I'm sure there are a lot of other degrees that many people think are more difficult. I'm just more curious about these.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Topics - jack24
« on: April 22, 2008, 12:33:12 PM »
I'm so confused!
What is the deal with this global warming stuff?
"The world is getting warmer and we're the cause"
"The world is getting warmer but we aren't the cause"
"What? That's like denying the holocaust"
"What? Any changes we make will have little effect"
"We have to act now, there's no debate!"
"Somewhere between 2100 and 19000 scientists in the oregon petition say there is"
"Those scientists are in the minority"
So what is right? I've heard some convincing evidence for man-caused global warming. The history channel said there is no debate that we are the cause, but then some scientists on another 20/20 special said that CO2 doesn't cause warming, and that there is evidence that the warming happens first. I don't know who to believe. I just want to do what is right.
Al Gore is trying to guilt us to death with 300 million dollars worth of ads. I don't think he understands true motivation. He's mad that the US isn't acting, but he won't change his strategy. We didn't make it to the moon first because we were guilty.. we made it there first because we were proud.
Here are a few things I know.
-The majority of reasonable people think we have a lot to do with global warming
-The majority of reasonable people think that we need to end our addiction to oil
-The majority of Americans want the US to lead the world
-if we run out of oil before we find a good alternative, the cold will kill more people than the warming.
I just watched something on discovery about Energy and it looks like Nuclear, and Solar power are improving like crazy. So why can't we get the country behind this?
Increasing MPG standards kills our auto industry and raises prices...
Ethanol production increases poverty all over the world...
Carbon tax would make all products more expensive.. The US might be okay, but most poor countries would just suffer more...
Those plans are dumb.
We need a new nemesis.. We fought Russia in the space race and we all wanted to kick their ass. Now we need an Energy race... we just need an ass to kick.
The capitalists would love this because technology increases wealth.
The protectionists would love it because we would have more jobs and less oil imports
The greenists would love this because it would reduce CO2
The consumers would love this because energy prices would go down (And as a result so would food and clothing prices)
I know there are a few threads that address this issue, but I couldn't find what I'm looking for. I've been waitlisted to two schools. Both of the schools sent business reply envelopes with checklists i'm supposed to fill out.
Here are some questions I have
1: They just asked me to fill out the checklist, should I still do a LOCI?
2: Should I mention any other schools that I've been accepted to?
3: If I have the opportunity to visit the school before I send the LOCI should I?
4: Should I explain family and job connections to the school's area?
5: My diversity and job experience were highlighted during the application process, should I rehash those things?
Any other advice would be appreciated.
EDIT: Question 3 is a bit fuzzy. I meant to as if I should visit the school before or after I send the LOCI. Would it be smart to mention the visit in the letter to show interest?
I already put my first seat deposit down at the University of Kansas but I'm still waiting to hear from the University of New Mexico. Both schools are about equal in rank, price, and job prospects. (as far as I know)
I'm driving to Kansas the first week in May and if I go about an hour out of my way I can visit UNM.
I called New Mexico and they said that I wouldn't have a letter until the first of May.
Should I visit New Mexico even though the rejection letter might be in my mailbox at home when I get there?
So I'm a Right leaning moderate.
Sure I believe in conservative economic principles and conservative social principles. But I'm pretty liberal on the immigration and health care issues. I also don't know where I stand on the Iraq War.
I do believe that everyone needs to "..Ask what [they] can do for [their] country" You may be able to blame the economy problems on the government, but the economy is mostly made up of people making choices. Go out and "be the change you want to see in the world"
Anyway... The Right wing media loved the Debate questions last night, and the Left wing media hate the questions. The questions didn't really make me mad, but the responses to some questions did.
1: Both Obama and Clinton pledged to bring all the troops home from Iraq by a certain date regardless of what the Generals on the ground say. Because it's the "will of the people" Oh bull. If General Patraeus (sp?) and the other military leadership told Senator Clinton that waiting a year longer would create stable democratic government and society, do you think the Majority would really want Her to disregard what he said? I want the troops to come home, but I think the President needs to make decisions based on all the information.
2: The capital gains question kind of sucked.. but Obama botched it. He was so busy preaching "fairness" that he didn't address the fact that Tax Revenue might go up when Tax Rates go down. He could at least have said something like "Capital Gains Tax revenues have more to do with the status of the economy than they have to do with the tax rates. My number one goal with the economy is to make it better for EVERYONE. But right now we are going to require some extra short term sacrifices to acheive that goal"
3: The American Flag, Weather Underground, Bosnia, and Rev. Wright.
Hillary: Saying "oops" really doesn't fix the problem. Why didn't she just say, "I exagerated, but I want everyone to know that our military would never let the First Lady walk into a dangerous situation. No sniper would ever get close enough.
Obama: Come on man! Silence the critics. "I am a patriot and I will always be a patriot. I will wear an American Flag Pin, I disagree with Reverend Wright and I believe the Weather Underground is dispicable. I believe this country has some shortcomings, but I love it. I will work as hard as I can to keep this country great, and I will do whatever I can to motivate the great citizens of this land to overcome the challenges we face."
I've read a lot of heated arguments about whether or not going to a T3 or T4 school is a bad investment, but I haven't heard that much about T2 schools.
I'll be a 1L Jayhawk this fall and I'm wondering if anybody can give me information on the potential return on my investment.
Will almost all of the top half in my class have good job prospects?
-According to Yahoo! hot jobs, a retail store pharmacist in 25th percentile of income will make $98,000. (This is based on an average of 8 cities with populations between 250,000 and 1 million.)
-I spoke with the man who is in charge of hiring pharmacists for the 12 retail stores he oversees yesterday and he said that they are now starting phramacists at 108,000 right out of school. These pharmacists work three 12 hour shifts a week and have 4 days off.
-I checked on target.com and 11 target stores in my state are hiring pharmacists.
-The field is expected to see much higher demand as the baby boomers get older.
I'm still going to law school. I must have something wrong with me.