Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 June 7

= June 7 =

Nguni Use of space and acquisition of territory in the nineteenth century
Does anyone know about the way migrating Nguni (especially Zwangendaba) conceived of space and used territories in the nineteenth century southern Africa. Possible answers might refer to ways of territorial acquisition, the meaning of public and private space, etc. References will be well appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndzesop (talk • contribs) 00:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Why should I keep my father's surname if I change my name to a Arabic/Muslim name?
I was thinking about changing my name to Abdullah Muhammad Ahmad. I'm using Abdullah Muhammad Ahmad as my pseudonym. But some other Muslims say I can't drop my surname (change it). It's orthodox to retain the surname but unorthodox to replace it. I rather go with the unorthodox way because it too have to say to some people, uncommon, and adoption of religion/culture purposes. I have a long last name with 10 letters. Writing and spelling is like this: C*o*a*a*d*. I may want to adopt a Arabic/Muslim because I'm Muslim and Arabic is important in my religion. My family is from Thailand where one one family can use a given last name so the last name I'm having is too long. I'm the only Muslim in my family. My family are all Buddhists. I would like the family to adopt a new last name (surname) since we may have that surname that is too long. My future family will be "Muslim". This is like Arabization to my family because of the Arabic/Muslim surname. Should I keep my surname or I have choice to change it? Note: I am not asking for legal advice. I just want simple answers. (talk) 05:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I doubt there is a factual answer for your question. Changing your name appears to be a matter of personal preference based on, in your case, religion, culture and family. Whichever you choose is a statement to your family and others of what is most important to you. Before you decide, you might consider that your children may have the same options, both in choosing a religion and in choosing a name. What you do now may set a standard for what you expect of them and for what your actions establish as permission for their choices. ៛ Bielle (talk) 06:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * After a recent court case in California, the husband can take the wife's surname there. If you are unmarried and plan to marry someone with an Arabic surname there, that'd work. User:Krator (t c) 07:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Why is a ten-letter name too long? What's wrong with "Washington" and "Eisenhower"? If your name was Pichaironnarongsongkram, I'd sympathize. Surnames are a recent invention. In the Islamic Golden Age Muslims did not have surnames, and a notion that changing one's surname goes against orthodox Islamic teaching must be based on a misunderstanding. --Lambiam 07:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Absentee ballot
I'm going to be at school in NC during the election this november but since I'm a CT resident and I'm (about to be) registered in CT I won't be able to vote there. I know I would need to do an Absentee ballot, but I have no idea how to do something like that and could use some instructions if someone has them. Thanks :). Chris M. (talk) 06:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This webpage of the Secretary of State of Connecticut contains information about absentee ballots, including links to application forms. A phone number you can call for information is 1-800 540-3764. --Lambiam 07:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Chris M. (talk) 17:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

For everyone else, try http://www.votefromabroad.org/. The website provides an enormous amount of information about where to write to get a ballot, where to send it, etc. VOTE, people!DOR (HK) (talk) 02:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Stock exchange and share things
I just turned 18 and I really wanna start putting small amounts of money on the stock market and turning it into large amounts :P. How do I go about buying shares firstly and which shares are the best ones to buy?


 * First of all, try reading the Efficient market hypothesis article. This suggests that it is practically impossible to predict or forecast the market or individual shares - or else (I think) you need a PhD in maths or statistics to do so after a lot of research. So if you want to invest, choosing shares at random is as good a method as any, or you need very high levels of skill, experience, or luck. In other words, it is practically impossible to know which shares are the best ones to buy. But apart from that, buying a set amount of shares every month would probably suit you - I do not know what specific investment products are available. Of course, investment businesses of various kinds spend a lot of advertising money trying to convince people that the EMH is not true.


 * On the other hand, there are some market anomalies (a too brief article - see http://www.investorhome.com/anomaly.htm instead) which could be exploited perhaps. High yield is another one. 80.2.197.210 (talk) 11:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

As for "How do I go about buying shares", you have to go through a stock broker, who will collect a fee for every time you buy or sell shares. Different brokers deal with different kinds of customers and you would need advice appropriate to the country where you live. --Anonymous, 09:21 UTC, June 8, 2008.


 * Regarding "which shares are the best ones to buy?", I wouldn't tell you if I knew but I would recommend reading anything Warren Buffet has written that you can get your hands on. Warren Buffett seems like a good place to start. He's a very strong proponent of value investing, for example.


