Zarathustra....alas

If you took 4 mg. a day for over a year.

Only answer if you REALLY know!

What type of panel do they use IN PHILADELPHIA?

Standard mail United States Postal Service.

Auburn, Massachusetts (01501) to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (19136)

If the letter was brought to post office in Ma. Tuesday morning, would I get it by Friday in Phila.? If not what is the average time, standard mail?

Standard mail United States Postal Service.

Auburn, Massachusetts (01501) to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (19136)

If the letter was brought to post office in Ma. Tuesday morning, would I get it by Friday in Phila.? If not what is the average time, standard mail?

For example- Someone who shifts blame despite what proofs, logic or empirical evidence, or whatever would be needed, to without a doubt show they are at fault, either solely or partially. Though it is important to mention in cases where partial blame can be attributed to someone/thing else, the subject will ONLY see the blame as solely whatever was partially responsible, and none their own...and that is best case scenario. It sometimes seems to need almost acrobatic leaps of "logic" to shift blame to another source in many cases. It seems easy to classify this subject as a classic pathological liar but in most cases it only manifests when taking responsibility is the issue.

This has to be a known or labeled syndrome due to the problems it would surely cause via life, relationships and especially ones OWN reasoning. If one does not accept responsibility for something that is empirically their own "fault" then correcting whatever problem or issue would be impossible.One almost always learns most from their mistakes. If one believes no mistake was made on their part then how can they not keep making the same mistakes, unless by changing particular outside perceived catalysts for what or whomever they perceive to be "the problem". This is why I believe it to be pathological because I have seen this type "precaution taken by the "subject". Yet no matter how many times the same negative result occurs, self blame is STILL the farthest thing from their mind.

Subject- average intelligence, otherwise mentally stable, chronically having issues with friends or fellow employees (conveniently works with family) where they are never at fault. I quite often avoid commenting, while stunned they don't see their part to play in the issue, due to being tired of being blamed for "taking their side" and not being "supportive"(and the sad part is I am ONLY getting ONE side!! And yet I still can't agree!)

Is this common? Is this have to do with today's current culture maybe? (Like where a poor person, like me, who can somehow blame "the rich" for their lot in life and poverty) Does this fall under some other disorder like extreme narcissism, sociopathic tendencies, or just a strange specific type of pathological liar?

I am a fan of all the Star trek series (esp. T.N.G.). I have just started watching Voyager on netflix and on season 4 and like it as well. However, seeing Capt. Janeway make absurd, life threatening decisions that CONSTANTLY,not only put her life in mortal danger, but more importantly that of her crew is becoming MORE than annoying. Her logic and reasoning is beyond dumb increasingly often. For instance, Picard of TNG, he put the Prime Directive 1st almost ALL the time. When he tweaked it it was ONLY when the life of his crew was in imminent mortal danger or a couple morally sound times as with Data's "child" in ep. "Offspring". Now when Capt, Janeway disregards it it in MOST times puts her crew and ship in mortal danger and usually for some silly self-righteous psuedo-moral reason. (admittedly the P.D. may not be not as applicable 65,000 light years from the alpha quadrant when your primary mission is getting home which is nearly impossible in their lifetimes but she seems to only use it to justify stupid illogical decisions!)

For instance I JUST watched S.4 ep 16, "Prey" when she refused to release species #8472 to the Hirogens (both highly predatory and BOTH very nearly successfully tried to destroy voyager several times and would again in a second w.o remorse!). Yet she decides NOT to release the dying and trapped 8472 alien cut off from it's galaxy (who breached, broke, and INVADED their ship!), not to mention cut off when in an attempt to EXTIGUISH ALL life in OUR galaxy, to the Hirogens who want to kill it. Now I understand the moral and ethical reasoning for not "wanting" to hand it over but this is all while the Hirogens have 6 MUCH more heavily armored AND shielded warships trained on them. All the Hirogens requested was the 8742 alien and they would leave her AND her crew unharmed. That seems like a no brainer!! Certain death or turning over an evil predatory alien to another evil predatory species? Now if it was just HER who wants to sacrifice her life for this killer alien that is between her and her moral guidelines. BUT to make that decision for her entire crew is beyond contempt as well as immoral itself! Then she has the nerve to punish 7of9 for doing what she should have done?!?! MY GOD! And she does this type of crap ALL the time. That may not be a prime directive issue but when she does go against it it seems to only be if it will be most likely detrimental to the lives of her crew and vessel. And I am not even going to start on PURPOSELY destroying the crews almost 4 chances of returning to the Alpha quadrant which is their MAIN MISSION! (not to mention getting stuck their to begin with which IMO broke the Prime directive by destroying the array in an of itself! The voyager interfered by upsetting the inevitable power shift that would have inevitably benefited the Kazon species. The prime directive disallows her to make that decision to blow up the array simply because she feels bad for the Ocampa. The Prime Directive is there for a GOOD reason. She is behaving more like Q than a starfleet Captain!)

