Spock (rhp)

multiple players on the Tennessee Titans tested positive as soon as Monday after their Sunday game. Since incubation periods run between 4 and 10 days, it seems certain that multiple players on both the Titans and Vikings were exposed Sunday and some, likely, got the virus. It follows that both teams likely have players in the incubation period and that both may have passed the virus around from player to player.  Deferring their next game one or two days won't solve this, they'll still have possibly infected players who test negative.  So, "an abundance of caution" suggests that their next games, or even three, should be cancelled entirely.  Or are you part of the group that is willing to sacrifice the players for your vicarious sport pleasure?

Judge orders Uber/Lyft to reclassify drivers as employees.  While we think this will be good for drivers [they might make a living doing it, instead of barely more than breaking even], there is no doubt it will cost more, much more.  Since Uber doesn't actually make money, it is plain that fares would have to rise substantially.  50% is my guess ... so if that Uber ride across town costs 50 percent more than now, will you still use them?  [of course, this is just until they have driverless cars in 5 to 10 years -- then fares will plunge again.]

a former Obama administration health official says we could lick CV19 if America was willing to lockdown 90 percent of everything and everyone. China required 11 weeks of this in Wuhan.  After that, things could cautiously reopen with social distancing, required masks, frequent hand washing, etc. .. OR, [door number 2] we could endure as we are ... with overloaded hospitals, schools malfunctioning, and CV19 widespread.  What's your choice?  and are you willing to pay everyone to stay home?

We've all been told that CDC insisted on developing their own test for coronavirus and that their product failed in use. I want to know a) who made this colossal blunder and b) how they have taken responsibility for the resulting failure of US efforts to contain Covid-19. If the government is unwilling to say, don't you think the ultimate answer has to be "Trump"?? [And that we should, therefore, vote him out of office for refusing to be responsible.]

Under the guise of racial inequity, there's mounting pressure to eliminate the practice of requiring cash bail for many criminal cases. The other side of the coin is that defendants would them be more likely to skip their trial -- leaving the victims of crimes hanging.

Proposal: For most criminal cases, eliminate cash bail BUT if the defendant does show in court, s/he is immediately found guilty as charged and sentence is pronounced. Then, when next found by police, the now guilty criminal can be immediately jailed for the full term of his sentence.

Obviously, significant resources now used by law enforcement to manage prisoners awaiting trail would have to be re-allocated to skip tracing and looking for missing defendants. However, this would reduce the jail population, perhaps by several hundred thousand.

A judge would still be able to impose cash bail, or remand a defendant to immediate custody, if while awaiting trial the defendant is charged with further criminal incidents. A judge could also remand to custody any defendant thought to be a violent risk to others, as well as non-citizens. But no bail should be the norm for most crimes for most citizens. It's fairer.

What say you? In many cases, would this adequately balance the rights of the accused and the rights of society?

Read the backgrounds of the Justices on the Supreme Court. There are 205 approved law schools in America, yet the elite ones' graduates dominate the Supreme Court [and Congress]. Is this inherently unfair to minorities and lawyers from poorer families and if so, what should be done about it?

By now, we all know that government provided health"insurance" is on a collision course with lack of funding. Either benefits have to be cut or taxes raised -- or we kick the can down the road and make things worse in the 2020s.

So, which taxes that you actually pay are you willing to increase? and by how much?

If this is not enough revenue, what's your next choice of tax that you actually pat to make higher?

[You can not validly raises taxes on businesses unless you are a business owner.]

in every recovery from recession, except this last one, jobs created by private investment in new businesses and new equipment outnumbered jobs created by government about seven to one. Why does America's left not recognize this and want to increase investment?

is it Marxist blinders? willful refusal to read economics? or are they under the spell of some slick, fast talking wizard?

some hours ago, I asked a question about how to fund "Medicare for All". [see https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20170...

So far, no valid answers have been offered.

Is America so economically illiterate that we deserve a dictatorship telling us what we MUST do?

Please suggest where the government can get ~$1.7 trillion per year to pay for "Medicare for All":

{That is 80 percent of the portion of health care government does not now pay for, plus enough to increase Medicaid reimbursements to Medicare levels, plus debt service on the estimated $800 billion required to buy out existing health insurance operations.}

Some taxes that might raise this amount:

1. Fifty percent [50pc] surcharge on all pre-credit Federal taxes -- income, estates, Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment, Customs, Excise, et al. Yes, this would push marginal tax rates up over 60 percent for some.

2. Carbon dioxide emissions tax equivalent to $3.00 per gallon on fossil fuels. Electricity bills would also go up about half.

3. Impose a sixteen percent [16pc] Value Added Tax on all spending except health care -- rent, food, automobiles, home ownership, insurance, everything included.

You may propose a mixture of these taxes, or to exempt some uses, or other taxes not listed, as long as the net revenue increase reaches ~$1.7 trillion per year.

