Image

Cialis is a latest medicine for treatment of disturbances of erection at men. Cialis feature is its high-speed fake (30 minutes) and a long-term effect (up to 36 hours). In this regard you can choose the moment which is most conventional for sexual intercourse, having all the rage a drug in advance. It is feasible to give a positive response Cialis in the morning and to be ready even next-door day. nimble ingredient - Tadalafil.

Il ne devrait buy cialis melbourne être pris une heure avant une relation sexuelle. That Hillary can somehow take a nap in the middle of all this is a sign of her sheer exhaustion.

Categories: Male Enhancement | cheap cialis eu

Comments

  • froggster

    froggster

    March 10, 2015, 10:10 pm

    sure: in response to an expected passage of some form of health care reform my employer (of > 100k employees globally) has eliminated the traditional indemnity and EPO programs of their health care offerings which leaves HMO and PPO with no option for using out-of-program doctors. we now have a choice of any in-program doctor or specialists in our regional area, although in the catalog of in-program doctors every specialist has the same last name and office address: my new internist is also a specialist in colon-rectal surgery (proctology) and neurosurgery (he wanted to cover patients head to toe...) all covered in a 3 minute examination.

    unfortunately this is factual..

    i'm opposed to it because it eliminates competition and personal choice. under the obama initiative grandma buby won't be denied medical care so that she dies earlier: she'll just wish she would.

    Reply

  • tokage

    tokage

    March 10, 2015, 12:20 pm

    I've always had my own personal conviction for years that this shit will kill me. Whether there is scientific research to back up the healthfulness of artificial sweeteners or not, the idea of filling my body with unnatural chemicals to trick my mind into thinking something tastes sweet is not something I have ever really been comfortable with. If I want something sweet, I eat or drink something with sugar in it. If I control how much I take in and manage to get some exercise from time to time, I don't have to worry about becoming diabetic or overweight or developing any of the other problems associated with consuming sugar.

    Are there legitimate uses for artificial sweeteners? Maybe -- but I think the biggest problem that comes with their use is that they turn into an excuse for people not exercising personal responsibility for their own health.

    Plus, I just think the shit tastes nasty to begin with.

    (edit: Downvoted!? gimme a break.)

    Reply

  • ontologicalninja

    ontologicalninja

    March 10, 2015, 6:24 am

    I'm upvoting this entry for the purpose of letting every redditor read your question and give you an appropriate answer.

    For me, the "appropriate answer" is twofold:

    One, there are many public services which when originally developed might have been seen as designated for the private sector. Schools, police, etc. Guess what? There are private schools and you can hire private detectives and bodyguards to do anything you need.

    Two, the idea that peoples' health should be reserved for the private sector is all well and fine, but that's a simplistic view that fails to account for the complicated business models that are established in the health care industry. Insurance companies, imo, see their customers' health as a commodity, something that is represented as a numerical value and put into an annual report, and not something to be genuinely concerned over.

    And like any other business, insurance companies try to appease their investors, which means making profits consistently throughout each financial quarter. The easiest way to do this is by selling lots of expensive plans and finding incredibly imaginative ways to deny coverage of the most expensive-yet-deserving claims that are made, or by placing as many hurdles as possible in front of the insured so they give up on getting any actual payment. If investors are happy, they invest more.

    Leave it to the private sector, huh? This is how the private sector has handled it so far.

    Reply

  • lectrick

    lectrick

    March 11, 2015, 9:54 am

    OK. I will admit to one, very strange, man-crush. Not that I wanted to do him, but he got me all starry-eyed for some reason. Only time that's ever happened. I texted my female friends about him. "YOU HAVE TO MEET THIS GUY!!" I was strangely let down when I found out he was married. Married people are kinda lame, if you're still single.

    Met him at a Ruby on Rails convention. (!) He was really smart, outgoing, funny, had a bit of style about him, and, I guess, was good-looking. I did not feel like banging him, though. No... really. Did not. But the rest of it was... odd.

    If he had a sister, I would have been all over that shit.