And she does this type of stuff ALL THE TIME.

In a realistic (futuretype) reality I can't IMAGINE the crew tolerating bad decision after bad decision. Not only is she almost always choosing the path that puts them in most danger...but will make it virtually impossible to get home!

If ANY ship called for a mutiny it is to get her literally "out of the way". Personally my choice for Captain. would be Tuvok and keeping starfleet rules and regs. for their OWN welfare.

I am a fan of all the Star trek series (esp. T.N.G.). I have just started watching Voyager on netflix and on season 4 and like it as well. However, seeing Capt. Janeway make absurd, life threatening decisions that CONSTANTLY,not only put her life in mortal danger, but more importantly that of her crew is becoming MORE than annoying. Her logic and reasoning is beyond dumb increasingly often. For instance, Picard of TNG, he put the Prime Directive 1st almost ALL the time. When he tweaked it it was ONLY when the life of his crew was in imminent mortal danger or a couple morally sound times as with Data's "child" in ep. "Offspring". Now when Capt, Janeway disregards it it in MOST times puts her crew and ship in mortal danger and usually for some silly self-righteous psuedo-moral reason. (admittedly the P.D. may not be not as applicable 65,000 light years from the alpha quadrant when your primary mission is getting home which is nearly impossible in their lifetimes but she seems to only use it to justify stupid illogical decisions!)

For instance I JUST watched S.4 ep 16, "Prey" when she refused to release species #8472 to the Hirogens (both highly predatory and BOTH very nearly successfully tried to destroy voyager several times and would again in a second w.o remorse!). Yet she decides NOT to release the dying and trapped 8472 alien cut off from it's galaxy (who breached, broke, and INVADED their ship!), not to mention cut off when in an attempt to EXTIGUISH ALL life in OUR galaxy, to the Hirogens who want to kill it. Now I understand the moral and ethical reasoning for not "wanting" to hand it over but this is all while the Hirogens have 6 MUCH more heavily armored AND shielded warships trained on them. All the Hirogens requested was the 8742 alien and they would leave her AND her crew unharmed. That seems like a no brainer!! Certain death or turning over an evil predatory alien to another evil predatory species? Now if it was just HER who wants to sacrifice her life for this killer alien that is between her and her moral guidelines. BUT to make that decision for her entire crew is beyond contempt as well as immoral itself! Then she has the nerve to punish 7of9 for doing what she should have done?!?! MY GOD! And she does this type of crap ALL the time. That may not be a prime directive issue but when she does go against it it seems to only be if it will be most likely detrimental to the lives of her crew and vessel. And I am not even going to start on PURPOSELY destroying the crews almost 4 chances of returning to the Alpha quadrant which is their MAIN MISSION! (not to mention getting stuck their to begin with which IMO broke the Prime directive by destroying the array in an of itself! The voyager interfered by upsetting the inevitable power shift that would have inevitably benefited the Kazon species. The prime directive disallows her to make that decision to blow up the array simply because she feels bad for the Ocampa. The Prime Directive is there for a GOOD reason. She is behaving more like Q than a starfleet Captain!)

And she does this type of stuff ALL THE TIME.

In a realistic (futuretype) reality I can't IMAGINE the crew tolerating bad decision after bad decision. Not only is she almost always choosing the path that puts them in most danger...but will make it virtually impossible to get home!