 * By the way, if capital markets were efficient, how would you explain Buffet's success? Research has shown (and Buffet agrees) that the weak-form hypothesis is likely true so that rules out the Maths/Stats PhD thing. There's no conclusive evidence regarding the other forms of the hypothesis. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "how would you explain Buffet's success?" - even if a large number of people make investment decisions purely at random, one of them will be more successful than the rest. 80.0.104.234 (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * My word! Do you actually believe that the richest man in world "just got lucky"? And I suppose you would claim that this company's exceptional growth over 40 years was luck too. Yes, the chances that at least one investor out of a thousand will get lucky are quite high. But what would be the probability that one of those investors will continuously get lucky over many decades? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you believe that oldest person in the world "just got lucky" ? If one tiny thing had been different in their life, they could have died decades ago. Actually, its a plausible hypothesis - we assume that the successful have some secret formula, forgetting that there always has to be someone at the far end of the bell curve - see survivor bias. Gandalf61 (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a specious analogy: if the oldest person in the world "made a mistake", it's over but if Buffet makes a mistake on the capital market, he can cut his losses and learn from that mistake and end up better off for it. Also, survival analysis studies have found significant relationships between lifestyle, culture, diet etc and mortality rates. So it would be possible to find very old people who weren't lucky but happened to have the appropriate values for the relevant variables.


 * There is no conclusive evidence whatsoever indicating that equity and debt markets are semi-strong-form efficient. Some event studies are non-conclusive but these don't really test for fundamental analysis. The other event studies have found evidence that excess abnormal returns can be earned after certain "event"-type information is released. The rest of the studies testing for semi-strong-form efficiency look at the predictability of future rates of return using available public information. The outcome from the majority of these studies are vastly against the EMH.


 * The simple fact is that most investors don't have the resources/expertise to go through 200 page annual/interim/quaterly reports, SEC filings, newspapers and periodicals and sift out the relevant bits. Why is it so hard to believe that some people can? And I don't see how the existence of losers and survivorship bias necessarily implies that fundamental analysis doesn't work. It does. There is no evidence which concludes that it doesn't but there are several counterexamples to the hypothesis that it can't.


