The proposal went to a committee for consideration and - unsurprisingly - d ied there. I think that "very nearly legislated" is unfair to Indiana. Ever y legislature has its nutters, and sometimes it is easier to appear to take them seriously than to laugh at them in public.
If you knew your old Testament, you'd know that it does give a value for pi of three
formatting link
pi-in-the-old-testament/
and for any fundamentalist who thinks that every version of bible (in whate ver language) is divinely inspired (and divinely error-checked and error-co rrected) using 22/7 or any better approximation to pi would be blasphemous.
winger, but because all your friends are as right-wing as you are you thoin k that you are middle-of-the-road.
And what can you point to that indicates I am a right winger. About all I do is point out how wrong you are.
find fault with stupidity in government. And is far as being a Nitwit, we ll maybe so, but a Nitwit who made more money than you have, a Nitwit that managed to miss only 6 days of work from being laid off, a Nitwit that pro bably has a higher IQ than you and who went to a higher rated college tha n you did.
ified how much money I've earned, or possess, and I'm not going to engage i n a pissing contest with a half-wit about relative incomes.
I think I have more money than you because I have a bunch. And you keep po sting about how bad it is that some people are rich. People that are rich seldom post about how bad that is.
and I was there from 1960 to 1970 getting a B.Sc., and M.Sc. and a Ph.D. in that time. This is all well-known and has been posted here repeatedly. You haven't told us where you got your education. There are a couple of places in the US that had higher ratings than the University of Melbourne in the
1960's, but not all that many. The fact that you think you might have a hig her IQ than I do - and that it might matter - suggests that you attach more importance to IQ than is sensible.
It really does not matter where I went to college. But I do know the colle ge I went to is rated higher than any university in Australia.
Actually I do not attach much importance to IQ. But from reading your post s I have come to the opinion that you probably have an IQ some where betwe en 130 and 140. I could be wrong, but at one time I administered a bunch o f IQ tests. So I have some feel for it.
with the capacity to pass exams, but rather less well with useful skills.
hat he can't construct a coherent argument to support his dim-witted prejud ice.
ing that doesn't match his pre-programmed wordl-view, but "It is still hocu m" isn't fundamentally different, and betrays the same kind of cognitive de ficit.
f the > rest. To refute it the easiest way is to read the book. That will work for > most people, but I am sure it will not work for you. You are n ot critical
group.
has done anything like enough work to be taken seriously
g because there doesn't seem to be anything plausible you could link to.
king out why you might justifiably claim that you don't have to take it ser iously, when people like David Cameron (the current UK prime minister - a C onservative) do.
If I were a politician , I would claim to believe that the poor should have more money. There is a hell of a lot more poor voters than rich voters.
all convinced that he had to be wrong, but could never come up with an inte llectually satisfying counter-argument. They still think he's wrong, but ou r world is Spinoza's, not theirs
t-winger, but because all your friends are as right-wing as you are you thi nk that you are middle-of-the-road.
I do is point out how wrong you are.
Actually, you didn't. You pointed out that you didn't agree with what I pos ted, which isn't quite the same thing - and a typical right wing reaction, as is your lack of affection for "The Spirit Level".
ot find fault with stupidity in government. And is far as being a Nitwit, well maybe so, but a Nitwit who made more money than you have, a Nitwit th at managed to miss only 6 days of work from being laid off, a Nitwit that p robably has a higher IQ than you and who went to a higher rated college t han you did.
ecified how much money I've earned, or possess, and I'm not going to engage in a pissing contest with a half-wit about relative incomes.
posting about how bad it is that some people are rich. People that are ric h seldom post about how bad that is.
Nobody thinks that they are rich - some admit to being well-off (as I am) b ut everybody knows somebody even richer.
I don't keep posting about how bad it is that some people are rich - what I do worry about is "The Spirit Level" point that having too wide a disparit y between rich and poor is bad for society. My usual formulation is that th e rich need to invest more in making sure that their employees are healthy, well-fed, well-educated and well-trained. This does involve diverting more resources from the rich to the poor than the US does - Scandinavia and Ger many do seem to have got that right - but there's obviously nothing wrong w ith some people having more money than others, and some people do invest wh at they've got more wisely and productively than others, so it makes sense if they happen to have more to invest.
The fact that you aren't aware that my point of view isn't purely "soak the rich" does suggest that you are right-wing nitwit, keen to see what he wan ts to see and unwilling to pay any attention to the details of the argument .
, and I was there from 1960 to 1970 getting a B.Sc., and M.Sc. and a Ph.D. in that time. This is all well-known and has been posted here repeatedly. Y ou haven't told us where you got your education. There are a couple of plac es in the US that had higher ratings than the University of Melbourne in th e 1960's, but not all that many. The fact that you think you might have a h igher IQ than I do - and that it might matter - suggests that you attach mo re importance to IQ than is sensible.
lege I went to is rated higher than any university in Australia.
Sure. And it's alumni association had to search hard to find a rating syste m that included universities outside of the US, and then got picky about th e quality of the civics courses at the overseas universities.
I'm not saying that it's hard to find international rating scales for unive rsities, but I do suspect that your university isn't all that conscious of the rest of the world (outside of the US) and doesn't take it all that seri ously.
sts I have come to the opinion that you probably have an IQ some where bet ween 130 and 140. I could be wrong, but at one time I administered a bunch of IQ tests. So I have some feel for it.