If ANY ship called for a mutiny it is to get her literally "out of the way". Personally my choice for Captain. would be Tuvok and keeping starfleet rules and regs. for their OWN welfare.

I am a fan of all the Star trek series (esp. T.N.G.). I have just started watching Voyager on netflix and on season 4 and like it as well. However, seeing Capt. Janeway make absurd, life threatening decisions that CONSTANTLY,not only put her life in mortal danger, but more importantly that of her crew is becoming MORE than annoying. Her logic and reasoning is beyond dumb increasingly often. For instance, Picard of TNG, he put the Prime Directive 1st almost ALL the time. When he tweaked it it was ONLY when the life of his crew was in imminent mortal danger or a couple morally sound times as with Data's "child" in ep. "Offspring". Now when Capt, Janeway disregards it it in MOST times puts her crew and ship in mortal danger and usually for some silly self-righteous psuedo-moral reason. (admittedly the P.D. may not be not as applicable 65,000 light years from the alpha quadrant when your primary mission is getting home which is nearly impossible in their lifetimes but she seems to only use it to justify stupid illogical decisions!)

For instance I JUST watched S.4 ep 16, "Prey" when she refused to release species #8472 to the Hirogens (both highly predatory and BOTH very nearly successfully tried to destroy voyager several times and would again in a second w.o remorse!). Yet she decides NOT to release the dying and trapped 8472 alien cut off from it's galaxy (who breached, broke, and INVADED their ship!), not to mention cut off when in an attempt to EXTIGUISH ALL life in OUR galaxy, to the Hirogens who want to kill it. Now I understand the moral and ethical reasoning for not "wanting" to hand it over but this is all while the Hirogens have 6 MUCH more heavily armored AND shielded warships trained on them. All the Hirogens requested was the 8742 alien and they would leave her AND her crew unharmed. That seems like a no brainer!! Certain death or turning over an evil predatory alien to another evil predatory species? Now if it was just HER who wants to sacrifice her life for this killer alien that is between her and her moral guidelines. BUT to make that decision for her entire crew is beyond contempt as well as immoral itself! Then she has the nerve to punish 7of9 for doing what she should have done?!?! MY GOD! And she does this type of crap ALL the time. That may not be a prime directive issue but when she does go against it it seems to only be if it will be most likely detrimental to the lives of her crew and vessel. And I am not even going to start on PURPOSELY destroying the crews almost 4 chances of returning to the Alpha quadrant which is their MAIN MISSION! (not to mention getting stuck their to begin with which IMO broke the Prime directive by destroying the array in an of itself! The voyager interfered by upsetting the inevitable power shift that would have inevitably benefited the Kazon species. The prime directive disallows her to make that decision to blow up the array simply because she feels bad for the Ocampa. The Prime Directive is there for a GOOD reason. She is behaving more like Q than a starfleet Captain!)

And she does this type of stuff ALL THE TIME.

In a realistic (futuretype) reality I can't IMAGINE the crew tolerating bad decision after bad decision. Not only is she almost always choosing the path that puts them in most danger...but will make it virtually impossible to get home!

If ANY ship called for a mutiny it is to get her literally "out of the way". Personally my choice for Captain. would be Tuvok and keeping starfleet rules and regs. for their OWN welfare.

Say if a woman starts taken the pill at 18 up until she was almost 40....

To me, it would seem that she would then have all those eggs she WOULD have lost in the type of pill that reduces periods. (clearly I mean the pill as birth control AND reduces periods....or even the other IF that applies similarly to my assumption. I am a man so am not exactly sure how they work with all the different types I've seen advertised)

Is this true or is my logic completely flawed and why?

My Dad is coming up with a last will and testament. He is concerned about the amount of hospital bills I owe which is upwards of $1-200,000. He fears, and reasonably so, that they will take or put a lien on all owed monies which because I have siblings causes problems since the house will most likely go to me plus additional cash and pre-taxed stocks which I am not sure they can touch.

What can I do about this? Is bankruptcy a reasonable option or will that cause trouble if, god forbid, my father dies soon and they take it as settlement. I am completely ignorant about bankruptcy.