    Reply

  • cthulhufhtagn

    cthulhufhtagn

    March 10, 2015, 9:59 am

    I'd say you're partially right about dumb/smart girls. But I'd also like to say that, with no correlation to intelligence whatsoever, this phenomenon is mostly tied to broken/not broken girls. Girls who had shit for a dad versus girls who didn't, for example.

    Did the girl have a decent-to-good male role model in their life, taking an active interest in them? If so, they have a good chance of being OK. Otherwise, unless they're exceptional in willl-power and in the ability to turn their lives around, they'll likely go after the shitty guys.

    Reply

  • LeGrandOiseau

    LeGrandOiseau

    March 10, 2015, 3:53 pm

    Prop 13 is a tax on mobility. It rewards people who don't move. It means that next-door neighbors in identical houses pay widely divergent property taxes. It's grotesquely unfair and it should be abolished. If you want Granny to not be taxed out of her long-time family home, give her a means-tested tax break.

    And there's plenty California can do on the expenditure side: they can empty the prisons of nonviolent drug offenders, and they can cut subsidies for Central Valley agribusiness, for example by charging them the actual cost of the water they use. That would be good for the environment as well. And they could gut the middle-management layer of the educational establishment. The ratio of front-line teachers to administrators should be no less than 6:1. Right now it's under 1:1.

    Reply

  • ipfreely_12386

    ipfreely_12386

    March 10, 2015, 6:32 am

    I dont quite agre with your logic. Either people get the free-pass by working in government, or they dont... you seem to be wanting to having it both ways (in your first comment, and from the sounds of it from your last comment) . If you force someone to work in government, then by all means, it's the same as if they worked at any other job and had to pay off their student loans. If however, you mean that working x number of years in government would annull their student loans, well you've effective given them a free pass and are promoting financial promiscioustiy. So we're right back to square one about why we shouldn't annull debts.

    Perhaps I'm wrong from my perspective. Maybe it's because of my background where parents allow kids to live with them past 18 years of age. I do accept that rent is a massive cost, but unless your parents have pretty much forced you out, IMO you (not you, people in general) should be living with them while going to school. (unless of course they live more than a couple hours away from your school and there isn't a school nearby).

    I just find it at least from those people that i've run into at school, they're CHOOSING to live a HIGH lifestyle. But again, anecdotal evidence cannot be used to make a generalization. So you maybe right.

    Reply

  • Infinity_Wasted

    Infinity_Wasted

    March 11, 2015, 6:39 am

    I just wanted to thank you for being so kind and generous. money makes a lot of people selfish and cloister themselves in a hollow domains.

    I have no need of your money. some time in the future, I might, but for right now, I'm fine.

    also, if I ever become rich, I plan on doing exactly what you're doing. fuck buying 20 corvettes in 35 different colours; fuck yachts (but I would have a small boat); fuck country-clubs. I would prefer to live comfortably and help others out there in the world. speaking of that: I hope I never become rich. it would just be too much of a burden. but I'm happy for you and your wealth and that you have found a good way to use it.

    keep being awesome!

    Reply

  • dagnabbit10

    dagnabbit10

    March 11, 2015, 12:29 am

    What keeps me interested in him is that I think he would date me if he weren't dating his girlfriend. Maybe. For some reason I feel like an ass saying that, though.

    He pays attention to me, and we have similar interests. We have a little romantic history together, but we haven't been around each other in years. I think it's more that he's very faithful to his girlfriend, and that's perfectly fine, a wonderful trait to have, not that I would never be an option.

    I don't want to find someone else because I just don't want to date in general, not because I'm holding out for him. Like I said in another reply, I don't think I would even want a relationship with him if the opportunity arose. I'd be scared to f it up.

    My problem is more, how do I not make a fool of myself around him as I most likely am going to have to see him fairly often? I tend to blurt things out, especially when inebriated. :/ And I don't want to be thinking about grabbing him and kissing him when he's talking to me, I just want to think of him as a friend.