You haven't done badly, but what you've missed is that IQ tests don't mean much at the high end of the scale - people who do that well on them don't t ackle them in the same way as the bulk of the population, and the differenc es the IQ tests are designed to detect aren't being measured in any kind of reliable way in people who ace the tests.
ll with the capacity to pass exams, but rather less well with useful skills .
that he can't construct a coherent argument to support his dim-witted prej udice.
thing that doesn't match his pre-programmed wordl-view, but "It is still ho cum" isn't fundamentally different, and betrays the same kind of cognitive deficit.
of > > > the rest. To refute it the easiest way is to read the book. Th at will
e
ute > > > it in a use group.
cs has done anything like enough work to be taken seriously
ing because there doesn't seem to be anything plausible you could link to.
orking out why you might justifiably claim that you don't have to take it s eriously, when people like David Cameron (the current UK prime minister - a Conservative) do.
ve more money. There is a hell of a lot more poor voters than rich voters.
But the UK Conservative Party isn't in the business of appealing to poor vo ters. The UK Labour Party has that part of the electorate sewn up - as you' d be aware if you had two neurones to rub together.
e all convinced that he had to be wrong, but could never come up with an in tellectually satisfying counter-argument. They still think he's wrong, but our world is Spinoza's, not theirs
750/dp/0199254567
You do like to think that, but you still can't produce a shred of coherent justification for your preference.
This is pure right-wing nitwit behaviour, as you'd be aware if you weren't a right-wing nitwit.
That's not true, anyone can see he's been extremely active ever since he be come a member of Congress. Here's the list of legislation in forward chrono logical order:
formatting link
troduction%3Aasc So you're wrong about that. And as for being a career bum, take a good look at yourself, you don't amount to much. You've been nothing but a lying and cheating little nothing of an oxygen waster your entire life. Looks like y ou stumbled on a niche hiding under a rock at that trash infested bloated c orporate cesspool for 30 some-odd years, but most people wouldn't consider that much of an accomplishment.
That's the incident I was referring to. I happened to spy pi to thirty decimals in my junior-high math book one lazy afternoon, read all the places, and have remembered it ever since. That's not fair.
And wouldn't it be a better world if legislatures simply passed new laws of physics, economics, and human nature?
A MODEST PROPOSAL Just adding a few flats to all our wheels could make 'Pi 3.0' a reality, purging this irrational business foisted on us by dead white men (many of whom had personal faults). Let's end 'pi-privilege' for all time.
Then let's pass decrees making all the best stuff cheapest. Then everyone will have equal amounts!
Owning a company means that you have stock shares. If it's a small private company, the shares often can't easily be sold so are effectively worthless. Unless it's an S corp or an LLC, share wealth, if any, is distinct from taxable income.
The current capital gains tax rate is about 25%. I don't know if Bernie wants to change that.
Bernie, like most socialists, is more concerned with punishing the wealthy than doing what's best for ordinary citizens. We keep electing professional politicians, people who have never run a hardware store, or ever done anything productive.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
lunatic fringe electronics
become a member of Congress. Here's the list of legislation in forward chr onological order:
fIntroduction%3Aasc
ook at yourself, you don't amount to much. You've been nothing but a lying and cheating little nothing of an oxygen waster your entire life. Looks lik e you stumbled on a niche hiding under a rock at that trash infested bloate d corporate cesspool for 30 some-odd years, but most people wouldn't consid er that much of an accomplishment.
he > >> >become a member of Congress. Here's the list of legislation in fo rward
teOfIntroduction%3Aasc
d look at yourself, you don't amount to much. You've been nothing but a lyi ng and cheating little nothing of an oxygen waster your entire life. Looks like you stumbled on a niche hiding under a rock at that trash infested blo ated corporate cesspool for 30 some-odd years, but most people wouldn't con sider that much of an accomplishment.
For krw's verison of "truth" which depends on the fact that everything he t hinks he knows he also "knows" to be absolutely true, and every claim that he disagrees with is a lie.
It's pathetic. Krw exists in an intellectual bubble where only his opinions count and facts don't get a look in.
Bernie Sanders' legislative activities haven't registered on krw's vestigia l political sensibilities, so they can't exist.
Socialists aren't interested in punishing the wealthy, as such. They are in terested in supporting the least well-off, which does require larger contri butions from the better off. As James Arthur points out, there aren't enoug h blatantly wealthy people to provide the money necessary, so some of it is going to come from the merely well-off.
Scandinavia and Germany invest more of their GDP in keeping their poorer ci tizens well-fed, well-house, well-educated and healthy than does the US.
This produces a better trained and more productive work force, which the ri ch can hire to make more money. This isn't actually punishing the rich, but rather forcing them to support their own long-term interests.
The rich tend to want to spend their money now, on the toys that appeal to them at the moment, and resent the short term deprivation. A childish membe r of that class might see it as punishment, and perhaps it should be seen a s a punishment for the crime of short term thinking (or the overly aggressi ve discounting of future profits).
Nor all that useful. How many diameters can you measure to a thirty decimal place accuracy? There procedures for calculating pi to whatever accuracy y ou need. Remembering the result of any one such calculation is a waste of s torage space.
It would be a different place if they could. Better seems unlikely.
It's 3 if you measure between the most distance points on your hexagon, 3.4
64 if you measure between the flat sides, offering a new way of being irrat ional (not that you need any).
As a comedian? Probably not. It's all been done before. Jonathon Swift's "M odest Proposal" takes some beating. Defoes' "The Shortest way with Dissente rs" was probably better, in that some of the people he was satirising thoug ht that he was one of them, but it's not quite a savage.
Assuming it was about 30.4 round it would be actually about 9.67 across, and the description would still be acurate as given (zero decimal places) without compromising the accepted value of pi.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.