyone will get coverage? That's the "answer" he thinks the American people are looking for, and will accept? :lol: Get a grip! What do they do in the meantime? What does the kid who needs a kidney do...just hold on and drink less water? There is no excuse for this level of incomptence, and the liberal Democrats will NEVER have the competence necessary to back up their grandiose plans. That is the takeaway from this, and the campaign ads for 2014 and 2016 have already written themselves. Talk all you want. When you get done? "Senator X voted for Obamacare, he said you could keep your health insurance, and your doctor. Then he tried to tell you everything was going fine. It it going fine? (Insert: Person in state who lost health care and suffered illness who says no) Now, Senator X is asking for you to trust them, and the Democrats, again with your vote, but you, or your neighbor, just got their health insurance taken away, so that Senator X and his pal Obama can have their awful system. (Insert State) has had quite enough of liberal Democrats like Senator X lying to us, and enough of their "big plans" they can't deliver. On election day, vote for common sense. Vote (challenger)." And that my friends, will be that. If people like B-large really want "change"? Then why not try doing the way competent change managers do it? Target it, test it, iterate. Control the scope, control: yourself. No. We'd rather have people with a deficit of understanding, meaning they think things are true that aren't, thus know less than 0 about health care, health insurance, and how to build big systems, attempt to take over 1/6 of the economy. We'd be better off putting Miley Cyrus in charge, at least she's completely clueless. But, that means she's not burdened by nonsense. She's at 0. Obama and friends are at -5.

Thanks. Now, let me, as a consultant manager(have to help DC_Tom along in his Children's Crusade) simplify something for you: Let's say I create the conditions where my organization overbills for expenses. I created the system that tracks billing(that I say is going to stop overbilling, yet, doesn't.) But, the only people who know WTF we are doing are my employees, or ex-employee consultants who I've hired to "regulate billing", which means they are the only people who can reasonably say what is overbilling, and what isn't. Are my employees/consultants/George W Bush at fault, or am I? Answer: I am. I created the damn system. I created the conditions for it's corruption. You are complaining about corporations...using the very facility you dopey leftists created. Stop creating the damn facility. Stop believing you can control something you know nothing about. Stop creating the conditions, the agencies, the very regulation mechanisms you keep selling as "the answer". They are the reason government can be "captured". They are the friggin vehicle! If a Congress critter has nothing to sell, then ADM(or whoever) has nothing...to buy. The more you involve government, the more power you give politicians to determine who gets helped/harmed, the more you increase the chance for corruption of government. This shoud be common sense. Create laws, not regs. This way, when you break the law, you go do jail. If you can't create laws? STFU. We live by the rule of law. Not by the rule of regulation... = whaaaa..."I can't manage these regs, because I'm "captured", because the smart guys at company X, Y, and Z are smart(which is why they work there, and not the government), and they know how to nail my silly government ass coming and going" Or, as in my case, "they hire consultants to make me look stupid!" So, that if there's a problem...well? "Bad consultant! Go to your room!" There's a reason the CEO is who he is, and the government employee is who she is, and sure as hell there's a reason why consultants are who they are. When we forget that, we create the conditions for failure. I can't believe you're dumbfounded: that people in business aren't going to lay down and take whatever nonsense you statists decide to put together next, and then? Cry when that nonsense gets corrupted by the very people you say should have EVEN MORE POWER: the politicians and the regulators? Staggers the imagination. How about: Stop empowering people whose net worth increases exponentially the longer they are in Congress? What the hell is so hard to understand about this? How about pass laws? How about: let the DOJ prosecute offenders in a court of law? Stop selling who wins and loses via regulation.

The hilarious part? We have an ongoing object lesson in just how well old white men work together, when power is involved. gatordouche even started a thread about it. It's called the Republican party! Perhaps he should read his own threads? :lol: :lol: Yeah, they'll all set aside their vast differences, conficting business interests, and personal agendas...as detailed in gatordouche's thread, to keep non-whites in their place, and keep a conspiracy hidden away for years, where nobody ever gets pissed off and runs to the media to tell! gatordouche trys to have it both ways more than Larry Flynt's girlfriend. EDIT: Nothing I've said here is factually accurate. I've simply used gatorman's own "logic" against him, as I've been doing to every liberal tool since I've arrived here. That reminds me: how'd that Iraq War Surge thing end up going? This lack of wisdom(= knowledge + experience), and the obvious "I didn't think before I posted" invokes The Surge level of stupidity from yesteryear.

