Slashdot Mirror

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ge...
http://nypost.com/2016/02/09/e...
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-s...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/ho...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.thelocal.dk/2016012...
http://www.politico.eu/article...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/...
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ge...
http://nypost.com/2016/02/09/e...
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-s...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/ho...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.thelocal.dk/2016012...
http://www.politico.eu/article...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/...
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

Story 1
Story 2
Sotry 3
Story 4

Not sure which source you are going to come back and say "that source is too biased", so I included 4 you can find more even the NYT if you want to bother looking. Its not even debatable at this point, its pretty much known fact that Clinton took bribes while Secretary of State, between $150M and $300M depending on the source. The one that is getting her in trouble is foreign donations (which she lied about multiple times before telling the truth), specifically Abu Dhabi that got a BIG favour for giving her half a million, and I think that is the one the FBI is investigating. You would think Clinton supporters would already know this about her. She even got in trouble with the IRS for not reporting the bribes as income and had to redo her taxes after she got caught.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-... (the Pacchieri baby snatching case)
https://www.lifesitenews.com/n... (they even go so far as to prohibit the mentally ill from having sex)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... (or those deemed to have learning difficulties to marry... Mark and Kerry have been happily married now for seven years and are very good friends of mine)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... (background on the CoP and the evils that it can order: abortions, caesarians, experimental surgery and medication, euthanasia (AKA Liverpool Care Pathway which is just another term for "withhold all food, water and painkillers"), sterilisation, forcible restraint, incarceration "for the public good" even if no danger to the public has been evidenced)

this is what happens if you don't get out soon enough http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

alarmist nonsense like the impossible scenarios Al Gore presented

Yeah, about that...

http://phys.org/news/2015-10-s...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

http://www.newyorker.com/magaz...

Australia is way ahead of you.

Man! What a dick!

Lemmy only lived to 70. How long would he have lived without the booze and speed? (You call that living?!?)

Now that you mention it...

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix...

Dear Mastercard,

Here is my selfie:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix...

I would like to order a case of beer, an Alfa Romeo 4C in black on red, and a bikini wax for the old lady.

Australia is way ahead of you.

This would ultimately create a mostly female, reasonably yet underpaid company with a massive economic advantage

Assuming that the women would work well together, yes. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem...

It's one thing to go into CVS and take a bottle of aspirin off a shelf next to all the other OTC remedies.

It's something else again to go into a hospital pharmacy and take a bottle of aspirin off a shelf next to a lot of drugs that could kill you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03...
At my own hospital, in 2013 we gave a teenager a 39-fold overdose of a common antibiotic. The initial glitch was innocent enough: A doctor failed to recognize that a screen was set on âoemilligrams per kilogramâ rather than just âoemilligrams.â But the jaw-dropping part of the error involved alerts that were ignored by both physician and pharmacist. The error caused a grand mal seizure that sent the boy to the I.C.U. and nearly killed him.

Hospitals have systems in place to prevent those 1-in-a-million accidents. In fact, since they dispense more than a million pills, they have systems in place to prevent 1-in-100 million accidents. Even so, they keep making rare mistakes. It's a constant battle. And it's expensive -- they use bar codes, the pharmacist has to check the prescription, the nurse has to check the prescription, and if there are dangerous drugs around, like in cancer treatment, another nurse has to check the first nurse, etc. It's a pretty expensive process. It's worth a lot, because otherwise they would kill more people.

There was a recent British report that evaluated the reason why a cancer patient got an injection into the spine of the wrong, fatal drug, which killed him. It went into great detail about the error-prevention methods, and why they failed. Here's a news story about it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

So when you get an aspirin in a hospital, it has to go through an expensive process. They can't just go next door to CVS and buy a bottle.

This following was published January 31, 2013.

"Migrants working in the United States sent a staggering $120 billion back to their families last year, it was revealed today.

The amount of money being sent by migrants across the entire world reached $530 billion last year, making it a larger economy than Iran or Argentina, the data from the World Bank showed.