I assume my Dad can find out this information but wants me to do it. Which is difficult since I have NO money besides what is needed for bills and my family needs. So I have no money for a lawyer. But I NEED the information. And I just don't know where to even start looking!

Are hospital bills exempt or dealt worth differently in any way in regard to liens having to do with wills. Not that I think it should be but due to the nature of the bills in question it is not due to irresponsibility and the ABSOLUTELY ABSURD amount of the bills. Granted, they saved my life, but wow. This would almost destroy me financially. Personally I really don't care that much as It is not really mine. But my Dad wants me to have it to help me out..and my siblings

There has got to be something I can do!

If you know of another site that is more capable of answering these Type of questions please direct me there. Preferably a legal or lawyer site or a site that would answer my specific question about where to found about my specific debt amount. Preferably a free site, but if there is none please still include.

And your imput is more than welcome if you know anything relating to this. Thank You

Go to the link provided below to see Chinese propaganda at it's best!

I have looked into many of this persons answers and they are fascinating. It is somewhat scary that there are really people who know of Mao's and communism's atrocities, yet not only fervently support them, but actively promote them as role models for Western countries. Admittedly Western countries and culture has it's flaws. But to overlook Communist China's flaws of today and especially the past and attempt to convince Americans and the West that China and Mao has the "cure all" method for fixing America and the world's problems is insane at best.

Here is the link to the account. I promise you it is worth looking at. I am not sure if the author may be a Chinese academic, a high ranking communist in the Chinese government or what! But it is interesting at least.

(the longer answers are the best ones!)

http://answers.yahoo.com/activity?show=FG10tonKaa

What do you think?

I want to have a REASONABLE debate or discussion with people on the left about current economic and social issues. The problem I am having is finding people who are CAPABLE of arguing/debating an issue in an open-minded and reasonable manner where the passion for their cause does not interfere with conceding certain points when indisputable facts and proofs are presented.

There is NO point in discussing issues with someone who is incapable or unwilling to admit that they are wrong, or at the very least, that the opposing argument is valid, true, or logical when imperical evidence is presented in support of an issue.

I am SO tired of hearing, "Well we can agree to disagree" or some condescending remark like that when they have no argument left or have flat out been proven wrong yet do not have the humility to simply SAY it. I am more than willing to admit error when I'm wrong or that an opposing argument was better. So many fragile egos out there!

So if you know of any good links where INTELLIGENT debates are discussed with people willing to DEBATE...not just be right, please leave the link.

Where is the unfairness? The derivatives trading was a problem in conjunction with the bundling of normal mortgages with very risky sub-prime type mortgages with high interest to ppl. who had little ability to repay these loans in the long term..which is WHY the interest is high.They are a credit risk fro a reason after all!)..but a problem that was only there because of government involvement to enact the very same type "social fairness" OWS ppl. love, well maybe not "only", but mainly. there will always be greed, but when it it government subsidized there are too many problems to name here eg. far. less risk, legality and a feeling of righteousness and the PR you get "helping the poor are 3 biggies though, imo,; to get banks to lend money for mortgages mostly when they otherwise would NOT have qualified. This is just one reason "social or economic equality" are just dumb ideas and even dumber when policies are made around that agenda, as in this case.AND NOW WE SEE THE EVIDENCE OF WHY THEY SHOULD NOT QUALIFY for loans. Mainly in the massive foreclosures. Now w/o excusing The bundling of these Crappy mortgages and derivative trading was enacted so as to minimize financial damage to the banks AND THEIR SHAREHOLDERS, whom they they have an obligation to not lose their money..as long as they are doing it legally..which they were. Say what you will, but if the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac style sub-prime lending had never been so pushed down their throat by congress (Frank, Dodd, and BUSH not vetoing it! etc) then none of this would have started or ended up the way it did. Now these banks were not totally stupid. They figured a way to make knowingly risky loans, but minimize THEIR banks risks by bundling, etc. Not to mention the housing market was BOOMING! We always need to remember the law of unintended consequences which are way to often overlooked.