Yep, like I said in the other thread: we are dealing with psychological dysfunction. That's because: we are dealing with people who were psychologically committed to a false reality. You can see this in the North Koreans. Their entire society has been predicated on a "final war" with the South, where they "liberate" the South. They are the "freedom fighters". Many have spent their entire lives pyschologically committed to this...lie. What can you do with these people? How many of them die in their beds thinking the "final war" was coming next week, and if only they'd stayed alive to see it? It's no different with the far-left. They believe in this "great future" that is always "coming" if we just did what they want. Every time we do, and it fails, they deny it. Just like any other cult: when they fail, they just wrap that into the ethos and/or blame somebody else and/or say that it's because some of them "weren't doing it right". Amazingly they never identify the "heretics", or if they do, they always quietly welcome them back a few days later. I see very little difference between Scientology, Global Warming, and the Universal Health Care cult. That's because I look at all 3: objectively. They all use the same tactics, they all deal with contradictory evidence the same way: attack the provider of it, rather than disprove it. Obama is a far left guy. When he says "you didn't build that", that's because he actually believes it. It's a lie. But, he's psychologically committed to that lie. My very existence, as I write this, proves it's a lie. I really enjoy that fact. All I have to do is exist: and that makes Obama et all, full of schit. So, the question remains: what are we to do? With Scientology? Monitor it closely. With the rest, that actually have a chance of causing catastrophic consequnces? Therapy. Just Say OBAMACARE! This is why the Republicans have to be careful about "punishing" Obama voters verbally. IF somebody already knows they F'ed up, you telling them they did is useless, and just strains the relationship. They need to be the grown ups here.

These last 2 pages have been a great example of why spending time here is valuable. You can always count on the PPP Financial Jedi Council for a good read. However, as good as it is? You're all working too hard. Just say: OBMACARE! From now until forever, OBAMCARE! is the argument ender, for essentially every political topic liberals/progressives raise....forever. (I imagine they will have to find yet another name after this debacle. I give Rush Limbaugh credit for killing "liberal", but, "they" are killing "progressive" all by their lonesome.) Look, I know it's going to take some time getting used to, for all of us. Especially for the Jedi Council, who would rather make informed points/give/take etc. And, I do not subscribe to the Krauthammer Vision that says OBAMACARE! is the the end of liberalism. That requires: therapy. Consider: we had an object lesson in the fall of the Soviet Union, AND, the constant failures of the socialist EU experiment, when NONE of those countries pay for their own defense(that's left to OUR budget), and only 1(Germany) has its act together. If Germany had to maintain a real standing army/navy/air force, their socialist aspirations would die the day after it was commissioned. Given all of this: we STILL have idiots trying to tell us that Marx wasn't completely misguided. Given all the deaths, and all the failure, and all the suffering their a-hole ideology has caused, they STILL won't accept reality = human nature demands individual outcomes for individual efforts. Safety nets are fine, but when they create dependence? They are counterproductive to a free society. I believe this refusal to accept reality means we are dealing with psychological dysfunction here. I suggest a simplistic Cognitive-Behavioral approach: It's the same one I suggest with my avatar for the loons on the football board. "Just try saying it: EJ is a rookie". If we can get them to say it, that starts them down the road of accepting it. But, we have to start small, and that means limiting our interaction. If all we just say: "OBAMACARE!" that confronts them them with the reality that is necessary, and doesn't allow them to wriggle around trying to grasp various loose ends of our arguments, and to make these straws into a comfort blanket of denial.

I always work with clients I'm not a big believer in skipping the plane ride and doing it virtually. Even if I'm sick, I get on the plane. Face time is face time, because for all our advancement, human beings are human beings. Knowing this, was the same reason I knew the thing wouldn't be ready, BEFORE I looked at the code. Chef, you've never been a project manager. Sure, you managed a kitchen(which means you are apparently more qualified to be President, and also manage the HealthCare.gov project). However, do you know what the very first thing I have to think about...when you suddenly add 292 people to my project? Hint: It's the same thing if you only added 1. Think for a sec.... Where are they going to sleep tonight? I swear to God, that's what I'd think. Clearly the magnitude of that answer increases exponentially as the #s of people rises. Or, it could be, how are they all going to get here, or, how am I going to manage them remotely if they stay where they are? Who on my team am I going to have to send away from this project site, and locate them where they are? What's that gonna cost me? See? I haven't even gotten into: where should I put them on the project? What are they qualified to do? How do I integrate them into my existing resource plan? Do I integrae them at all? Who is going to manage them, and/or can I trust their current managers, if they have them, to follow my direction? Or, am I going to have to crack heads the first couple weeks, while nothing gets done, just to make sure everybody knows who's in charge, because they are coming in "all high and mighty"? These are the real concerns on big projects. This is all the stuff you have to deal with, BEFORE, you even start writing the code, and it's an ongoing thing. I usually do this stuff after lunch. (EDIT: who am I trying to kid. I send emails, and I am very lucky to have a person who helps with this. I should send her flowers tomorrow.) That's why you need real big project managers, not pitiful government lawyers/lobbyists, to manage real big projects.