    Reply

  • m00min

    m00min

    March 10, 2015, 5:52 pm

    > The crowd that showed up for the Chicago Olympics rally is about as complicit in what Bush, the US military & contractors & major corporations have done as average Afghanis are in what Al-Qaeda & the Taliban do.

    The bigger problem is farm subsidization that damages agriculture in the third world (dumping) and prevents third world countries from having fair access to the American market. Illinois is practically guilty in that aspect (since it gets a lot of $$$ for maize if I am correct).

    > rally is about as complicit in what Bush, the US military & contractors & major corporations have done as average Afghanis are in what Al-Qaeda & the Taliban do.

    Bush was supported by the majority of the electorate. Obama was basically supported by all those that didn’t vote for Bush. Yet he isn’t pulling out of Iraq or pulling out of Afghanistan. So there comes a point where the electorate needs to be held responsible for the actions of their duly elected leaders.

    (In all fairness, Bush gave a lot of aid to Africa. Aid to Africa increased significantly during his tenure).

    Reply

  • the_nuclear_lobby

    the_nuclear_lobby

    March 10, 2015, 11:34 pm

    >it's a little weird to call these points "corrections"

    The following points I made were also corrections, in addition to the one you quoted (ie either I'm right or he is, we can't both be):

    ----

    >Iran's formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod facility __underscores that Iran is playing by the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran has signed.__

    They violated the rules in both spirit and letter, as I cited above. This is a direct correction to his post.

    >The IAEA and all 16 United States Intelligence Agencies are __unanimous in agreement that Iran is not building and does not possess nuclear weapons.__

    He misinterpreted what those reports said as I cited above. This is a direct correction to his post.

    >__The United Nations passed a resolution calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty__ and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.

    Without mentioning that the resolution was non-binding, the OP is implying that Israel is in violation of the law when they aren't. Not including context in this case required correction.

    ----

    >none of these contradict anything stated or even implied by the OP.

    Most of my post directly contradicted what he said, but I guess you're right that I could have phrased things a little less abrasively.

    Reply

  • judgej2

    judgej2

    March 10, 2015, 10:04 am

    No, but I would assume that if you do not understand the answer, you refer to it and dig a little deeper rather than just ignoring it.

    Or just say, "sorry, this isn't for me" and move on.

    I'm not a mathematician, or a topologist, and I also cannot see any practical application of this technique *right now*. What I can see from the video though is that the whole process is self-consistent (they *don't* make up the rules as they go along) and it does do what it claims.

    I also know that number theory was a quaint branch mathematics with no application for two centuries. It took computers and cryptology to give it an application, and now we cannot do without it.

    Anything that furthers mankind's understanding of science is *A Good Thing* in my opinion. If it exists, even as a mathematical construct, then it *exists* in this universe, and I'm proud that we humans teased it out of nothing.

    Reply

  • robreim

    robreim

    March 11, 2015, 5:17 am

    I don't much doubt that weight training is better at losing weight than cardio when taking the anaerobic metabolic rate increase into account. If I understand correctly, studies on anaerobic training vs aerobic training for weight loss (eg Tabata) support your guess. I don't know how conclusive the evidence is but I wouldn't be too surprised if you're right.

    The main advantage of aerobic training is that you can do it for longer and slowly burn calories the whole time. Of course since you did a marathon you pretty well tested the extend to which that can work.

    Like I said you've got so many variables there. You could be right but it'd take a more controlled experiment with many more people to be sure. Regardless, I've been encouraging weight training over cardio to people who ask about weight loss for years now. Maybe after seeing this yourself you'll make the same recommendations when you're asked. I'm not sure why cardio is so much more popular for fat loss. My guess is that any exercise is better than no exercise so sedentary people were first recommended cardio to start out with since it's easier and from there the myth that cardio is "THE way to lose weight" was born.

    Reply

  • tobyflorida

    tobyflorida

    March 11, 2015, 2:53 am

    First of all, you are fascinating.

