More commercial availabilities, and the possibility that they are videotape delaying the show, so that they need two tapes and have time to rewind it. Or is it live? Perhaps there's an option to break away or to split the show for more commercials?

The cost of living is going up for the average American, and especially so if you are into health foods like yoghurt and even organic food. But the elite earners of the nation will never feel the pinch as these expenses are too negligible to them.

Hey Russ, I relayed your question to KIRO via twitter and here's what they told me, verbatim:

"Here's what happened with "Face the Nation": At the start of the season, FTN announced they'd add a 2nd half-hour (1/2)"

"We Already had set our schedule for the season, so we found another place to put the 2nd half-hour (2/2) ^PB"

There you have it.

The lending of money to people to buy real estate (who could not realistically handle the debt) and the hugely stupid mortgages that functioned on paying interest only (with later increasing loan interest rates) and then bundling and packaging these to unsuspecting markets for investment should never have been allowed to occur.

Much of what has happened has transpired because so much money has been involved in transactions that have nothing to do with REAL goods, but in betting on how markets and investments will perform (not a product) - and this is not related to real goods futures markets which have existed for a long time.

If reforms were possible to make transactions by banks deal only in real goods and services and not the casino betting that derivatives and swaps actually represent, then we would go a long way to never facing this kind of situation again. That and eliminate the computer driven microsecond reactive buying and selling of stocks which can actually create its own effect on the market and not reflect the true value and forces that change market values normally.

With the current fight about future direction and apparent behind the scenes control attempts by much of the most wealthy and their paid-for politicians it appears those reforms are on a very distant horizon.

I've seen some ideas floated around that are somewhat exciting to me, though they may also have about a snowball's chance in hell of happening, given how hard our constitution is to change, and that those charged with voting to change it would be the ones who lost their power because of this idea.

LOTTERY ELECTIONS

Basically, it would work like the Jury Pool. It sounds goofy and untenable when you 1st think of it (it did to me, anyway), but the more it stews in your head, the more it seems like the only way to end corruption in this country's government.

Juries, when they have all the information they need, tend to take their jobs seriously and make pretty fair and rational decisions. If someone was chosen as a legislator, I think they would take their jobs equally seriously, and given that there are 550+ spots to fill, you would get a great, and true, demographic make-up that was truly representative of the people (black/white, man/woman, smart/stupid). Also, it's not like the congress, and especially the house, is made up of geniuses and nobel laureates. A good 1/3 are functionally retarded (I could be underestimating that percentage), 1/3 are average, 1/6 are smart enough, but completely corrupt, and the last 1/6 who actually care about the country and their jobs can't get anything of any substance done.

With a randomly chosen Congress, I think a good 5/6 would care about doing the best job they could, and with no elections, there's no reason, outside of that cush job, post-legislation career, to allow lobbyists and corporate interests to influence you in your work as a congressman.

I was really high on the idea of a 28th amendment that redefined "artificial person" such that corporations only retained the limited 4th-6th amendment rights they needed in order to conduct business (since there are organic robots on the verge of self-awareness that would also be citizens, per the way corporations are treated), but that seems like a non-starter.

Run-off elections seem like a good step toward a 3rd party, and possibly a randomly selected congress in the future, but even those are met with resistance at every turn.

I don't know if this is going to put a skip in your jump, but it's some stuff to think about, anyway.

In the end, I think we're gonna either have a 2nd revolution (and, if we last long enough, a 3rd and a 4th and a 5th) or a totalitarian government, courtesy of Bush and Obama (or, yobamama, as I like to call them).

The tree of liberty needs blood apparently, or that stupid thing can't grow. Seems like a dumb set up to me, but if it's the one we got, we'll just have to wait for the person with the plant feeder full of o-negative to stop by and give 'er a sip.

(I haven't used a bank since I worked at one for 6 months post college. Credit Unions are great for banking, and Mutual Companies aren't bad financial institutions either. Co-ops are cool, but they tend to revolve around agriculture and food, only, and those are the extent of business set-ups that I know of that don't have, as part of their mission statement, a provision to screw you through your government.)

Cheerful thoughts, huh? Unfortunately, things are gonna have to get a lot worse before they get any better. (I'm voting Green Party this year, I think...may seem like throwing your vote away, but if the party, or another 3rd party, can get a little momentum, maybe 2016 or 2020 is a reality (and federal election matching funds those years as well...the vote actually could do a bit of good in advancing the cause...or, it could be a giant waste of time...but, at least it will assist me in sleeping at night)

May not work for you, but maybe it will be a positive for your children or grandchildren, should you have any.

Article 125 of The Uniform Code of Military Justice still prohibits sodomy, which is defines as oral, anal or any other copulation not directed through the "sex parts" (yep, it uses "sex parts" in the definition).