 * We don't subject other talented people to the same treatment by calling theories that they're just lucky plausible, why do we do so to this one? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:58, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Getting to the OP's first question: The most common way to buy stocks is through a broker. They typically will charge you for each stock purchase. Discount brokers as the name suggests charge lower fees but don't offer personalized advice. Other options include: dividend reinvestment plans (DRIPs) and stock mutual funds. DRIPs are free but your choices are limited. Mutual funds are usually free to purchase if you go directly to the mutual fund company and can provide instant diversification but they include management fees of about 1% of your investment annually which eats into your returns a bit. All this advice is from my perspective as a U.S. investor. Don't know where you are, so the details may differ. --D. Monack | talk 00:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Formula for price and sales graph line
Generally (with some exceptions) lower prices mean more goods are sold, higher prices mean less sales. If price and sales is plotted on a graph (which may be "chart" in American English), its probably going to be a curve of some sort. Has anyone actually worked out a formula that relates price to number of sales? Yes, I anticipate you may point out that the sales volume depends on many other things apart from price, and it may be difficult to determine the relationship even under experimental conditions. 80.2.197.210 (talk) 10:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a basic homework question in economics. See supply and demand for plenty of information on the interaction between price and demand. --  k a i n a w &trade; 15:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It is an actual mathematical formula I am after please, preferably one obtained empricably. If its so basic, please be so kind as to tell me such a formula. 80.2.207.208 (talk) 16:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Apparently I wasn't clear enough... There is no formula. The creation of a formula is a common homework question.  You are given a bunch of price/demand/supply values and asked to draw the graph for that specific instance.  Since it is a completely different graph for any product at any point in time, you have a different formula.  If, by chance, you happened to read supply and demand, you would easily see how there are common types of graphs/formulas for certain types of products. --  k a i n a w &trade; 16:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I did look at the article and also the demand curve article. Cannot see any formula. It is a formula I am after. I have studied economics among other related subjects for a number of years, by the way - I won't dazzle you with my qualifications. In all the decades that economics has been discussed, it seems likely that somebody at least has tried to do an empirical determination of the formula for such a curve - that is what I am after. 80.2.207.208 (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There is no formula. Within limited price range fluctuations, reasonable fits can sometimes be obtained by a formula of the form Demand = C × Price−E, in which C and E are positive constants. (E for Elasticity.) However, for most commodities there are usually sizable fluctuations in demand all the time even when the price remains fixed, which makes any empirical construction of a formula precarious and of dubious value. A slump in sales after a price raise is often temporary. Demand may even increase when the price is raised because the consumer is inclined to ascribe higher quality to higher-priced goods. --Lambiam 17:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no formula, and yet there is a formula. That's very Zen. Anyone know of any papers that have tried to study the price/demand curve empirically please? (And so, as many other people have noted, the whole edifice of economics is not based on any empirical basis). 80.0.100.139 (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This is getting to the point of childish stubbornness. There is not universal formula. There simply isn't.  If you absolutely must have one, how about price = demand / supply.  Of course, that won't work in any real case, but it is a formula.  I already pointed out that the creation of a formula is a common homework/test question.  If you took economics, then you've done this.  You are given price/demand/supply data and asked to create a "best-fit" curve.  That curve can be represented as a formula.  However, that formula/curve is only valid for that single set of data.  It is absolutely useless for any other economic case.  I simply do not know how to make this any clearer - especially to someone who claims to know economics. --  k a i n a w &trade; 20:51, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "That curve can be represented as a formula." Could anyone point me to any real-life data for such a curve please? Thanks. 80.0.104.234 (talk) 23:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll try again to make this as painfully simple as possible. Consider the historical cost of oil: 2000=$33.39, 2001=$27.29, 2002=$26.61, 2003=$31.62, 2004=$41.84, 2005=$53.77, 2006=$60.73, 2007=$64.92.  Supply of oil is very steady (because of OPEC) and demand has increased steadily every year since the 40's.  So, in this basic economics homework question, you are asked to plot the cost per year.  Consider X to be the year and Y to be the cost.  You get out your graph paper and mark the years, 2000, 2001, 2002... across the X axis.  The low cost is $26.61.  The high cost is #64.92.  So, you mark 26, 27, 28, 29... all the way to 65 up the Y axis.  They, you plot each point (X=2000, Y=33.39), (X=2001, Y=27.79)...  Now, you can see that there are two curves.  This is obviously a Y=AX3+BX2+CX+D formula.  So, you use your "best fit" curve methods to come up with a formula.  You have many plot points to work with.  For example 33.39=A*20003+B*20002+C*2000+D.  Depending on the method you are asked to use, your formula will have different values for A, B, C, and D - and no values will likely produce the exact values from the plot points.  That is why it is called a "best fit", not a "perfect fit". --  k a i n a w &trade; 23:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Demand is usually described as a point-in-time measure of quantity demanded as a function of price, not price as a function of time. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Not "based on any empirical basis"? A quick google search will lead you to (I'm not kidding) hundreds of thousands of journal articles involving empirically testing economic theory. To find the formula relating price and quantity demanded for a specific data set, you start with price and quantity sold (as quantity demanded is not known until *after* you have the formula) and factors other than price that are relevant to demand and supply (e.g., consumer income). Then apply the two stage least squares procudure. This will give you an estimate of the demand function. Wikiant (talk) 11:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ask I asked above, could anyone point me to real-life data for such a curve please? And could anyone point me to any papers that have empiricably investigated such a curve with quantitative results please? Thanks. 80.0.104.234 (talk) 23:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Simple. Go to your library and pick up any textbook on economics that you can find.  Inside, you will find a section on supply/demand and historical prices.  Look in the index for "best fit" and you'll find a section on attempting to fit formulas to real-world data. --  k a i n a w &trade; 23:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * To the OP: have you even thought about perhaps considering Wikiant's advice? Regarding your "new" question, if you find Kainaw's suggestion beneath you, you should know that the Refdesk doesn't do the OPs' work for them. Especially the ungrateful ones. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Meta-themes of making money
I'm wondering if it is possible to list all the possible ways of making money. In the abstract rather than specific cases. For example money can be made by 1) putting two or more things together to create something with a value greater than the sum of the value of the parts, 2) buying something now which has a higher value in the future, 3).....? What other themes of making money are there please? Buying a lottery ticket might be another. 80.2.197.210 (talk) 11:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't forget about the value of labor itself. Give me a piece of wood, and it's worthless. If I apply some labor to the wood (carve it into a little statue), suddenly I can charge for it. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This would be covered by 1) above, as you are putting wood and labour together. 80.2.207.208 (talk) 16:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * And don't forget about intellectual property. By carving that wood in a statue of Mickey Mouse it enters into a whole other regime where the labor and the materials are not the only salient aspects to its cost. Personally I don't think there's an easy way to parse out all of the "ways of making money". There are different ways to talk about value itself, which is probably more worthwhile. I think someone has tried that before, though. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If Das Kapital does provide such a list (which I rather doubt), please could someone point out where it can be found. Thanks. 80.2.207.208 (talk) 16:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I assume that it can be reduced to two possibilities:
 * Take money (or something of value that may be sold for money). For example, stealing.
 * Make the appearance of value and exchange it for money.
 * The first one is obvious. If you steal something, you can get money - especially if you steal money.  The second isn't so obvious.  In selling objects, the appearance of value is the object itself.  In the labor example above, the labor is the appearance of value.  In entertainment, the movie, game, show... is the appearance of value.  Even in something like a telephone scam, the scam is the appearance of value that generates money.  I just thought of counterfeiting.  In that case, the fake money is the appearance of value that is traded either for money or something that may be sold for money. --  k a i n a w &trade; 15:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, so 3) could be "steal it". But neither of the two comments above include 2), suggesting that there may be other themes also. 80.2.207.208 (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * (N+1). Begging.
 * (N+2). Extortion.
 * (N+3). Finding lost coins (e.g. under slot machines or in the beach sand).
 * (N+4). Insider trading.
 * (N+5). Bounty hunting.
 * (N+6). Marrying old rich people.
 * --Lambiam 17:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I think begging and marrying old people could be 4) being given money by sympathy or affection; extortion would be 3) stealing it; insider trading would be mostly 2) and in the past was not illegal. Finding lost coins and bounty hunting (is that getting a reward for capturing criminals?) is interesting - could be 5) searching for lost assets. This reminds me of Vladimir Propp's (sp?) narrative morphology. 80.0.100.139 (talk) 20:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Extortion, while illegal, is not theft. In theft the criminal takes the money or property, possibly without the victim's knowledge, and definitely without their consent. In extortion, the victim gives the money or property. In the case of young people marrying much older people, there is a plausible possibility that at some future time they will inherit their spouse's wealth and become rich (as for the late Vickie Lynn Marshall, née Hogan). This then is the effect of the laws regulating inheritance, and no sympathy or affection is involved in the eventual transfer of property. In insider trading, the criminal buys below value; because of the use of inside knowledge, the buyer knows that the shares bought are actually worth more than the seller knows at trading time. The later increase of value on the market is real, but intrinsically the shares did already have the higher value at trading time, and thus this cannot be categorized as an instance of "making the appearance of value". --Lambiam 10:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the OP was referring to his/her number 2 (not Kainaw's). Selling above value on material non-public information also constitutes insider trading. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * In most of the cases mentioned, they fall under the number 2 I mentioned. In begging, a person offers a social value in exchange for money (the person exchanges money either to feel better about themselves or to get the bum to go away - both are valuable).  In extortion, the value that the money is exchanged for is the peace of not being hurt, having your place burned, being framed for some crime... Bounty hunting is simple.  Some law enforcement finds value in catching criminals and is willing to pay.  In marrying old rich people, the companionship is the value exchanged.  It all comes down to exchanging value for money.
 * There are two cases mentioned that don't fit this. Insider trading is not a unique way to make money.  Buying/selling stocks is the money making method.  Insider trading simply increases the money made due to knowledge of the stock values in the future.  If you sell that knowledge to someone else, the knowledge is the value that is exchanged for money.  Finding lost coins equates to the first point I used - taking money.  You can find coins all day and not make any money if you don't take them. --  k a i n a w &trade; 20:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't agree that trading (inside or otherwise) stocks is selling knowledge. Say you have a stock and are willing to sell it for $5 but I "know" it's worth $10 and I buy it from you for $5. I haven't sold knowledge to anyone (I just earned a profit off it).