    You mentioned nearly all of the inmates have an external locus of control. Is there any way of fixing this in a normal person? Please give a more elaborate answer than just "therapy", and explain what that therapy would consist of.

    What tricks have you learned in dealing with borderline personality people? Say, a bpd person was cycling really violent, and they were about to get really really fucking pissed... that they were just waiting to snap. AND they had an external locus of control.

    And also, is it possible to have an overly internal locus of control? Or is internal locus of control always a sign of mental health and success in life?

    What books would you recommend to someone (a layman) about locus of control?

    What books would recommend to someone (a layman) that were about borderline personality disorder?

    Interesting that you find borderline personality disordered people more dangerous than people with antisocial personality disorder. Have you ever thought about writing a book for the layman on identifying and avoiding these types?

    Reply

  • daemin

    daemin

    March 10, 2015, 5:31 pm

    False dichotomy. _Both_ solutions are correct. They just depend on the circumstances.

    The solutions are _not_ for the same problem.

    In the first "solution", you know that _your_ envelope has $100. This limits the other envelope to being either $50 or $200, leading to the average gain of $25.

    In the second "solution", you know the values of both envelopes, but not which is which. Assuming you got one of them randomly, when averaged out of several runs, switching is a wash.

    So when you know what your envelope has but not the other envelope, you should switch. When you know what both envelopes might have, it doesn't matter.

    Edit:

    I must admit, when I fired this off last night, I wasn't expecting such controversy. Anyway, let me try and clear up my comment a little.

    The two cases given _are not the same_, and its the difference between them that gives you the different strategies.

    Read it again:

    > Suppose your envelope contains $100.

    As opposed to

    > Suppose the amounts of money in the two envelopes are $100 and $200.

    In the first case, we are told the value of _one_ envelope, which happens to be the one you hold in your hand (not that that really matters).

    In the second case, we are told the value of _both_ envelopes.

    In first case, knowing the value of one envelope, along with the rules of the game, gives us a minimum and maximum value of the other envelope. So we have to work based on the probabilities that the envelopes are $50/$100 or $100/$200.

    In the second case, we know exactly what the values in question are; its the $100/$200 case.

    Given that, I believe it works like this:

    In the first case, you know the value of the envelope in your hand. You also know that one envelope contains twice as much money as the other. Since you know what one envelope has, you can infer that the other envelope has either twice as much or half as much. Hence, the other envelope has either $50 or $200. In this case, the potential gain ($100) is bigger than the potential loss ($50), so averaged over multiple runs, _where one envelope always has $100, but the other has either $50 or $200_, the gains outweigh the loses.

    In the second case, you know what the values of the envelopes are, but not which envelope is which. In this case, you know that one has $100 and the other has $200. The potential gain from switching ($100) is equal to the potential loss of switching ($100). So averaged over multiple runs, the gains equal the losses, and its a wash.

    In the first case, you know the value of one envelope, and this introduces some ambiguity to the value of X. In second case, you know the value of both envelopes, so you know what the value of X is.

    Different circumstances, different strategies.

    Edit #2

    Look. This is an empirical question.

    I slapped together a php script to test this out over 10,000 iterations. This is the result of a run:

    ============ Case 1 ============

    Total result from always switching: 1251350

    Total result from always staying: 1000000

    Average result from always switching: 125.135

    Average result from always staying: 100

    ============ Case 2 ============

    Result from always switching: 1508400

    Result from always staying: 1491600

    Average result from always switching: 150.84

    Average result from always staying: 149.16

    Code:

    <?php

    $x = 100;

    $switching = 0;

    $staying = 0;

    for($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++)

    {

    if(rand(0, 1) == 1)

    { $y = $x * 2; } // I got the X envelope

    else

    { $y = $x * 0.5; } // I got the 2x envelope

    $switching += $y;

    $staying += $x;

    }

    print "============ Case 1 ============<br>";

    print "Total result from always switching: $switching<br>";

    print "Total result from always staying: $staying<br>";

    print "Average result from always switching: " . $switching / 10000 . "<br>";

    print "Average result from always staying: " . $staying / 10000 . "<br>";