Yep, this is the point: When we talk in terms of large numbers, the thinking has to change: consider how far a light year...really is. How far is it from where you are sitting reading this? (This is what I use to help people understand the Internet). Drastically far, isn't it? Can you see how far away it is? When we talk 50 million people(again, the low end of the estimate) losing their insurance, the thinking also has to change, drastically. You've been to a Bills game. That's 80k(old days) and 70k now. How many "old" Bills games = 50 million people? Try to visualize that. That's 625 Bills games. Then, visualize only 32 guys in each Bills game, losing their wife/kid, and going postal. That's the 20k fathers. As I said, think that's too much? Cut the # in half, if you want. Cut it in half again. Cut it in half as many times as you want....it's still a very large number of people going nuts, and shooting up the place...whatever "the place" is. 500 men going postal in a 6 month period, would cause mass hysteria. 50 would as well. Anybody want to have a gun rights discussion then? The hysteria, as hysteria does, would lead to more, as people overreacted. But, let's say you decide, whether you talk to your priest, or the Family Feud guy, you aren't going to do it. Let's say you just make it your mission in life that another far-left clown never gets elected again. That makes 49 guys instead. Great. But remember, we've already eliminated so many of you, when we cut the # down from 20k. This is why I am a little worried. I'm not tin-foil hat paranoid. I just understand large numbers.

Oooo I wanna try! How? Not for me, and, even if it was, why the F do I wanna go set it up when you can just tell me? I'm lazy, dammit! But, not for me, post it online, so everyone can see it. Let's have Chef run the test! Better yet: have gatorman do it! I love how the "clients", us, are paying(taxes) to run our own sysem and acceptance tests. What rubes we are. We're dumbest clients in the history of clients, and do you realize how dumb that is?

I assure you I have. I don't like what I've been thinking lately. Not one bit. I hope I am wrong. Consider: The LOW estimate is that ~October, 50 million people on group plans...will be off group plans. That's the low estimate. (Didn't we get into this thing because of 30 million people? WTF?) As many of you know, I'm no fan of government-run anything. Government is a necessary evil. It's the worst choice for problem solving, so it's the last choice. However, I am no anarchist(or Anti-Christ 4mer). If you throw 50 million people out into the street...while their medical treatment is ongoing? That's a pescription for all-out rebellion. You're fooling yourself if you think that doesn't come with chaos and violence. I know, I know "why did they think they were entitled to anything, especially of they voted for this clown?". That's a different discussion. What matters right now, today: what if 1 father loses his kid due to this? How about something more realistic #s-wise? With 50 million? How about 20k fathers lose their kid/wife? That's .0004%. What do we do with 20k fathers that want blood? We can't even manage to keep 1 kid from shooting up a school. What do we do about 20k, or, (assume half regain their senses) 10k guys looking to put a bullet in the people who did this? Still think some of them get weak on the day of? Ok, what about 5k guys? What about 2.5k guys? A what point do the excuses/mitigations run out...while we are still left with a very large number? Shoot them? 2.5k guys, who just lost their wife/kid? 1000 guys, who decide to go postal? See? This is about large numbers. It always has been. That's why this is so unsettling. The large #s here dictate: we may very well have an even bigger mess on our hands, than many of us are able to conceive of, when we fully realize the unintended consquences, and the response to those cosequences unfolds. I'd like it if we tried to find a way to get ahead of that issue, or, if we realized right F'ing now that this is what's coming, and acted immediately to stop it. There is no escaping the math here. Or the statistical probabilities inherent to 50 million people losing their health care plans, that they've earned, because they actually work. That anger can't be quantified. But, it sure as hell can be applied, on scale that is difficult to imagine.

"There's nothing wrong with that LABillz, you just aren't familiar with the way they do it in "the Valley". Don't you know that 292 Google, and Apple, and Oracle programmers have been assinged? They can fix the entire approach, and make code, as yet to be desgined, derived from as yet unstated requirments, magically appear! They are from California! They work for Google! So your stupid Gantt Chart, which represents a "waterfall" approach, is useless, because we do RAD/XP. Got that? RAD has worked great for every Ruby on Rails project, ever, so why wouldn't it work here? It works great in "the Valley". Your stupid waterfall from the 80s isn't how we do things in 2013. You might as well be talking about not using ORMs! Rather than using phases, we can iterate our way into doing anything...and not encounter serious structural and design flaws...because we didn't anticipate all the requirements.... ...oh....wait...." It's hilarious watching the arrogance of California IT...implode. I'm going to have a good laugh over the next year, because it's still not working. Boston may benefit huge from all of this. "Why would you go with a company that's based in Fairy Valley, when you can work with some salty guys who get the job done right, without all the blather"? You can just hear them saying it....

