Fox News reports legislation in Colorado to let illegal immigrant kids attend college for in-state resident rates.
I just read this article (that a Facebook friend posted on Facebook). Assuming that I would need to research the bill further, since it's well documented how many 'accidental' innacuracies Fox News incorporates into its reporting, I figured I'd read the Fox News article then try to cross reference it to see what the real skinny was on the legislation. However, I didn't need to read any further, even within this article it says that kids who are residents of the state but who have illegal immigrant status are going to get the in-state resident rate. The same rate as the kids that live in state that have legal status get.
What's wrong with this exactly? This makes perfect sense. These kids, students, live in the state. Sure - there are issues with their immigrant status, and I agree we as a nation need to do something rational and non-descriminatory, which protects our economy and our citizenry.. and our security. However, that's an entirely separate discussion on border control, border permeability, etc. Fact is, everyone who bothers to do more than drink the kool-aid on Fox knows that even when unemployed US Citizens are given the option of performing the type of labor illegal immigrants perform they flat out refuse to do that work... so until we can build robots willing to do the necessary work that illegal immigrants do, we need them because American US Citizens are - well let's not call them lazy, let's just say they are so drunk on the lies of the so-called 'american dream', they feel so entitled to having a middle class existence, that they won't do those jobs they consider 'beneath them'. Every state that has tried to enforce some kind of practice of giving unemployed people a chance to do the jobs illegals have traditionally performed have empirically documented resounding and utter failure. They are unable to find US citizens willing to do the work.
Again - that's a side comment that is unrelated to the education of kids in this country.
Back to this legislation in Colorado. If a kid lives in a state, regardless of immigrant status, it makes perfect, logical, economic sense to give them the in-state tuition rate. Either way everyone benefits, the state, the kid, our economy. The kid is not 'self-deporting'. The kid will be in the state, right? So - we give him or her an affordable education, he/she becomes a contributing part of society and improves the state's net worth/productivity, or we create a 'money-gate' to make it harder (or impossible) for this illegal alien child to get an education and he/she becomes a drain on the state's economy, maybe, worst case, turning towards some kind of chaotic path, like crime.
Me, I am not a people person. That doesn't mean I dislike people, just don't have any favorites, which means I don't have any I dislike more than anyone else. I'm totally neutral. I don't favor white people, I don't favor males, I don't favor anyone. I am concerned with the human race as a species, because I think they are all dangerous, yet necessary for my survival. I want every human to prosper, I want to minimize suffering. I want to reduce crime and boost my nation's productivity and to boost the world's productivity.
I guess if I had strong feelings of xenophobia like Faux News employees and viewers, maybe I would want to harm my own well being and my nation's well being, just so I could take out my impotent xenophobic paranoid fear against brown people or whatever. But I don't have those impulses. I don't actually have a whole heck of a lot of emotions in general. I just see cost/risk/reward, and my goal is a stable global society of humans that have the resources to start to make the changes necessary to preserve our human technological civilization. My reason is simple, I need that to survive as long as possible with as little suffering as possible. My only goal in life is to live as long as possible with as little suffering as possible. To do that, every other human has to be able to live as long as possible and suffer as little as possible.
Anything anyone does to increase the entropy of the system is basically acting against their own best interest and by my definition is a threat to my own well being, which - I don't like to use strong language, but I define anyone who is harming my well being a potential enemy. The interesting thing is that the only way to combat the enemy is to create confluence. If I can show all humans that they are all part of a single tribe and if I could make them see how this planet (not even the whole solar system but only this one little planet) as more resources than 10 times the current population requires, if we could just start utilizing the available energy properly, and that everyone on the planet, if they worked together, could live long, healthy, stable lives free of suffering, then, I could eliminate the threat.
Allowing hatreds and prejudices to form against one set of humans in favor of another does neither set of humans any good, and it definitely doesn't do ME any good, since my goal is to live as long as possible with as little pain as possible.
The urge that most humans feel is a throwback to a past that no longer exists, when each human animal fought independently to advance it's genome over it's competitors in an environment of limited resources. Evolution programs us to have short term myopic problem solving targets. But our human sentience and theory of mind allows us, if we try hard enough to expand our view to a farther horizon. It is that expanded view and farther horizon that will save humanity, and if we as a species fails to do this, then we deserve the extinction we will get.
Me, I see that far horizon, (so I feel I don't deserve the extinction)... so if I end up suffering and dying painfully due to the myopic vision of other humans, then I will justly spew my rancor at them with my final breaths.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Friday, March 8, 2013
Need a god to have good relationships?
I just came across the following picture and caption on facebook:
It made me think. Well, moreso it seemed so bizarre and condescending. So I started to think of, and decided to craft, the following essay to catalog my thoughts on the topic.
I can't speak for tomorrow but so far I've been in a relationship with the same woman for 10 years, 4 months, and a handful of days. I have a strained relationship with my mom because she was mentally unstable and abusive to me my entire life, however, I have nonetheless provided care and succor for her for the past 15+ years, for which she's grateful, in her more lucid less unstable moments. My 3 oldest (and possibly closest) friends are friends whom I met in 6th grade, 12th grade, and when I was 21 (so about 20 years ago) respectively.