It's OK to be gay now, but there is no form of sexual activity that you can perform, or have performed, that falls within the code of justice under which you are subject during your time in the military.

So, as long as you're gay, but don't have sex and don't talk about it, it's cool to be GI Fabulous. Otherwise, you are subject to a General Court Marshall (though I have no idea what the actual penalties would be for this "crime", but a hint might exist in that this is the same article of the UCMJ that prohibits child rape, and rape in general.)

You sit back with a smug, shit-eating grin on your face and think about how awesome you are while giving no fucks what so ever about the haters (who gotta hate).

Something I like to do is practice putting myself in the other person's shoes. Like Russ implied, there's usually something wrong with someone who constantly puts other people down or behaves disrespectfully. I try to think about why they are like that, and have some measure of compassion for them. This helps me to disengage emotionally to the point where I can see that their jerkiness is THEIR problem, not mine. While dealing with them may produce a temporary disturbance in my life, I can go on my merry way as a mostly happy, considerate person, while they have to live with being a jerk (and the things that make them that way) all the time, most likely causing similar reactions in others, alienating people and descending further into a vicious, anti-social cycle.

If a person is consistently a jerk, they're probably wounded, fucked up, and unhappy. Rather than letting yourself get worked up by their lashing out, try to practice compassion and use the experience to reflect on how you can improve the way YOU relate to people. Good luck!

No one ever got any taller by trying to make other people feel small, no one ever got any smarter by trying to make others feel dumb. Look out for yourself and don't waste your time listening to them. Simply confront them every time those kind of comments come out of their mouth - don't argue, just let them know you are not going to stay talking with them if that is the direction they are going, and follow through - politely walk away if you have to.

If that is too much stress to take on, make an excuse and exit. If you want to make a quizzical and lasting impression you can always politely excuse yourself to go use the restroom saying you'll be back - and then leave.

Now a side note:
Your questions are not really national or international news headline material. If you feel that additional topic categories are needed, give it some thought and write to the Gnome though the Feedback topic and suggest them. Others will add their comments and Qland may yet again morph and grow with new possibilities. That is what is so great about this place.

There are social skills programs which can be incorporated into the classroom -- which have been shown to be effective in increasing student academic performance as well as interpersonal skills.

I saw a program on TV about a school using this type of curricula and it was pointed out that while these skills are taught in the preschool years that just as children's social world gets more complex the educational system sort of neglects this reality.

See:

Study Finds Social-Skills Teaching Boosts Academics
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/02/04/20sel.h30.html

http://www.socialsmarts.com/

What is "human nature". If you can answer that one then all other questions will be trivial.

I know I'm gonna get a ton of thumbs down for this but Here goes- It's beginning to sound like you're trying to write a paper and are mining qland for subjects for a psych 101 class. It's always this open ended "how do you feel about x". General musings aren't really that answerable. Maybe if there was some context but for the most part your recent smattering of questions seem like prep for debate team. maybe it's because you keep posting these questions in news, instead of an area that makes more sense, but it really feels like you're bringing qland your homework.

Did you feel that cold breeze? *shudder*

In the spirit of not wanting your question to sit with no response, you should know this subject has come up repeatedly in discussions on this forum. It has been discussed in queries about why it is hard to meet people, make friends, find relationships, etc. Suggestions have been made and discounted, even the very existence of such a phenomena is doubted. The term "chill" and "freeze" have been used. Most recently it came up in the comments of answers to a question about moving here:
http://questionland.com/questions/23906-moving-to-seattle

Lots has been said and if you dig around in the archives you will find such discussion. There may be more added here, but just in case the topic was ignored I thought you should get some feedback.

It's very taught in any philosophy class that wades into ethics.

Are you trying to say something rather than ask something? If so, this isn't the place to do it.

If you are sincere, then I probably want to think about this in symbolic terms i.e in response to their work/beliefs the country is making a statement about its beliefs.

Aren't these things taught as an aspect of other things? It is hard to avoid in any sociological or even historical course - if you are discussing it in class.

That which may not be taught by direct lesson is modeled by the vast majority of the professional teaching staff that are with children every day (in my experience over 15 years of being in multiple classrooms daily in public schools).

Aside from sharing at the kindergarten level, non-zero sum games at middle-school level would probably be taken as "communism".

The penny? Just the penny? This is why we even have to ask this question.

Cash has reached obsolescence.

At the moment cash is still pretty useful because you don't have to deal with electronics, banks, and fees. And you can give it to people instantly without any middlemen or time wasted. Nobody can argue with that, but that could change without all that much trouble.

According to this site:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12771.htm

It's going to cost about $750 million bucks just to _print_ the new currency for 2012. I'm assuming that doesn't include dealing with all the old currency or all sorts of other overheard that the physical world has to deal with.