Yeah this makes sense. Too much wine last night Chef? Still groggy? There's essentially nothing to reply to here, and I've already won this argument. The hard news story is that the "website" cannot be working by the end of this month, because they back end payment system(subsidy, or no subsidy, system) won't even be started until January. There's nothing left to talk about. Meanwhile, did anybody see them as the 4 security specialists if the site was going to be secure? All 4 said one word: "no". Yeah, go ahead and put your data in, because The Boy Google says he hooked the search engine to it...when 4 real deal white hats are telling you not to. All they did Chef? The same thing I did. So, you should feel privileged. You got your own personal specialist to give you an expert opinion, for free. With nothing to reply to, I will use the time to clarify what I do: I am essentially the originator of what I call "blue collar software". Ze Germans that we partnered with have some overlapping ideas, but, they defer to me for "the canon". Besides, I can write it better anyway. If you want to know more about it. Ask me. If not, I don't care. But please...don't run your mouth ignorantly? You should see what we are looking to do in restaurants. You might want to try being a Chef again. It's freaking this waitress of 30 years out....but she likes it, because she can control it. That's why I do this. Working in the Valley was easy and boring, and I got real tired of the phonies and their crap. I could do a presales meeting on autopilot, provided I said the same stupid phrases the Valley pseudo-Buddhists desired from me, and made it sound like this was specific to the client. Working with these people is interesting and much more challenging professionally, because it really is different every time. Also, if I say the word "synergy"...somebody will say "What? Did you say sin orgy? Where? ". It keeps things practical, and it keeps me in my place. That's how this job is supposed to work.

YEEEAAAHHHH! This concludes my remarks.

I gave you the only correct answer: "no, and that's only meaningful to an idiot." Now, what have you done in your post to disprove that answer? Nothing. Just like in every other post in this thread. The point is put to you: and you run. I answered your ignorant(not dumb) question. Now it's my turn: Show me 3 questions I've asked, anything that ends in a ?, in any of my posts, that you've answered. EDIT: Dum de dum.....(twiddle...twiddle....) la te da....(tick tick tick) Oh, btw....while you're failing to find the 3 times you've addressed any of the "good points" you said I've made? Did you send my response to The Boy Google? (That's funnier) I can't wait to hear what he has to say. Just remind him that I have a whole bag of "Psssht!" with his name on it. EDIT2: Of course, now I've opened up the "you should know better than to send something like that to a client, if you say you are a super duper consultant(or whatever twee thing you say)". However, I respond with: "Dude, I send most of my clients dirty jokes, funny pics, hot chick pix, whatever, because...I revel in my blue collar clientele...you can have your white collar tight asses".

Wait a sec...ADM doesn't care about prices being higher or lower, yet, they are responsible, via the ethanol subidy they get, for prices being higher? Which is it? If they aren't the reason for lower farm prices, and are just middle men, then how in the sam hell are we supposed to blame them for higher prices? Why lay this at ADM's feet? Why not on the politicians who created this? Why not on the government agencies who regulate it(why else do they have a job?) Again, what happens to ADM's stock price if their CEO doesn't take advantage of subsidies that Obama has extended/increased(and yeah, yeah, I know ethanol has been around forever, spare me)? You gonna advise people to buy? And seriously, you are talking about what, the 4th(2nd, whatever) oldest profession in the world: Getting the farmer's goods to market. Yeah, this whole business discipline called logistics(used to be called supply chain, used to be called materials management) that has repeatedly shown return on investment it the form of lower costs....doesn't exist. Right. The middle man can't reduce overall cost, because he is a middle man? Are you trying to sell me a mattress here? Furniture then? The words "factory direct" come to mind. Or are you talking about the entire infrastructure of the agrobusiness? Please tell me again how a farmer in Iowa gets his corn to market...in Switzerland.

Dude, now here is evidence that you have more than one level of intelligence. But, it is being wasted on gatorman. Booo! Like gatorman is ever going to understand that bias, isn't something that only white males do, and is merely a group behavior norm. I believe it was LA or GG saying something about human nature here...elswhere? Yeah, people like gator seem to have a mental defect that renders them unable to process this. Now that would be an interesting psychological study: what about liberal perception causes this consistent defect? We might get something useful, we might even learn how to treat it. You can forget about the statistical connotations of bias. What the hell where you thinking doing that? So you still get no points. Sorry.