npts2020

Scientific or not I think there ought to be somewhere to discuss economic principles at this site. IMO much of economics is as aimed at obfuscation as much as explaining anything and it would be a worthwhile exercise for those here that are interested to parse out. Just my 2 cents. To the OP; how could such a thing be made to happen?

If I was building it, I would use an electric eye (light beam) that gets broken when you place the glass under the spigot. Then have the dispenser pump out a specific amount with settings for two or three size servings (if required).

IMO that is doubtful. If the measuring device is releasing energy (heat) it has to be releasing it to somewhere i.e. the medium surrounding your measuring device, thereby raising its temperature some incremental amount above absolute zero.

Rolling rods are frequently used as bearings, few things are as efficient. AFAIK any modification (besides making them ball bearings possibly) would make them less efficient.

What other possible "value" could the fed get besides rights to use/publish the work it funds? I wonder if this law would supercede eminent domain and who actually "owns" the results of government financed research?

I read the entire bill and would be hard pressed to give the exact portion of the bill this is in but IIRC the money was for non-citizen veterans like Filipinos or Mexicans (not specifically Viet Nam vets) who served in and are now retired from U.S. Armed Forces. I would not say if the amount was correct or not.

I think it is ironic that those who attach the most conditions for loaning money, don't want any conditions attached to their borrowing it.

In America we celebrate Darwin's birthday every year (just most call it Abraham Lincoln's birthday:D). Lincoln and Darwin were born the same day. Happy 200th to both.

Save some of that cold up and send it down here in July or August.

Depends if you want to blame those culpable or just blame someone, eh?

I have failed every one of those "find the number in the bubbles" tests I have ever taken (at least half a dozen that I can remember). I seem to see the wrong number or none at all about 75%-90% of the time (unless I stare at them for a long time but then I am not identifying the number by color), yet I can match colors for touch-up painting. I have never been able to figure out the difference between what I see and what a normally visioned person sees since it never seems to make much difference, just that the bubble tests say that it is different. The pictures of what a normal person sees and different forms of color-blind people are a good case in point. The one of a normal person's idea of a rainbow looks, well, normal, the other pictures are oddly colored.

A few posts ago someone asked about pork in the bailout. Unfortunately, I think the most pork is in the very area that will also create the most jobs, transportation. We are going to spend hundreds of billions (I'm sure trillions over the next decade) of dollars trying to prop up both mass transit and an antiquated highway system and likely devote to little for either. We need to combine the two systems, automate them, and power them from renewable sources. IMO there is little the government can do in the short term that will help in the long term other than create conditions for future economic stability. At present there is no way to get around instability as long as the pipelines we use for energy and other raw materials are insecure from political strife, sabotage, exhaustion, manipulation etc. Seeing as our transportation system is one of the biggest consumers of resources in the world, automation and powering with wind and solar energy would go a long way toward addressing this problem. Just my two cents. BTW I see nothing that is any more "pork" in this bill than was "pork" in the previous bailout bill..........why can't I get this bacon smell off my fingers?....

Thor Heyerdahl anyone?

Mathematicians too, aren't they the ones who were hired by Wall Street to set up a Ponzi scam, I mean derivative market?

Drunk driving is not quite the same thing. Charles Barkley was in the news for a DUI incident but I find it hard to believe that anyone would have given a picture of him chugging from a whiskey bottle (except maybe to comment about someone with that much money not affording a glass) a moments pause.

Well, it seems like most regulations are made to address someone or something's "safety" issue. Isn't that one of the reasons America is considered to be a mixed economy? "Managed" can mean anything from a few safety regulations to all economic activity being controlled by the state. IMO the less "managed" an economy is, the better, so long as those participating in that economy are not abrogating the rights of everyone else while doing so. In a perfect world laissez faire might be a good system, unfortunately we are left with trying to figure out how to apply it, if at all, to our real, imperfect world.

Well, I believe in Thor. Do I believe Thor can cleave rifts into hills with his hammer, drink half the ocean in a couple of draughts, cause lightning bolts ...... etc.? No, but they do make for great stories. It's kind of like asking if I believe in monarchy. Of course I do, but I am not for promoting such a system of belief.

Heck, I wonder about that right now. I can't think of a single song up for a grammy that I can remember even having heard, that is how much I pay attention to it.

heh-heh. Thats what I get for not being specific. The questions were about the means not the goal. The question should have been; Is there no alternative method that might be cheaper and more effective?

Sure doesn't laissez faire imply no control other than the "market".

Well, if you believe in anything greater than yourself you believe in my god. (surely you can think of something greater than just yourself....you and your best friend maybe)

Yeah, but it seems as if for some people there is no harm unless someone immediately dies.

There have been some great points made in this discussion, definitely a lot to think about. IMO the biggest problem with the stimulus package is that we are trying to solve long-term problems with short-term solutions. Propping things up the way they currently are is a short term solution (its effectiveness can be argued) that does little to address the reasons we got into this mess to begin with (fiat currency, over-inflated derivative market based on an over-inflated housing market, large fluctuations in enegy prices, Ponzi scams both institutional and individual, etc.). The so-called "leaders" in America are telling the people that it is a bad time for everyone that is going to require major sacrifices from us all (globalization, national debt, environmental degradation, etc.) yet make no sacrifices of their own. In the midst of the "worst economic crisis" since the Great Depression (maybe ever) the most expensive campaigns ever conducted for public office unfolded in front of everyone. Do these people then get together and attempt to explain why things have happened the way they did (hint it is to their advantage if nobody can figure out what is going on)? Do they make some symbolic sacrifice of their own, like cut their salaries by $1 or require all congressmen to get their own health care? No, They propose spending more of our money than has ever been spent (IMO people are being naive to believe that it will not cost more than advertized). This has been bi-partisan (even if house republicans would have you believe differently) both before and after the most recent election, which is still going on, costing us even more $$.... Anyway, the point is that it is only businessmen for the most part who are able to accumulate the resources to run for large scale public offices (national, statewide, some large citywide offices), which automatically puts an extreme bias toward business oriented solutions (not arguing for or against) or at least ought to be expected. The problem is that many of the business oriented solutions are detrimental to society and/or individuals i.e. current and previous bailouts, carbon emissions, tax breaks to corporations over individuals, etc. Personally I would like to see the government completely take over any failing "business-too-big-to-fail" and do one of several things; A)sell its assets outright, B)operate it into an orderly bankruptcy and sell-off, C)take over and operate the business outright if it is so vital to have it until it is no longer needed, D)some combination of the above. Yes, this will require government to be responsible and will be more trouble than simply printing more money and "loaning" (wink wink) it to those who couldn't manage the money to begin with but I believe it would send a clear message that in a capitalist country, capitalists are expected to support themselves.

I believe in defining god as being anything greater than myself (that would make me an athiest or heretic in many if not most widely practiced religions).

Is it necessary? How much will it cost?