The iPad is basically the same resolution as an older monitor (1024×768) which is what many websites are designed for (990px wide, specifically).

The key difference is making things tappable by fingers rather than mice pointers and readable at arms length rather than 12-18 inches away.

I wouldn’t change the design of your existing site, as a result, but install things like a mobile theme for the blog, for example. There are plugins for wordpress that will make a smaller screen friendly site for you. For standard web sites, I would consider making a mobile or iPhone/Android optimized experience. That’s what the media companies are doing right now.

I realize this may be expensive or whatever, so I’d base the decision on how many iPhones, iPads, iPods, and Android devices visit your site. Google Analytics or SiteMeter will both give you screen resolution report, I think.

Sujal

I watched this movie knowing it was a Tarantino alternative reality with no historical basis. That said, I still didn’t enjoy the movie. Every chapter seemed to have the same formula making the movie drag on without much plot movement. The resolution was silly, because I just couldn’t believe the main SS officer would join the allies, and Brad Pitt survived only because he’s Brad Pitt. There’s a lot of meaningless violence that I’ve grown accustomed too since Pulp Fiction, but the violence just didn’t do it for me in this film. It seemed more demented then usual. Maybe because it lacked that funny factor that Kill Bill had and Pulp Fiction also had. Altogether, I wasn’t impressed.

Oh wait, sorry, I thought it was the Yule log.

You talk on one hand about fiscal responsibility while advocating that the government cut taxes. There’s no attempt by you or anyone else advocating for tax cuts to show how tax cuts will actually balance the budget. Just some hand waving about economic growth.

On the other hand, the health care bill is projected to be deficit neutral, actually saving money by CBO projections ($10-18 bil / year avg). Each significant modification to the bill caused Reid and Pelosi to send the bill back to the CBO for updated projections. They have followed a process which makes sense and is open to review.

Even if you think the CBO projections are not 100% accurate, at least the Democrats are trying to explain how their bill will save money. So, I share your concerns about cost, but the evidence (not conjecture) shows that the bill will save some money or, at worst, be deficit neutral. Doing this, btw, while providing health insurance for 40 million additional people who don’t have it today.

On the other hand, the GOP and conservatives believe in the tax incentive fairy.

George W Bush decided to beef up security, created 3 new government agencies to boost our post-9/11 security. He started two wars that have tied our hands in both Iraq & Afghanistan. He paid for it… by cutting taxes. twice. The tax cuts haven’t helped the economy. They increased borrowing. Our economy didn’t grow that much.

Besides, tax cuts are a tool, not a policy. We’ve had good times w/ Presidents who increase taxes and bad times w/ Presidents who cut taxes. Using a tool has tradeoffs, and you can’t talk about a massive budget deficit, claim it’s a terrible thing, and then propose policies that exacerbate it w/o an explanation.

On top of that, the exact nature of the tax cuts matter. George W Bush’s tax cuts gave the biggest cut to the top bracket. I’ve written about how those tax cuts were terrible policy. That post contains economic analysis from The Economist magazine, hardly a leftist publication. I believe the same issues hold now. The bill to taxpayers would be greater than the payoff in stimulus.

I’m not going to acknowledge your opinions about Pelosi and Reid. These are hardly radical leftists.

Obama has said from before the campaign that his healthcare policy will aim to tweak at the margins. During the campaign he talked about the exchanges, he talked about increasing competition. He was, IIRC, against a mandate (this was a Clinton idea). So, this is what he promised, this is what this bill (senate and house) do. The bill is hardly the result of Reid & Pelosi operating from vague outlines. It lines up almost perfectly with the proposals Obama outlined. The public option is hardly socialist. It’s basically a limited medicare/medicaid.

It’s funny that you criticize the Keynsian model. We’ve never actually followed the model to its definition outside of the Great Depression. And we’ve never done it the way that the model requires, which is with a large stimulus proportionate to the recession. If it weren’t for WWII, boosting government spending, it wouldn’t have worked for the Great Depression. I believe that Bush’s deficit spending and two wars plus the creation of DNI, Homeland Sec, and boosts to CIA/NSA budgets (and the contracting they buy) did more to boost the economy than the tax cuts. This isn’t my theory, btw.

So, we’ve never done the keynesian model in practice. It’s hard to see what you’re pointing at as “history shows.”

Sujal