    $x = 100;

    $y = 200;

    $switching = 0;

    $staying = 0;

    for($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++)

    {

    if(rand(0,1) == 0) // I got the $100 envelop

    {

    $switching += $y;

    $staying += $x;

    }

    else // I got the $200 envelope

    {

    $switching += $x;

    $staying += $y;

    }

    }

    print "============ Case 2 ============<br>";

    print "Result from always switching: $switching<br>";

    print "Result from always staying: $staying<br>";

    print "Average result from always switching: " . $switching / 10000 . "<br>";

    print "Average result from always staying: " . $staying / 10000 . "<br>";

    ?>

    Reply

  • lukey

    lukey

    March 10, 2015, 1:47 pm

    > in regular public schools all the time would allow so many more students to learn and understand why learning is useful for real life.

    You know, that was the whole problem. It sounded so reasonable and laudable. But in actual practise, this was total junk. The teachers essentially assigned one project (write a novel...) and the rest of the term was totally nothing. No english curriculum or history curriculum to speak of.

    And...it was totally scripted. You had no choice whatsoever. It wasn't *real* learning...it was just a bigger more integrated project to grade for two courses. But really, you didn't deal with anything substantial.

    On the surface, it sounds like there would be something "higher order" happening, but actually, it operated at an even lower level. In a regular English class, you could select your own material and approach. In the special stream, it was down to pure mechanics as you followed the instructions.

    I'm not a teacher, but I don't really think that education happens top-down. And the gifted program was worse than the normal stream for this.

    Reply

  • RiskOfInferno

    RiskOfInferno

    March 11, 2015, 1:33 am

    > Democrats live in the future, worrying about things like sustainability and individual well-being.

    Democrats have brought us into unnecessary wars overseas, given bailouts/corporate welfare, etc. Government institutions that Democrats support such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are in trouble and may face the threat of going bankrupt.

    My point is that sustainability isn't something a Democrat (or nearly any politician) actually cares about.

    Edit: Will someone who is downvoting me at least explain why?

    Reply

  • jrandom

    jrandom

    March 10, 2015, 10:48 pm

    Hey, if you're trying out my code, try replacing Continents.cpp's flow routine with this one:

    // ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow_Continents()

    void Continents::Flow_Continents()

    {

    float half_world = float(world_dimensions.first >> 1);

    float stiffness = float(half_world * half_world) * 0.5;

    for( int32_t i = 0; i < continent_list.size(); i++ )

    {

    int32_t flow_direction = last_direction_list[ i ];

    if( random.Chance( 0.25 ) )

    flow_direction += ( random.Chance( 0.5 ) ) ? -1 : 1;

    flow_direction = Toroid2D::WrapCoord( flow_direction, Jitter_Direction_Count );

    int32_pair new_coordinate = continent_list[ i ];

    switch( flow_direction )

    {

    case Up : new_coordinate.second--; break;

    case Up_Right : new_coordinate.second--; new_coordinate.first++; break;

    case Right : new_coordinate.first++; break;

    case Down_Right: new_coordinate.second++; new_coordinate.first++; break;

    case Down : new_coordinate.second++; break;

    case Down_Left : new_coordinate.second++; new_coordinate.first--; break;

    case Left : new_coordinate.first--; break;

    case Up_Left : new_coordinate.second--; new_coordinate.first--; break;

    }

    Toroid2D::WrapCoord( new_coordinate, world_dimensions);

    int32_t closest_old = 0x7FFFFFFF;

    int32_t closest_new = 0x7FFFFFFF;

    for(int32_t j = 0; j < continent_list.size(); j++ )

    {

    if( j != i )

    {

    int32_t current_old = Toroid2D::Dist_Squared( continent_list[ j ], continent_list[ i ], world_dimensions );

    int32_t current_new = Toroid2D::Dist_Squared( continent_list[ j ], new_coordinate, world_dimensions );

    if( current_old < closest_new ) closest_old = current_old;

    if( current_new < closest_new ) closest_new = current_new;

    }

    }

    if( (closest_new > closest_old) || random.Chance( float(closest_new) / stiffness ) )

    continent_list [ i ] = new_coordinate;

    last_direction_list[ i ] = flow_direction;

    }

    Calculate_Veroni();

    }

    It reduces the times that the plate centers get to close to each other, resulting in better plate movement. (The code certainly needs cleanup and commenting, but it does work better.)