This worldwide figure has tripled in the last ten years and is now three times bigger than the total aid budgets given by countries around the world. It has sparked debate whether this so-called remittance money could be a viable alternative to relying on help from other governments.

In the United States last year, more than $120 billion was sent by workers to families abroad - making it the largest sender of remittances in the world. More than $23 billion went to Mexico, $13.45 billion to China, $10.84 billion to India and $10 billion to the Philippines, among other recipients."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

They didn't need to give him a non-exec position. All they needed to do was give him and his son a nice plane ride and some Superb Owl tickets.

They want an animated Real Doll, preferably something that maintains a human body temperature.

There is a scratch for that itch already:

When Tyger asked her Harmony if she would like to have sex, she was programmed to reply 'I am very anxious to have sex but I cannot comply till I have been registered to an owner'

Just thought I'd give an example from a highly esteemed British newspaper because this is Slashdot and nobody believes anything unless it goes along with the "The US does it wrong!" groupthink.

What if the perfectly approved Apple cable has been chafed and is now shorted to ground? Fail gracefully.

That's what you might think, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say a cable that would fail gracefully when shorted to ground would not pass mains voltage mains to ground (e.g. the phone case). Read the articles before you blame shoddy aftermarket chargers, as the 2nd one involved a genuine Apple charger; but what you're saying is that the cable, connector, and/or device should somehow prevent this.

What if the perfectly approved Apple cable has been chafed and is now shorted to ground? Fail gracefully.

That's what you might think, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say a cable that would fail gracefully when shorted to ground would not pass mains voltage mains to ground (e.g. the phone case). Read the articles before you blame shoddy aftermarket chargers, as the 2nd one involved a genuine Apple charger; but what you're saying is that the cable, connector, and/or device should somehow prevent this.

This news was submitted to the firehose and was deleted within minutes, fucking pussies afraid of getting banned by Google ads?.

Google uses PO Box 666 in Bermuda to save billions in taxes every year

A small metal box numbered 666 in the post office of Bermuda's capital, is the official address of "Google Bermuda Unlimited", which "Don't be Evil" Google quietly funnels its entire global earnings (minus the US) every year to avoid paying billions in taxes.

Three obvious possibilities that don't require fear of losing their major revenue stream, which, btw, is a fair thing to be afraid of:

(1) You asked that question in the Firehose while posting it and they responded "Fuck this asshole."

(2) They know they're pretty safe but are still new to this and are a little concerned about defamation law, so they're being careful when dealing with big accusations against a company that could sue them out of existence with as much difficulty as you might swat a fly.

(3) They want to post it but their *lawyers* are still new to this.

This news was submitted to the firehose and was deleted within minutes, fucking pussies afraid of getting banned by Google ads?.

Google uses PO Box 666 in Bermuda to save billions in taxes every year

A small metal box numbered 666 in the post office of Bermuda's capital, is the official address of "Google Bermuda Unlimited", which "Don't be Evil" Google quietly funnels its entire global earnings (minus the US) every year to avoid paying billions in taxes.

You know, it depends on how you flip it, which apparently you can do without having any ill intent.

Years ago in playing some games with co-workers, a coin toss was part of something. I would occasionally get about 8-10 in a row.

People used to kind of freak out, because I'd flip the same thing a bunch of times and they said it was statistically impossible. I said I just flipped the coin and they could see me do it.

Much later I saw things which suggested if you know how to flip it, you can control the outcome ... which means you can possibly do it by accident.

Is it still a fair coin toss if I have no idea how it happened? I sure wasn't cheating, and I couldn't do it on command, it just happened sometimes.

Really, statistically unlikely means just that -- given enough samples the chances pretty much become 100%.

Oooh, 3 of 100 times you could get that outcome, quick, call the witch doctor.

Statistically unlikely stuff happens all the freakin' time.

Bald Eagles are native to North America. They simply don't exist in the wild anywhere else.

In the United States they were endangered most of my life (until about 10 years ago), and still to this day it is illegal to "own" one in captivity except under certain very rare circumstances. Usually, it has to be injured in some way which would physically prevent it from living in the wild.

