We are an organization of the best insurance agents in miami , bringing you the best in home , auto , and business insurance!
5 stories
·
0 followers

We Insure Group Miami

1 Share

1550 Madruga Ave #330
Coral Gables, FL 33146




via WordPress <a href="https://weinsuregroupmiamiblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/13/we-insure-group-miami/" rel="nofollow">https://weinsuregroupmiamiblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/13/we-insure-group-miami/</a>
Read the whole story
organizationofinsuranceagents
374 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Organization Of Insurance Agents Of Miami

1 Share

Organization Of Insurance Agents Of Miami

We are an organization of the best insurance agents in miami , bringing you the best in home , auto , and business insurance! 

https://organizationofinsuranceagentsofmiami.wordpress.com




Read the whole story
organizationofinsuranceagents
375 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

RT @Chargers: pf changs is so good

2 Shares
Read the whole story
organizationofinsuranceagents
375 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Do You Know the New York Accent Better Than a New Yorker?

1 Comment and 2 Shares
article-image

But what does it sound like? (Photo: W45lin/CC BY-SA 4.0)

Can you tell where in New York someone is from based on their accent? A new online survey is testing whether even native New Yorkers can tell the difference between the various accents that exist in the city's five boroughs.

As we’ve looked at previously, Americans aren’t especially great at differentiating between regionally-specific accents, and now a professor from Reed College is putting that to the ultimate test. Developed by Assistant Professor of Linguistics Kara Becker, the online quiz lets participants listen to a trio of short lines of dialogue spoken by a different person from either Manhattan, Queens, The Bronx, Brooklyn, or Staten Island. After listening to a clip, you are asked to choose which borough you think the speaker’s accent hails from.

The quiz also asks you whether you are a native New Yorker, meaning you were born or raised in the city, pitting the ears of non-natives against those of transplants and tourists. After you answer each of the questions, you can see how many other participants voted like you did. Then, at the end of the quiz, the quiz reveals where each of the speakers is actually from, and, having taken the quiz ourselves, it's probably safe to say that neither natives nor transplants are that good at picking out the accents of one's neighbors.

The study behind the quiz hopes to shine a light on whether or not there is even such a thing as a borough accent. To check it out yourself, go here!

Read the whole story
organizationofinsuranceagents
375 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
DMack
375 days ago
reply
I love accent stuff, but I'm disappointed that the sound clips they used weren't more cartoonish :P
Victoria, BC

