Asp Forum - Race Is On to Woo Next-Gen Developer

zoat

9/1/2006 2:54:00 PM

Dynamic languages are flexible languages that enable developers to
write code quickly and easily. The appeal of dynamic languages is
clear: As systems continue to grow more complex, developers seek
simpler ways to get their work done. The goal of these languages:
Simplify the software development process. The winner takes the loyalty
of the next generation of developers.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2009...

3 Answers

Mike Stok

9/1/2006 3:25:00 PM

On 1-Sep-06, at 10:55 AM, zoat wrote:

> Dynamic languages are flexible languages that enable developers to
> write code quickly and easily. The appeal of dynamic languages is
> clear: As systems continue to grow more complex, developers seek
> simpler ways to get their work done. The goal of these languages:
> Simplify the software development process. The winner takes the
> loyalty
> of the next generation of developers.
> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2009...

With a few small changes to the first five words this could have been
said forty or more years?

Mike

--

Mike Stok <mike@stok.ca>
http://www.stok...

The "`Stok' disclaimers" apply.

Slackjaw

8/24/2010 2:07:00 AM

"Godolphin&fellow" <g4...@netscape.net> wrote in message

news:
0071815d-3bba-4fdf-9383-384b911952b3@w30g2000yqw.googlegroups.com...

Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the
Iraq
war
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
08/23/10 11:32 AM EDT
Expect to hear a lot about how much the Iraq war cost in the days
ahead from
Democrats worried about voter wrath against their unprecedented
spending
excesses.

The meme is simple: The economy is in a shambles because of Bush's
economic
policies and his war in Iraq. As American Thinker's Randall Hoven
points
out, that's the message being peddled by lefties as diverse as former
Clinton political strategist James Carville, economist Joseph
Stiglitz, and
The Nation's Washington editor, Christopher Hayes.

The key point in the mantra is an alleged $3 trillion cost for the
war.
Well, it was expensive to be sure, in both blood and treasure, but, as
Hoven
notes, the CBO puts the total cost at $709 billion. To put that figure
in
the proper context of overall spending since the war began in 2003,
Hoven
provides this handy CBO chart showing the portion of the annual
deficit
attributable to the conflict

But there is much more to be said of this data and Hoven does an
admirable
job of summarizing the highlights of such an analysis:

* Obama's stimulus, passed in his first month in office, will cost
more than
the entire Iraq War -- more than $100 billion (15%) more.

* Just the first two years of Obama's stimulus cost more than the
entire
cost of the Iraq War under President Bush, or six years of that war.

* Iraq War spending accounted for just 3.2% of all federal spending
while it
lasted.

* Iraq War spending was not even one quarter of what we spent on
Medicare in
the same time frame.

* Iraq War spending was not even 15% of the total deficit spending in
that
time frame. The cumulative deficit, 2003-2010, would have been
four-point-something trillion dollars with or without the Iraq War.

* The Iraq War accounts for less than 8% of the federal debt held by
the
public at the end of 2010 ($9.031 trillion).

* During Bush's Iraq years, 2003-2008, the federal government spent
more on
education that it did on the Iraq War. (State and local governments
spent
about ten times more.)

Just some handy facts to recall during coming weeks as Obama and his
congressional Democratic buddies get more desperate to put the blame
for
their spending policies on Bush and the war in Iraq

Read more at the Washington Examiner:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-con......

Read more at the Washington Examiner:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-con......

Man of Mind

8/24/2010 3:04:00 AM

On 8/23/2010 9:06 PM, Salty Stan wrote:
>
> Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the
> Iraq war By: Mark Tapscott

Oh, is that this Mark Tapscott?

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mar...

"Mark Tapscott is editorial page editor of the Washington
Examiner and member of Clarity Media Group's National
Editorial Board. He is also a blogger, as well as and
founder and chief instructor of The Heritage Foundation?s
Center for Media and Public Policy, a Computer-Assisted
Research and Reporting (CARR) training program for journalists.

Tapscott began his journalism career as a national staff
reporter at the Washington Times in 1985. He rose through
the ranks to become business editor, national editor and
assistant managing editor. Subsequently he was managing
editor at The Journal Newspapers in Washington, D.C. In
1999 he joined the Heritage Foundation."

Well, who owns this "Washington Examiner", anyways?

Oh, here it is..

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_F...

"Anschutz is an active Republican donor," Annys Shin wrote
November 21, 2004, in the Washington Post. "Since 1996,
he, his companies and members of his family have given
more than $500,000 in campaign contributions to GOP
candidates and committees."

(footnote at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A808-2004Nov20?langua...)

"In 1987, Anschutz's family foundation gave Focus on the
Family founder James Dobson an award for his 'contributions
to the American Family."

Also..

"A low profile hasn't protected him from controversy. He
has taken the heat for funding organizations that oppose
legalized abortion and legal protections for gays and
lesbians. And he was non-executive chairman of Qwest
Communications International Inc., the Denver
telecommunications company involved in an accounting scandal."

Gosh, you Republicans can't seem to stay away from scandals..

--Isn't that why you keep accusing others of your own sins?

comp.lang.ruby

Race Is On to Woo Next-Gen Developer

zoat

Mike Stok

Slackjaw

Man of Mind

x Login to ForumsZone