So the real question is, if we stopped using cash completely, could that billion or so bucks provide an alternate, electronic system that has all the benefits of cash and cost less than that?

If it were a private business, hell fucking yes, it would be easy. Although it would eventually become so big that it would be wasteful and fees or subsidies would start up and it would be largely pointless.

If it were the government, hell no, the entire government is at about 2002 electronics-wise (if they're lucky) and don't have the brain power or organization to do it.

So, based on the fact I think we're not capable of doing what we should be doing: eliminating cash completely, I think the penny still has its purpose. If only as a reminder that we are a weird people who choose to carry around special metals and pieces of paper with things printed on them instead of tapping your phones together to transfer money or pay for something.

PS: to the Madison Market cashier last week who had to deal with the fact I had a ton of small bills and never use cash, I'm sorry I held up your line for 3 minutes trying to count it all out, make it look pretty, and I still fucked it up and gave you too much which confused you giving me change and held up the line even more. My fault.

Folks have been trying for years. It hasn't been really useful for at least the last decade or two. But there's so much sentiment tied into the damn thing in the US (especially as it features Lincoln) that all movements to end it have been dead on arrival. I believe the US actually loses money printing the silly things.

Eventually it will happen. Not as fast as it should. The hardest part is going to be updating all the point of sale terminals and cash registers. If paying with cash, you're going to have to round to the nearest $.05. All of those would need software updates to handle that.

Ideally we'd eliminate the nickle and dollar bill as well, and then introduce $1 and $2 coins. This is less likely to happen because all of the vending machines and other coin op machines would need to be reconfigured to take them. Though registers would have the correct number of coin slots to take all the coins. Rounding cash prices would be slightly harder, but nothing a computer couldn't handle.

Could you vote for Harry Reid? Harry Reid is a Mormom. Of course, he's not running for President.

They say you should avoid talking about politics and religion. I guess, though, if you are talking about politics, you can also talk about religion. Personally, I usually try to avoid confrontational statements, since it discourages discussion (at best).

May I suggest that you try something like, "I have reservations about voting for a Mormon", in order to foster further discussion? It's not a lie, and who knows, you might change your mind.

That said, there is no circumstance under which I would vote for a guy who straps his dog to the top of his station wagon, American-made or not.

I don't think the country will be destroyed, but, of course, many people will have their lives disrupted unnecessarily by the ignorance and malfeasance of politicians.

Still, I'd really like to know more about this concept "destroy the country", which is right up there with accusations of "treason" against politicians. These phrases are typically used by those who are fearful or angry in some vague way. Some people say the country has already been "destroyed", and others merely predict "destruction". I prefer to think in more concrete terms, like the number of people without jobs, without health insurance, and without food on their tables.

I want to answer this, but am not sure where to start. The number of people who voted in the Iowa caucuses is actually a very small percentage of Iowans. Rick Santorum received just under 30,000 votes, edging out Mitt Romney by 34 votes. Total votes cast: about 125,000. Figuring there are about a million (rough guess) Republicans in Iowa, that means 3% of Iowa Republicans actually voted for him in the caucuses. Many of those who voted for him, I'm sure, voted for him as a proxy for that elusive candidate, "not-Romney". Still, it is rather disturbing that there are people who take him even remotely seriously.

Enough about Santorum. The point I really want to make is that no one can oppose both birth control and abortion and be morally consistent. At least Rick's in the right church. But enough about him.

I doubt if Mitt even knows the cost of the Cadillacs his wife drives. On the other hand, Mitt makes around $20 million a year, which, when you break it down, is less than $2 million dollars a month. On the third hand, Mitt's $250 boodle is only one percent of the $25 billion dollar piles the Koch brothers are each sitting on. So it's all relative.

The short answer to your question: no.

The "average American" doesn't even buy milk anymore. She's more likely to purchase a 64 oz sody water for her breakfast, and another two more for lunch and dinner along with fries and a grilled sandwich.

For me, I keep tabs on milk, but I only drink Organic Valley which puts me into an elite milk buying bracket. It seems to cost upward of $3.25

And right now I'm baking my own Eggplant Parmesan. How many other Americans at this exact moment are doing the same? Not many...not many.

Check out this website:

"Mitt Romney made over $21.7 million in 2010. For most people, that number is so huge it's hard to comprehend. Mittbucks puts Romney's income into perspective for you, showing you what ordinary stuff would have to cost him before he could relate to your daily experience with money."

http://www.mittbucks.com/

We just added our response to SOPA. Thanks for asking this question Kristin.

Not that I know of. I'm not blacking out my stuff on the web today, because I think most of the people I interact with online today already know about SOPA and PIPA.

Instead, I took the time to write a detailed email to my intelligent, but not-too-tech-savvy dad explaining why he should oppose it, and after my next cup of coffee, I'm going to call my Congressman.