 * Maybe if we changed "making money" to "creating wealth" then your two possibilities could be restated as:
 * Take value. (Not necessarily illegal.)
 * Make value (or the appearance thereof).
 * In either case the assumption is that the value may be exchanged for money. Now, insider trading falls under 1 because by buying the stock from you, I "took" $5 of value from you. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 21:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I was covering both types of insider trading. When you use your own knowledge, you are still just buying/selling stocks.  The possible increase in value of the stocks is the value that is being traded for money.  The second type of insider trading is when the person with the inside knowledge does not do any stock trading.  He or she sells the knowledge to someone else to do the trading.  In that case, the knowledge is the value that is traded for money. --  k a i n a w &trade; 23:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, selling knowledge is the same as selling anything else and would fall under 2. But when you're inside-trading you're not making the value (the value's already there - the "loser" just doesn't know it). You're taking it. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 07:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It is my opinion that knowingly misrepresenting the value of something is not "taking" value. Pretty much all of real trade has to do with misrepresenting the value of something.  In the housing market, the sellers misrepresent the value of the home to get more money.  Automotive dealers misrepresent the value of their autos to make more money.  The government misrepresents the value of politicians to take more taxes.  The lottery misrepresents your chances of making winning even a single dollar to get more money.  Restaurants misrepresent the value of the food to make more money.  I don't consider it necessary to specially classify an inside trader who misrepresents the value of a stock. --  k a i n a w &trade; 12:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. "Successful" misrepresentation "makes" value. Insider trading isn't misrepresentation, it's merely buying at an inefficient price to earn an (unfair) profit. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The concept of money involves the (sometimes justifiable) expectation of someone getting more of something that is desirable, or avoiding more of something that is undesirable, all within the dynamics of learned human behaviors. Therefore, enumerating all the ways of "making money" is akin to enumerating all the ways two or more human beings can interact to create the perception of something worth buying or selling.