Earth Temperature Timeline

15 Comments and 64 Shares
[After setting your car on fire] Listen, your car's temperature has changed before.
Read the whole story
organizationofinsuranceagents
375 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete
15 public comments
tedder
368 days ago
reply
Keep arguing about parking spaces, XKCD edition.
Uranus
sjk
373 days ago
reply
Proof that painting, pottery, rope, and bows and arrows cause Global Warming. All we need to do, is revert our technology to those halcyon days and all will be right with the world.
Florida
srsly
374 days ago
reply
All these likes and shares, even Samuel can't pull this attention!
Atlanta, Georgia
tante
374 days ago
reply
XKCD's brilliant visualization of global warming.
Oldenburg/Germany
DerBonk
375 days ago
reply
Munroe is on the top of his game with this web comics essay. Very disturbing. Summer is coming.
Germany
gangsterofboats
375 days ago
reply
Fossil fuels will solve the problem.
MaryEllenCG
375 days ago
reply
Yeah, we're fucked, because too many people believe climate change is a hoax.
Greater Bostonia
kazriko
375 days ago
I'd say it's because of doctrinare belief that the only way to stop climate change is to stop emitting carbon. I believe you'd make far more headway if you said that instead of a carbon tax, you had to transfer money to those who design and maintain carbon sinks. That would give people more incentive to create the technology to remove CO2 from the air, and to not cut down forests, etc.
stefanetal
373 days ago
@kazriko Your proposal is about as sensible as letting everybody take your stuff and then hiring people to look for it after a week. It will create costs and employment for looking. But you won't end up with much stuff. Not using the 100x more expensive technology isn't doctrinaire.
kazriko
373 days ago
You're not going to make any headway with the idea that everyone must immediately stop all of the things that make them healthy, prosperous, and happy though. The technology is only expensive because nobody has put money into the research and development of it. Even the drastic step of stopping emissions does nothing whatsoever for the problem because you have to do something about what is already in the air. If you want to actually solve the problem, then funding this research is the only way to actually do it.
stefanetal
372 days ago
Ahm, it's a carbon tax, like a sales tax, it won't 'stop all of the things that make [people] healthy, prosperous, and happy' any more than current sales taxes do. You might as well suggest people not be allow to take all the stuff they see that makes them happy. It's only expensive since property is theft. And if people could take what makes them happy, companies would do research on how to make more cheaply. Maybe the gov should fund research on that instead of wasting it on police. On a less sarcastic note, your view just does't work if you try to write out any basic cost functions based on any input-output technologies. There may be an escape if we get really cheap non-carbon energy, but that's about it. Paying people to put carbon back in the ground if you don't tax others as least as much to take it back out is about as reasonable as say Venezuela buying gasoline on the open market to sell it to 'users' at 10 cents/gallon (who then sell it right back). It may be how the politics play out (see your first sentence), but it doesn't end well (or it needs to be sustained by rationing -- which is where any implementation of your proposal is going).
stefanetal
372 days ago
Also, on 2nd thought, If you want to discuss cost functions and physical constraints on them, I'd be happy to do so non-sarcastically. Writing a good and realistically model of this might help clarify why we disagree and who is right/wrong, under which kinds kinds of assumptions. For instance, sometimes other costs (transportation costs?) do function as the near equivalent of Pigouvian taxes, so things can work out at times for other reasons. I don't see that here.
stefanetal
372 days ago
Real issue is that the climate change 'cost' part is still pretty much all in the future, due to the very very high heat capacity of the ocean and the ocean's slow turnover. Lots of future warming is already fully baked in and many people aren't willing the see it as real yet. And I do expect that using taxes to control carbon emissions is going to look very gentle compared to methods that at least some groups are going to try 50 years from now (say, biological methods to control energy demand by reducing the customer base). So concern about taxes making people unhappy is going to look very pre-crisis quaint.
kazriko
372 days ago
That's quite the wall of text there. I'm not talking about the carbon tax. I'm talking about all of the environmentalists who say that the only solution is the complete ceasing of all emissions, and won't take "nuclear" for an answer. You know, the ones you're referring to as "some groups are going to try." You would be taxing others through this scheme, but you would be then shifting that money to putting carbon back in the ground, instead of shifting it to governments to do... whatever... with. I just don't trust anyone who says that taxes only are a viable answer because it will neither decrease emissions enough, nor will it actually decrease concentrations whatsoever. It alone is not a solution. It is only an intermediate step towards banning all emissions.
stefanetal
372 days ago
You write: "I'm not talking about the carbon tax." I was responding to your 2nd initial sentense: " I believe you'd make far more headway if you said that instead of a carbon tax". And your arguement that carbon can't be in the tax base since taxes are bad is...well, we already have a tax base, just a economically and ecology less good one. Can't follow your other claims, but they strike me as incoherent as articulated (i.e. using word with different coverage in different parts of the argument as if they referred to the same thing, that is 'carbon tax' = 'crazy enviromenatlist", so lets discuss "crazy enviromentalists". You've not shown that carbon taxes are crazy or associated only with crazy enviromentalists. ).
kazriko
372 days ago
The main thing I don't want is for how all of the current taxation schemes seem to be doing it. Emitters are grandfathered in to a certain amount, and if they cut emissions they can sell those credits to others. This basically entrenches all of the existing interests and makes it impossible for new companies to make any headway. Any solution shouldn't give exemptions to the entrenched, only allow those who find ways of mitigating the issue to sell exemptions to others.
kazriko
372 days ago
*sigh* Yes, that sentence doesn't parse the way I was intending. I was meaning instead of ONLY a carbon tax. I didn't also mean "crazy environmentalist" = "carbon tax" but "crazy environmentalist" = "100% end of all carbon emissions" As I said just before, the problem with the tax schemes are that they just go to do whatever, and don't solve the problem, just slightly discourage things rather than solving them. Only a carbon tax will lead to the 100% end of emissions because it won't work, and if it doesn't work, by your own admission people will be doing less gentle methods.
kazriko
372 days ago
You can see what I intended to say by the "transfer money to" thing in the same sentence. That meant transfer money from those who emit carbon to those who remove it.
stefanetal
372 days ago
Ah, mostly a misunderstanging then...:-). We still disagree, but I can dial back to a much more manageable debate...need to run now. I do take the technocratic basline view that Pigouvian taxes are a good starting point, but there are political issues that are serious and hard to model. More later...
Ferret
375 days ago
reply
:-|
wreichard
375 days ago
reply
The power of visualization.
Earth
darastar
375 days ago
reply
This is legit. And also scary?
alt_text_bot
375 days ago
reply
[After setting your car on fire] Listen, your car's temperature has changed before.
drchuck
375 days ago
reply
Stonehenge!
Long Island, NY
emdeesee
375 days ago
reply
Fun fact: If laser-etched onto a 2x4 we use to hit people who say "...but the climate has changed before" over the head, it would be almost seven feet long.
Lincoln, NE
joeythesaint
375 days ago
And since the most common sizes you find 2x4s in is 6' and 8' long and you wouldn't want to truncate the graph, that means you've got more than an extra foot to extrapolate the data further. Or wrap it with a shirt and tape so you don't get calluses.
jscartergilson
375 days ago
reply
bookmarked
smadin
375 days ago
reply
Today in We're Fucked
Boston