All current non-government health care payments would be reduced to about 25 percent of present Medicare allowed prices. Medicare allowed prices would be increased about 25 percent so that hospitals and physicians do not go bankrupt serving us.

No, none of this new revenue would be available to pay for Social Security or infrastructure needs.

Yes, there are other possible tax ideas not listed.

My attempt to post a question with supporting data is being rejected despite being under the limit for characters. What gives here, Yahoo?

Would the following stop or limit DDoS attacks?

a DDoS attack uses an army of remotely controlled computers or connected Internet devices to bombard a site [or DNS server] with millions of requests in a short time span. The attackers use thousands of other people's computers to do this ...

but the act of doing so creates a huge spike in requests generated by each controlled computer -- thousands where the normal number in a time period is few.

Suppose ICAAN or similar agency required all ISPs to monitor their clients' IP addresses for such spikes and take action to refuse them service when spikes are detected.

Would this limit or defeat DDoS attacks?

and if so, what agencies would need to step up and tell the world's ISPs to either comply with this directive or be shut out of access to the world's Internet backbone?

several decades ago, Prof. Don Campbell showed me that I have an unusual hearing condition as follows -- tap a tuning fork and listen to the tone. Then touch the base of the still vibrating tuning fork to the mastoid bone -- for me the tone changes significantly when this is done. Don commented that this rare condition is why I always sing off key -- what I hear from outside via my ears is NOT the tones I [try to] reproduce with my voice -- my hearing issue automatically corrects my singing to be off key. I've tried online but can not find a description of this condition -- what is this? [I don't think there is any treatment other than not singing.] {I can hear just fine -- but, apparently the tones are all "wrong".}

thanks for any lead or link on this.

Proposed: amend the citizenship portion of the Fourteenth amendment as follows: Congress may define who is or may become a citizen except that any person eighteen years or older when this amendment becomes effective and previously a citizen shall be a citizen. Congress may not discriminate in awarding or withholding citizenship based on race, sex, gender identity, religion, native language, or national origin.

good idea or bad? WHY??

dilemma -- in America, education once received belongs to the worker, who is free to take work almost anywhere he can find it. Thus, there is little or no incentive for employers to provide training and education to workers, except in those circumstances where the employee who benefits essentially can not quit and take his training with him.

This leaves education and training to the vo-techs, community colleges, universities, and private for profit education system. Sadly, many of their knowledge providers have little real world practical experience -- and the 'education' provided all too frequently is of little value to employers.

This also leads to some or many students graduating with large student debt, requiring a near lifetime [or longer] to repay.

Without violating the Constitution or America's anti-trust laws, how can this system be rebuilt to be both more effective, cheaper to operate, and leave the learner with lower debt?

{The underlying point of Bernie's "free college" campaign position is that America NEEDS to invest much more in education (it leads to economic growth). the problem is that taxing those who won't benefit from that higher education in order to enrich those who will is simply another income transfer from the poor to the middle class scheme -- and makes income inequality worse, not better.}

news today [Wedn 4 May] reports productivity was down one percent in 1Q 2016. since the growth rate of working age population wasn't over 1 percent [and likely won't be for a long, long time], it follows that GDP was probably down in 1Q 2016.

That means, if 2Q is also down, we'll officially be in a recession.

good going Obama. Recession just in time for the 2016 elections.

does anyone else think that HiLiarY will have a tough time defending this in November?

Example: "Bullet proof" person overdoses on illegal drugs and burns his brain out -- resulting in needing a lifetime of care. Should his insurance be exempt from paying for his care? Should the care be limited to hospice if he can not pay?

After all -- he did it to himself, despite laws intended to prevent exactly this.

Why should everyone else have to pay [in their ObamaCare insurance premiums or taxes to subsidize the ER] for this fool's defiant abuse of illegal drugs?

theft of goods, esp. electronics, is rampant in the US. Fencing them is a major source of funds for druggies. Why won't the government do something like this [see below] to help us recover our property?

idea: register the serial number of electronics and other goods with serial numbers to the original buyer on a centrally operated website. Like automobiles, require a seller to deliver title via the website to a buyer in order to defeat the presumption that the item is stolen. After this step, whenever an item is presented at a pawnshop, the shop owner calls up the website and verifies that the person presenting is the actual owner. When police raid a thief and recover goods, they could check them on the website for ownership and this both make the case against the thief [possession of stolen property] and return the goods to the owner.

Since this would reduce losses to the insurance industry, they should carry part of the cost. The makers of electronic goods could carry the rest [it's dog dirt simple -- registering for warranty automatically makes the entry for anti-theft.]

When a store discovers that items have been stolen [either out the front door or the back], they could flag the serial number [assuming they keep records of them when received] as stolen and thus prevent anyone else from registering -- and lead police to the stolen goods via the address of the person trying to register them.

Key question -- why won't the government help by doing this?