|General Chat MCB's Coffee House: Pull up a seat, and grab your favorite caffeinated beverage. Non-paintball related chat within.|
| ||Thread Tools|
|10-25-2012, 05:32 PM||#11 (permalink)|
Slowly making progress
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Vail, AZ
Ok, that's better. I was confused because the other measurements were per 1000 population, which is in the ~19 ballpark.
I've always thought that the 'average number of children per couple' or some form of it was the clearest measurement, which is what you used, just worded a little differently (and probably better, but I came up with the idea before I understood exactly what I was measuring, if that makes sense). 2 is the magic number. Anything less and things are going down. I just can't imagine living in a time where it was 10 kids as the norm instead of 2. I couldn't have handled that.
|10-25-2012, 06:23 PM||#12 (permalink)|
Deluxe super psychedelic
I dont like how the offhand solution in that video was just that TV networks need to give up specturm and stop broadcasting. in this age of $150 cable bills (and considering the state of the economy) I know plenty of people who are dropping cable service to save money or those like me who will never get it so as not to increase the number of bills I have to pay, not to mention those who could never afford it in the first place. access to that information is free and a public good, that's how emergency messages make it to us a lot of the time. forcing people to only have access to that if they bend over for the cable companies is most definitely the wrong solution, better compression and new technologies however are the right ones.
the cable companies are NEVER the good guys, for ****s sake, they cant even be persuaded to offer ala carte programming channels b/c of how greedy they are.
Photo blog: http://bluemorocco.blogspot.com/
If you are straight with me, I am straight with you : http://www.mcarterbrown.com/forums/f...-feedback.html
Created by Shade, stolen from foughtwolf's sig