    Reply

  • wetwater

    wetwater

    March 10, 2015, 11:32 pm

    No, they don't know. They'd go off the deep end if they heard. One of my cousins does know, but that was out of necessity. Thankfully, she's cool with it and knows how to keep a zipped lip. I know I'm only postponing the inevitable and when it does happen it's going to be particularly ugly.

    When my parents and I lived in the same state, we were not that particularly close, and I often avoided having to interact with them. Now that they are halfway across the country, I actually enjoy having conversations with them and visiting every couple of years. In the last several years, with distance, in some ways I've become closer to them and right now that's something I'd hate to lose. Their homophobia is as rampant as ever, but I hear far less of it, so I guess that's something.

    A lot of my friends tell me to come out to them and let them deal with whatever issues they have with it. I'm still torn on it: on the one hand, I'm finally honest with myself being gay, on the other, I'm still living a lie. I remain noncommittal when they ask about my relationships. I haven't yet figured out how I'm going to tell them or deal with the fallout that will happen when I do. When I get to that point, I know it's going to be very unpleasant for all involved; I reckon I'm going to hear from family members I haven't heard from in decades when they do find out. Also, I stand to lose a lot, which is why I keep avoiding it.

    The more I think on it, the more complicated it becomes, at least in my mind, and the more it makes sense to keep it quiet from family for the time being. Of course, living like this, indeed, creates its own complications and them knowing would be far, far simpler in the long run. The only point that I can come to agreement on with my gay friends about this is to tell them when I think the time is right. And so, I keep waiting, hoping for that one small opening in a casual conversation that I can either begin to feel them out and work up to it, or just lay it on the table for them.

    Reply

  • freakwent

    freakwent

    March 11, 2015, 1:40 am

    I have a retired friend who would hop with his wife from casino to casino around Australia.

    He would forward a massive lump sum to the casino and they would collect him from the airport; accomodation, food and drinks were all free. Back at home his house was shut down, no power bills, transport costs, food costs etc.

    He would need to run at least 5k through the tables a day, but he followed a very strict (boring) system so that his return was always something like %99-101, so any losses were less than the money he was saving on food and so on....

    Anyway, I'm surprised to see that Australia is not in your list of places you frequent.

    Reply

  • ropers

    ropers

    March 11, 2015, 4:33 am

    Here's what I suspect: You will never get socialized health care. Because of your attitude.

    If you wanted health care, here's what you would do:

    1. Demonstrate out in the cold tomorrow evening. If you're able to get some meatspace friends to come with you, great. If not, go anyway. Make a poster and go.

    2. Tell your friends. Talk about your experience. How you don't want your children to ask you "where were you when...". How it's a matter for doing what's right for the sake of your own conscience. Yes, you can also blog that and take pictures and talk about what happened to you and how your rights were abused (they will be), and how that's an outrage.

    3. Be back the next Monday. If you've done things right, you won't be alone anymore. You can even call that "promoting", but frankly your "promoting" will be you convincing one person at a time to stand with you. You "promoting" and a million other people coming out of the woodwork all of a sudden? Frankly, you're not that famous.

    But I'm pretty sure you won't do it.

    Prove me wrong by actually doing it -- and no, you will not be able to turn out a million people from the get-go, because you can't even convince one single person to come: Yourself.

    And *that* is inefficient. *That* is why you won't accomplish a damn thing. That is why you fail.

    Reply

  • DigitalEvil

    DigitalEvil

    March 10, 2015, 6:49 am

    I never said her situation wasn't the most important one out there. I know for a fact it isn't one that would help the most people. But as the OP said in their topic, they are interested in helping with personal situations such as this (car payments, tuition, etc).