I have been at the same job for 15+years and have worked with many of my current co-workers for 6 years or more.
I am itemizing this because I am as hard core a flaming atheist as they come, I have no relationship with any of the several thousand different gods humans have chosen to worship.
I know a lot of atheists, both in real life and via social networking, plus the people I have met at rallies, conventions, and events. Many of them are in long term relationships - in fact, we just moved to a suburb and have made friends with a couple who've been married for a while (who not only are married, they also work together), who are atheists, and rekindled a friendship with a friend from 10 years ago who happens to live near by and her, her hubby and her kid are atheists.
There's a lot of atheists who make a lot of relationships work.
Even if I lost my girl, my job and all my friends tomorrow.. (which I can't speak for tomorrow for who can say with certainty, what tomorrow may bring?) I can say that I have had long duration, mutually reciprocal, healthy, supportive, and warm relationships - romantic, platonic, and professional All without any supernatural support and far from being alone, I am part of a huge, happy, well adjusted, optimistic, hopeful, politically, socially, and community-ly(?) active fellow atheists who also have long term, warm, supportive, reciprocal, healthy relationships.
Me, them, none of us worship, or have a relationship with, any of the several thousand different gods that humans have worshiped thru history... not even the 3 or 4 that are the most popular fads of the past few centuries.
I'm just Not Sure if you need a relationship with the idea of a god to have healthy relationships with real people who actually exist in the real world.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
A personal relationship with god is the most important relationship you will ever have and it is what will make all other relationships work.
It made me think. Well, moreso it seemed so bizarre and condescending. So I started to think of, and decided to craft, the following essay to catalog my thoughts on the topic.
I can't speak for tomorrow but so far I've been in a relationship with the same woman for 10 years, 4 months, and a handful of days. I have a strained relationship with my mom because she was mentally unstable and abusive to me my entire life, however, I have nonetheless provided care and succor for her for the past 15+ years, for which she's grateful, in her more lucid less unstable moments. My 3 oldest (and possibly closest) friends are friends whom I met in 6th grade, 12th grade, and when I was 21 (so about 20 years ago) respectively.
I have been at the same job for 15+years and have worked with many of my current co-workers for 6 years or more.
I am itemizing this because I am as hard core a flaming atheist as they come, I have no relationship with any of the several thousand different gods humans have chosen to worship.
I know a lot of atheists, both in real life and via social networking, plus the people I have met at rallies, conventions, and events. Many of them are in long term relationships - in fact, we just moved to a suburb and have made friends with a couple who've been married for a while (who not only are married, they also work together), who are atheists, and rekindled a friendship with a friend from 10 years ago who happens to live near by and her, her hubby and her kid are atheists.
There's a lot of atheists who make a lot of relationships work.
Even if I lost my girl, my job and all my friends tomorrow.. (which I can't speak for tomorrow for who can say with certainty, what tomorrow may bring?) I can say that I have had long duration, mutually reciprocal, healthy, supportive, and warm relationships - romantic, platonic, and professional All without any supernatural support and far from being alone, I am part of a huge, happy, well adjusted, optimistic, hopeful, politically, socially, and community-ly(?) active fellow atheists who also have long term, warm, supportive, reciprocal, healthy relationships.
Me, them, none of us worship, or have a relationship with, any of the several thousand different gods that humans have worshiped thru history... not even the 3 or 4 that are the most popular fads of the past few centuries.
I'm just Not Sure if you need a relationship with the idea of a god to have healthy relationships with real people who actually exist in the real world.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Improved Elevator
Improved High Capacity/ High Efficiency Elevator
This elevator design can be incorporated into new construction OR retrofit into any existing Elevator Building provided the following criteria are met.
1: Existing building must have at least 2 elevator ascent shafts
2: The design only works on even numbers of shafts, if there is an odd #, then the odd #'d shaft will not be capable of receiving the retrofit.
3: There must be sufficient space below the last floor with elevator service, and above the last floor with elevator service, OR there must be room laterally on the upper and lower most floor to accommodate the additional mechanicals.
The elevator makes use of existing vertical ascent shafts and elevator cars, but would require additional superstructure, mechanicals and software.
Connect 2 adjacent shafts at the top and bottom most levels, creating a loop. If there is no space lower the the lowest service floor or higher than the highest service floor, consolidate the elevator into a single entrance/egress at the apex of the loop. On one side of a thusly created loop, created a spur channel capable of holding at least one but preferably multiple elevator cars.
Install more than 2 elevator cars within the loop and engineer it so that the elevators can travel along the entire loop circuit (elevators raised and lowered via cables would need to be engineered to rise and lower vial guide rails and brushless electric drive traction motors). All elevator cars will travel in the same direction in the loop, when a call button is depressed the next elevator on the loop preceding the call button will stop and accept the new passenger(s).