But these social equalizing type programs ALWAYS end up having disproportionately bad consequences to the things they were supposed to "be helping" The government needs to stop trying to help. They are NOT GOOD AT IT.

Pleas tell me why I am wrong and what I am EXACTLY wrong about.

And while you are at it tell me why "economic inequality" is something that could possibly be fixed without a full scale government change the likes of which The Soviet Union tried. And the only equality was that EVERYBODY was basically poor...that is except for the Politburo and high ranking Gov officials who, along with their family, had everything they desired. But the standard of life is what TRULY suffered for the masses. Yes, the "proletariat"

Where is the unfairness? The derivatives trading was a problem in conjunction with the bundling of normal mortgages with very risky sub-prime type mortgages with high interest to ppl. who had little ability to repay these loans in the long term..which is WHY the interest is high.They are a credit risk fro a reason after all!)..but a problem that was only there because of government involvement to enact the very same type "social fairness" OWS ppl. love, well maybe not "only", but mainly. there will always be greed, but when it it government subsidized there are too many problems to name here eg. far. less risk, legality and a feeling of righteousness and the PR you get "helping the poor are 3 biggies though, imo,; to get banks to lend money for mortgages mostly when they otherwise would NOT have qualified. This is just one reason "social or economic equality" are just dumb ideas and even dumber when policies are made around that agenda, as in this case.AND NOW WE SEE THE EVIDENCE OF WHY THEY SHOULD NOT QUALIFY for loans. Mainly in the massive foreclosures. Now w/o excusing The bundling of these Crappy mortgages and derivative trading was enacted so as to minimize financial damage to the banks AND THEIR SHAREHOLDERS, whom they they have an obligation to not lose their money..as long as they are doing it legally..which they were. Say what you will, but if the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac style sub-prime lending had never been so pushed down their throat by congress (Frank, Dodd, and BUSH not vetoing it! etc) then none of this would have started or ended up the way it did. Now these banks were not totally stupid. They figured a way to make knowingly risky loans, but minimize THEIR banks risks by bundling, etc. Not to mention the housing market was BOOMING! We always need to remember the law of unintended consequences which are way to often overlooked.

But these social equalizing type programs ALWAYS end up having disproportionately bad consequences to the things they were supposed to "be helping" The government needs to stop trying to help. They are NOT GOOD AT IT.

Pleas tell me why I am wrong and what I am EXACTLY wrong about.

And while you are at it tell me why "economic inequality" is something that could possibly be fixed without a full scale government change the likes of which The Soviet Union tried. And the only equality was that EVERYBODY was basically poor...that is except for the Politburo and high ranking Gov officials who, along with their family, had everything they desired. But the standard of life is what TRULY suffered for the masses. Yes, the "proletariat"

Where is the unfairness? The derivatives trading was a problem in conjunction with the bundling of normal mortgages with very risky sub-prime type mortgages with high interest to ppl. who had little ability to repay these loans in the long term..which is WHY the interest is high.They are a credit risk fro a reason after all!)..but a problem that was only there because of government involvement to enact the very same type "social fairness" OWS ppl. love, well maybe not "only", but mainly. there will always be greed, but when it it government subsidized there are too many problems to name here eg. far. less risk, legality and a feeling of righteousness and the PR you get "helping the poor are 3 biggies though, imo,; to get banks to lend money for mortgages mostly when they otherwise would NOT have qualified. This is just one reason "social or economic equality" are just dumb ideas and even dumber when policies are made around that agenda, as in this case.AND NOW WE SEE THE EVIDENCE OF WHY THEY SHOULD NOT QUALIFY for loans. Mainly in the massive foreclosures. Now w/o excusing The bundling of these Crappy mortgages and derivative trading was enacted so as to minimize financial damage to the banks AND THEIR SHAREHOLDERS, whom they they have an obligation to not lose their money..as long as they are doing it legally..which they were. Say what you will, but if the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac style sub-prime lending had never been so pushed down their throat by congress (Frank, Dodd, and BUSH not vetoing it! etc) then none of this would have started or ended up the way it did. Now these banks were not totally stupid. They figured a way to make knowingly risky loans, but minimize THEIR banks risks by bundling, etc. Not to mention the housing market was BOOMING! We always need to remember the law of unintended consequences which are way to often overlooked.