 * In case you are wondering, even in the abstract, this is an infinitely long list. Money itself is an abstraction whose primary tangible component is not physical currency, but rather the culturally-reinforced expectation of immediate harm that will result in not having any. If you're looking for "meta-themes" you may do well to ponder on why money is considered valuable at all. dr.ef.tymac (talk) 06:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Question about copyright renewals
Let's say you had a poster from a film that says "Copyright so-and-so Pictures, 1950." The U.S. Copyright Office renewal database the copyright for the film was renewed in 1978 or so. But it doesn't say anything about a renewal of the copyright on the poster itself. Are they one and the same, or is the poster is in the public domain? Is the poster necessarily a derivative work of the film, and thus covered by its copyright renewal? --98.217.8.46 (talk) 14:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * That is an interesting question which asks for legal advice and therefore cannot be answered here. --Anon, 09:23 UTC, June 8, 2008.
 * You don't have a talk page so this has to go here. The OP's asking if the film's copyright renewal covers the poster. While I agree that he/she is unlikely to get a good answer here (or from anyone besides a professional), it's not a request for advice. If someone happens to know the appropriate legislation, they should link it. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

spanish sailing ships of the 17th century
Did any spanish fleets sail from Spain to New Spain during the year 1640Thetreasurehunter (talk) 16:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, but some of the treasure lost on their return voyage has already been plundered. A twenty ship Flota de Indias left Seville and made the crossing in 64 days. As far as i can tell, all twenty arrived safely in Veracruz June of 1640. On the return voyage in 1641 the fleet was struck by a hurricane and ten ships were lost, including 600 ton almiranta (vice admiral's ship) Nuestra Señora de la puria y limpia Concepción which carried somewhere between 35 and 140 tons of silver. In 1688 Captain William Phips recovered either 25 or 32 tons of silver from the wreck of Concepción, and in 1978 Burt Webber found a further 60,000 silver coins at the site.