    My story was to show that my girlfriend obviously is trying hard to get through life and better her position so she can have a better life. She isn't unique, I know that. But she is the most important person in my life and someone who I see deserves consideration for her own troubles. I don't know what you have going on in your life, and I can't assume I do, so I won't. There is a lot more to our life story that I didn't discuss but I can say for certain she isn't saying anything close to "gimme more". Everything she has she got herself. She wasn't *given* anything.

    And she doesn't buy things. Considering most people, she lives with fairly bare minimums. No TV. No Internet. Just an apartment and enough food to allow her to eat at least a meal or two a day.

    Reply

  • lectrick

    lectrick

    March 10, 2015, 9:06 pm

    The fact that more asian women date white guys than the other way around, and the fact that more black men date white women than the other way around, indicates to me that size does, in fact, matter. It's not everything, but it matters. ;)

    I dated a woman I could not let loose on without injuring her. (It wasn't so much that I'm big; she was very very small tho, even by her gynecologist's admission.) That didn't last very long.

    My mother, conservative in every other way, once advised me "Make sure you take it for a spin before you drive it off the lot."

    Reply

  • ayrnieu

    ayrnieu

    March 10, 2015, 4:19 pm

    > What's your opinion? [Everyone's choosing] some flavour of socialized medicine

    And so have we. My opinion is that we'd be vastly better off if we exchanged the present chimera for free-market healthcare.

    > the invisible hand of the market is amoral. ... in large part not human.

    If you can get rich off of starting Dildo Lawn Ornament City franchises in small towns, the immorality of this rests with you and with the consumers who validate your entrepreneurship. It's pointless to blame your ability to get rich off of this, and futile to prefer a population who *would* purchase dildo lawn ornaments, but who are frustrated in this one respect.

    Reply

  • trenc

    trenc

    March 11, 2015, 9:42 am

    Commercial photography and art isn't the same thing. Decide what you want:

    1) Work for a magazine/company.

    2) Make and sell your own photos.

    3) Freelance.

    Develop your portfolio, and show it to people online, see what feedback you get. Don't show it to your friends/family, they will never say bad things, you will never get real critique.

    Talent isn't everything in commercial photography. A lot of it is about being able sell and promote yourself. There are thousands of crappy wedding photographers who make good money. They are good salesmen, and you will have to compete with them.

    From the art point of view, chances are

    1) You suck (not trying to offend you, but I took photography classes, and 95% of students majoring in photography suck big time).

    2) If you are good, but not great, you will struggle to make money. There are millions of decent photographers out there.

    3) If you're great (chances of that are very low), you will most likely succeed, but it will take lots of work.

    Reply

  • sunbeam60

    sunbeam60

    March 11, 2015, 4:28 am

    Well, ok, your definition differs from mine then. When I say constitution I mean a unified text that outlines how the country is governed and sets out the limits of government and unbreakable rights of people. Crucially, in my definition, those laws are more difficult to change than regular laws and there is a court who has the capacity to overturn new laws based on their fitness within the constitution.

    Obviously there are laws for how Britain is governed and how the fundamentals of government works, but if these can be changed just as easily as regular laws, they're not much of a "constitution".

    The very fact that there is no clear decision on whether the British population has a right to vote when handing over power to supranational bodies

    makes your definition of constituion fairly weak in my very humble oppinion.

    Reply

  • twistedcain

    twistedcain

    March 10, 2015, 10:38 pm

    If a nurse had the knowledge and experience of a doctor, they would be **A DOCTOR**. It's an insult to all doctors that a person with a fraction of the education they have would go around giving people medical advice in place of their own.

    That's like saying the guy working at Geek Squad is just as good at giving computer advice, because he does it all day, as the guy who graduated with a masters degree in computer science and administration. If the guy had the same knowledge, he wouldn't be working for minimum wage reinstalling windows all day.

    Reply

Leave a comment