The configuration can be side by side where the passengers face the loop head on, or across a corridor where the passengers are waiting in the lobby created by the loop. However the across the corridor configuration would require space above the top most serviced and bottom most serviced floor as the loop would have its bottom and top apex points in the center of the elevator lobby.
Additional software would need to be developed to ensure anti-collision measures are employed, and the spur line would be to take elevators out of service for maintenance, repair or replacement. In extreme cases, one entire shaft can be taken out of service and the elevator will travel up and down the single shaft at reduced efficiency.
The benefit of this design is that wait times will be significantly cut and capacity will be dramatically improved. Since the elevator cars all travel in the same direction, (one shaft being up-only and the other being down-only), more than 2 elevator cars can be housed in any 2 shafts, allowing for configurations such as 5 cars in 2 shafts (or a greater or lesser #), even at 2 cars per 2 shafts, which would afford the same number of cars per shaft as in a traditional elevator configuration, as there would never be the need to back track empty in the event of more passengers traveling in a particular direction, such as during the start and end of a work shift, there would still be efficiencies realized. The greater efficiency would be to have multiple cars in the transit loop.
Responsible safety protocols should likely require each elevator's emergency support brake/clamps to be able to withstand greater than 1 full cars. Perhaps as many as all full cars. A possible more cost effective alternative is to construct a mechanical clamp engagement system which is triggered by a car physically encountering another car, the primary physical contact point could be a lever that severs power to the ascent/descent drive motors and mechanically engages the clamping brakes of both cars. In such a configuration, even a cascade failure of all cars, would result in nothing more than a string of cars all locked into place by emergency clamps. This configuration would eliminate the need for clamps on any one car being required to support more than one full car in weight.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
This elevator design can be incorporated into new construction OR retrofit into any existing Elevator Building provided the following criteria are met.
1: Existing building must have at least 2 elevator ascent shafts
2: The design only works on even numbers of shafts, if there is an odd #, then the odd #'d shaft will not be capable of receiving the retrofit.
3: There must be sufficient space below the last floor with elevator service, and above the last floor with elevator service, OR there must be room laterally on the upper and lower most floor to accommodate the additional mechanicals.
The elevator makes use of existing vertical ascent shafts and elevator cars, but would require additional superstructure, mechanicals and software.
Connect 2 adjacent shafts at the top and bottom most levels, creating a loop. If there is no space lower the the lowest service floor or higher than the highest service floor, consolidate the elevator into a single entrance/egress at the apex of the loop. On one side of a thusly created loop, created a spur channel capable of holding at least one but preferably multiple elevator cars.
Install more than 2 elevator cars within the loop and engineer it so that the elevators can travel along the entire loop circuit (elevators raised and lowered via cables would need to be engineered to rise and lower vial guide rails and brushless electric drive traction motors). All elevator cars will travel in the same direction in the loop, when a call button is depressed the next elevator on the loop preceding the call button will stop and accept the new passenger(s).
The configuration can be side by side where the passengers face the loop head on, or across a corridor where the passengers are waiting in the lobby created by the loop. However the across the corridor configuration would require space above the top most serviced and bottom most serviced floor as the loop would have its bottom and top apex points in the center of the elevator lobby.
Additional software would need to be developed to ensure anti-collision measures are employed, and the spur line would be to take elevators out of service for maintenance, repair or replacement. In extreme cases, one entire shaft can be taken out of service and the elevator will travel up and down the single shaft at reduced efficiency.
The benefit of this design is that wait times will be significantly cut and capacity will be dramatically improved. Since the elevator cars all travel in the same direction, (one shaft being up-only and the other being down-only), more than 2 elevator cars can be housed in any 2 shafts, allowing for configurations such as 5 cars in 2 shafts (or a greater or lesser #), even at 2 cars per 2 shafts, which would afford the same number of cars per shaft as in a traditional elevator configuration, as there would never be the need to back track empty in the event of more passengers traveling in a particular direction, such as during the start and end of a work shift, there would still be efficiencies realized. The greater efficiency would be to have multiple cars in the transit loop.
Responsible safety protocols should likely require each elevator's emergency support brake/clamps to be able to withstand greater than 1 full cars. Perhaps as many as all full cars. A possible more cost effective alternative is to construct a mechanical clamp engagement system which is triggered by a car physically encountering another car, the primary physical contact point could be a lever that severs power to the ascent/descent drive motors and mechanically engages the clamping brakes of both cars. In such a configuration, even a cascade failure of all cars, would result in nothing more than a string of cars all locked into place by emergency clamps. This configuration would eliminate the need for clamps on any one car being required to support more than one full car in weight.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Saturday, March 2, 2013
2013-03-02 D blogging from ipad
testing some markup and graphics
a hyperlink to google (test)
modified text font and color
bold text
italic text
underline
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
a hyperlink to google (test)
modified text font and color
bold text
italic text
underline
here is a block quote
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
2013-03-02 C blogging from ipad
trying to use the local save feature, will save locally, then edit again, then post.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
2013-03-02 -B Bogging from iPad
Trying to find an app to write blog posts.
Having trouble. Looks like I got one published.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Having trouble. Looks like I got one published.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)