 * There should have also been a galleon fleet from Seville to South America in the same year, but i cannot find any reference to one.&mdash;eric 02:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * ??? Seville isn't a port.   Corvus cornix  talk  19:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a port, but The Port. High tide carried the commerce of New Spain 54 miles up The Guadalquivir to the place Fernando de Herrera described as "not a city but a world."&mdash;eric 23:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's a picture. Xn4  00:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Seville is still an active port with a shipyard. Richard Avery (talk) 12:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * How awesome. Thanks for enlightening me.  :)   Corvus cornix  talk  16:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Vice President term limit
Can a person who has already served two terms as U.S.vice president serve as U.S.vice president again under another U.S.president? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.251.221 (talk) 16:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. D AVID Š ENEK 16:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. However, if a person has already served two terms as as the President of the United States, he or she cannot be a running mate as a Vice President. Jtg920 (talk) 20:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Jtg920, are you saying that someone who has served two terms as President cannot be elected Vice President, but can be appointed Vice President? DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what is going on here, but only a screen or two higher on this page the answer given here is contradicted. The quote from the constitution is that "no-one who is constitutionally ineligible to serve as president can serve as vice president". DJ Clayworth (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, see 22nd Amendment. Oh, it went away. Please don't do that while we're talking about it. I've restored the section, which already has a tag asking for citations. --Anonymous, 20:02 UTC, June 9, 2008.

Medical cost that can be covered by the state
For practical reasons, (I think) the Dutch government must limit the expense that can be paid by the state for an individuals medical assistance to €80,000 per year. Is there a list of these values for other countries? How might they be derived? How does the average "value" of an individual factor in? I suppose it has to do with gross domestic product? Like if a person brought a certain amount of money into the country, it might not be sensible to allow them to pass for a sum below this amount. How does it work? Seans Potato Business 16:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, no; oh yes.
I watch more BBC America than is good for a body. I keep hearing reference to a sort of catch phrase, seemingly from theater, where one side says something like "Oh, no it isn't!" and the other side says "Oh, yes it is!" One example is in a Monty Python sketch involving Puss in Boots. I just heard it again on "Cash in the Attic". What is the origin of that? --Milkbreath (talk) 17:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Pantomime -84user (talk) 17:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * O'Rly? Chris M. (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It is a common way for English kids to conduct an argument regarding the factuality of a disputed issue. How do they do this at the other side of the North-Atlantic divide? --Lambiam 17:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "Uh-huh!" "Uh-Uh!" Wrad (talk) 17:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * That's one way. Beyond that, if it the matter is a particularly convoluted issue involving, say, a double dog dare, the one kid's lawyer will call the other kid's lawyer. Or they have a gunfight. --Milkbreath (talk) 17:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you sure that kids use it that way, Lambiam? It doesn't ring for me (though it's true that I'm not around kids very much). To me it is only the pantomime riff, as 84user said (usually augmented with a 'Look behind you!'). I remember hearing American children on television and films retorting to "It is not!" with "It is so!" and thinking how lucky they were to have a way of doing so: our "It is" sounded weak beside it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Punch and Judy routine?--Wetman (talk) 06:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Pantomime ? Part of the "he's behind you" routine.I've heard those exact words used in pantomime.hotclaws 08:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

It's pantomime. AndyJones (talk) 12:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Watch or listen to the Monty Python sketch Argument clinic. It will leave you in stitches. "This is not an argument! An argument is not just a contradiction!", "Oh yes it is!", "Oh no it isn't!" etc.  Zun aid  ©  ®  13:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

ontario canada
question: although this township covers alot of ground, the british name means little? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcron (talk • contribs) 19:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * According to our article, the name is derived from a Huron word: ontarí:io, meaning 'Great Lake'.&mdash;eric 20:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * And it is a province, not a township, more like a state if you know America, except much bigger in area. If the questioner is puzzled by "Ontario", I wonder what he/she thinks of "Saskatchewan" or "Manitoba". ៛ Bielle (talk) 23:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I assume it is a riddle about a township in Ontario. Little Township in Cochrane? Pettypiece Township in Kenora? List of townships in Ontario would help if there weren't thousands of them. Most townships cover "a lot" of ground; what is "a lot"? What is "British" opposed to? French? A native name? This is not a very good riddle. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Tiny, Ontario - EronTalk 20:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Oscar Wilde quote
There was some quote somewhere, about the fact that "everyone is someone else" with respect to their thoughts and ideas being a collection of those of previous people. I can't remember exactly. I think it was attributed to Oscar Wilde. Seans Potato Business 21:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation. Oscar Wilde, De Profundis, a.1905. Mhicaoidh (talk) 23:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is one text and another  that needs downloading, but be aware there are several versions as it was originally a letter written in prison and not published til after his death. Mhicaoidh (talk) 00:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. Seans Potato Business 14:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)