But these social equalizing type programs ALWAYS end up having disproportionately bad consequences to the things they were supposed to "be helping" The government needs to stop trying to help. They are NOT GOOD AT IT.

Pleas tell me why I am wrong and what I am EXACTLY wrong about.

And while you are at it tell me why "economic inequality" is something that could possibly be fixed without a full scale government change the likes of which The Soviet Union tried. And the only equality was that EVERYBODY was basically poor...that is except for the Politburo and high ranking Gov officials who, along with their family, had everything they desired. But the standard of life is what TRULY suffered for the masses. Yes, the "proletariat"

Is it still available?

The company has changed ownership so that is not an option to ask them.

Is there an easy internet way without including lawyers and fees etc.?

Is it likely worth it? It was 4 years employment at 36K a year. (I was only 24 :)

I could have at the time after receiving paperwork, but being young and dumb I just didn't see the value or worth the time due to other financial opportunities that I felt were more important,,,,stupidly.

All of these OWS people supposedly hate wall street and the 1%, yet they fail to see that without a prospering Wall Street that continually makes money for the company itself and their shareholders (not to mention the insane amount of tax revenue it provides) the economy would continue to go down and the unemployment rate would go up as corporations suffer and business in general goes down. Also many of these simple people fail to realize that there are millions of stockholders that own shares of huge corporations that ALL make money off these "greedy corporate pigs". Like me, I am far from rich yet I own stocks and a 401K, all of which are part of wall street and make money monthly from it as well as hopefully be able to retire from the money I make. Anyone can do this.

Why would ANYONE hate Wall Street?? It is so stupid. Only someone truly ignorant would hate a system that can make even the poorest halfway Intelligent person either rich or at least more well off. ANYONE can have a part of the wealth! All they have to do is invest!!! It seems like the people that dislike or hate it know the least about the wy wall street actually WORKS. Sure, some businesses are greedy...But Wall Street is GREAT for anybody who likes to make money for very little work, only some knowledge, foresight and a little bit of brainpower is all you need to do fine...or GREAT. Nothing risked...nothing gained. That is capitalism..

All of these OWS people supposedly hate wall street and the 1%, yet they fail to see that without a prospering Wall Street that continually makes money for the company itself and their shareholders (not to mention the insane amount of tax revenue it provides) the economy would continue to go down and the unemployment rate would go up as corporations suffer and business in general goes down. Also many of these simple people fail to realize that there are millions of stockholders that own shares of huge corporations that ALL make money off these "greedy corporate pigs". Like me, I am far from rich yet I own stocks and a 401K, all of which are part of wall street and make money monthly from it as well as hopefully be able to retire from the money I make. Anyone can do this.

Why would ANYONE hate Wall Street?? It is so stupid. Only someone truly ignorant would hate a system that can make even the poorest halfway Intelligent person either rich or at least more well off. ANYONE can have a part of the wealth! All they have to do is invest!!! It seems like the people that dislike or hate it know the least about the wy wall street actually WORKS. Sure, some businesses are greedy...But Wall Street is GREAT for anybody who likes to make money for very little work, only some knowledge, foresight and a little bit of brainpower is all you need to do fine...or GREAT. Nothing risked...nothing gained. That is capitalism..

I know there are alot of people against capital punishment but I am curious if they would STILL be against it when the crime is a forced sexual assault (rape) of a child (prepubescent).

If so, what is the point of keeping this person on this earth?

At least murderers don't have close to the same insane recidivism rate that pedophiles do..

Not just the diagnosis but all types of misunderstood "symptoms", reasons for them, and all the tests they think should be performed to be able to dismiss their suspicions.

I would imagine it would be. I mean if someone could acquire adequate knowledge by casual perusing of basic symptoms and disorders of what takes an MD 6 to 8 years plus college to learn and master then it seems to be quite an insult to medical professionals in general in my opinion.

Also, is there any type of clinical name for this by medical professionals. It seems the internet would contribute to in Munchhausen and hypochondriac type patients.

Please share any funny or strange situations you have heard in relation to this if you could.