Found by Misanthropic Scott.
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
#67 – Hastur,
You are assuming that the money collected by the tax actually goes towards covering the costs caused. If that was the case I would not be so concerned. What happens now is that all these taxes just go directly into the general budget.
And the expenses get paid out of the general budget, no? Sounds like a wash to me. It sounds to me as if you are just generally predisposed to hate taxes. I think you may have listened to carefully to Ronald Reagan, the orchestrator of the current global financial crisis via his voodoo economics and rampant deregulation that have continued unimpeded since he took office. He was truly persuasive and truly changed the paradigm. Too bad he changed it to something so catastrophic.
#66 – Toxic Asshead,
#56 – Unnacceptable. That’s a horrifying reduction in lifestyle.
You’re so right. Obeying a law to prevent us from killing each other with lethal 2 ton piles of steel is a horrible imposition.
How about regulating the speed at a bit (an amount to be agreed on later) above the limit to allow for safe passing which often does require a bit more speed?
The only real problem with this would be that different states do (and should, IMHO) have different speed limits. I agree with the state of Montana that on their roads, the biggest risk is falling asleep at the wheel.
Still, they have a limit.
How about if the roads transmit the speed limits to the cars and the cars allow for a bit over that? Everything in your car today is computer controlled already. I’m sure this could be included. Tesla already limits the speed of their roadster to 130 MPH despite physically being able to go much faster. People are willing to pay a high premium for their cars, so it must not be hurting sales too much.
So, why do you want to kill someone with your car? Are your neighbors really that annoying? What do they think of you?
>First year ice, being less dense is more inclined to fracture and break into flows. And yes, that does allow more mobility and more melting.
That’s what the experts said. Only it didn’t happen. The 2009 minimum ice level has been reached, and it is 500K sq km more than 2008, exactly the opposite of what the experts predicted. The thinner ice and so forth was one of their alarmist talking points. Let’s see what they say next year. Maybe they’ll repeat the same thinner ice mantra next year, since there was another ten percent increase.
But those same doom arguments didn’t fly this year, so if they say that again it’ll be weird.
Jim, by less safe, I was referring to less weight from removing safety gear. This is how cars were able to achieve higher mileages decades ago.
#69 – talk about an off topic assumption. I’m not against speed limits. I’m against unreasonably slow speed limits. 75mph on rural freeways is just fine. With a 5mph allowance, you can set the cruise control to just under 80 and that’s perfectly acceptable. Most people’s reaction times aren’t safe faster than that anyway.
#72 – Toxic,
Your post was quite ambiguous about what you felt was the big reduction in lifestyle. Thanks for clearing that up. So, you mostly agree with JimR but have a difference of opinion on where to set the limit. IMHO, 80 would be far too fast within NYC limits, even on the parkways. What did you think of a computer regulated speed based on radio transmitted limits?
That would be an unnecessary limit on individual freedom. Big fail.
I would agree that 80 is too fast in city limits. But then again, being in city limits is something to avoid as much as possible anyway. The biggest change we need to make in cities is get rid of some the the buildings to make room for more roads. Spread out – urban sprawl is a good thing. Mass transit is a horrible thing, fit for cattle but not humans.
#74 – Toxic Asshole,
So, my assumption in #69 was exactly correct. You want to be able to drive whatever speed you like regardless of the speed limit. You truly are an asshead. And, despite your moniker, when someone calls you on it, you deny it.
So, again, why do you want to kill someone with your car? Are your neighbors really that annoying? What do they think of you?
#74 dumbledorf,
Well done. Here are a couple of sites that have done the work already. I included kilimanjaro just to show that it’s not all arctic.
http://tinyurl.com/das6n
http://tinyurl.com/y9lmyes
#74 dumbledorf,
Well done. Here are a couple of sites that have done the work already. I included kilimanjaro just to show that it’s not all arctic.
http://tinyurl.com/das6n
(to be continued)
(continued)
This is kilimanjaro 1993 and 2000.
http://tinyurl.com/y9lmyes
Epic fail again Scott. I’ve never said I wanted to break the speed limit – but I don’t want it mechanically forced on me. It’s MY choice.
You have very eloquently proved my point that progressive/liberal solutions always about limiting freedom and forcing other to live a certain way. I haven’t seen a proposed solution to anything yet that doesn’t tell me what to sacrifice or what I can’t do. Sorry, I choose freedom instead.