In short, Bald Eagles should be wild. Combine that with them being a symbol of the USA, and a great many Americans find it offensive to see someone keeping one as a pet. Seriously offensive.

Yet I'm constantly seeing "tame" bald Eagles in Europe, and people there act like they aren't doing anything to be ashamed of. Another example is English Premiere League club Crystal Palace, which has a live Bald Eagle "mascot".

Where do they keep getting these Bald Eagles? Also, do they not care how offensive this is to Americans, or are they aware of that and are doing it on purpose?

This post is rather ironic given the attitude displayed by most US citizens over the uproar regarding pictures of Mohammad.

Bald Eagles are native to North America. They simply don't exist in the wild anywhere else.

In the United States they were endangered most of my life (until about 10 years ago), and still to this day it is illegal to "own" one in captivity except under certain very rare circumstances. Usually, it has to be injured in some way which would physically prevent it from living in the wild.

In short, Bald Eagles should be wild. Combine that with them being a symbol of the USA, and a great many Americans find it offensive to see someone keeping one as a pet. Seriously offensive.

Yet I'm constantly seeing "tame" bald Eagles in Europe, and people there act like they aren't doing anything to be ashamed of. Another example is English Premiere League club Crystal Palace, which has a live Bald Eagle "mascot".

Where do they keep getting these Bald Eagles? Also, do they not care how offensive this is to Americans, or are they aware of that and are doing it on purpose?

There's at least three different networks: "NIPR" for unclassified, general internet usage; "SIPR" for stuff classified up to Secret, and "JWICS" for some (but not all) TS/SCI. It is very difficult to electronically (e.g. send email) from one network to another and usually requires a second reader (who is outside the organization) to scour and approve/deny the shift. However, there is very little that can be done to prevent someone from manually typing information to circumvent the system.

It's not as big a difference as you think.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1226258/Cant-lose-weight-Dont-blame-metabolism.html

No, I do not believe the Free Market is the ideal, nor do I believe one can realistically exist any more than a pure democracy or communism.

Prey tell, what do you consider a better ideal than a Free Market based on **voluntary** (and thus, moral) exchange for perceived win-win ? You prefer involuntary (and thus, immoral) win-lose exchanges, such as the system called 'socialism' ?

And there are any number of reasons this country is going to hell but regulation probably is near the bottom of the list.

An alleged independent businessman as yourself wants *more* regulation? ROFL! you are too funny, and rather transparent. But please enlighten us all how your country is not hampered by regulation and how removing regulation would harm the country? I cannot wait to hear this.

I think your claim is pure hyperbole.

http://www.lemonadefreedom.com...
Yeah, you really need *more* regulation in the US.
http://www.foodrenegade.com/do...
http://articles.latimes.com/20...
http://www.naturalnews.com/043...
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
This level of INSANITY is only possible due to assh0les like you, who cheerlead for it. "Land of the Free" ROFL !

Feel free to identify this wonderful land so that we may all feel inferior to your paradise - unless, of course, you feel that we might not agree with you.

I've a better idea. Name an index and I'll tell you whether my country is better or worse than yours. On pretty-much everything except purchasing power parity and military power we're vastly better than the USA. Lower corruption, greater social cohesion, happier populace, lower inequality, debt to GDP, gun crime, broadband availability and speeds, etc. The USA is indeed a very great country, but the smartest and richest people from the USA have been buying up massive estates in my country because once you have made your money in the USA life is MUCH better here.

Let me also add that this country isn't "going to hell" any more than most of the rest of them are - so it would be appreciated if we could keep this discussion inside the bounds of reality.

Yes, when you say "most" this is true. My country is one of the few NOT going to hell - because it follows the policies I'm talking about, and not the ones you are talking about. You are so certain that what you strongly believe in now is the only possible course of action - you are delusional in your ignorance and your bad temper and arrogance is keeping you blind.

No, it's not regulations and even the fact that you would say that shows you have no idea what you're talking about.

Compliance costs money. A LOT of money. This is what makes straightforward things *unnecessarily* expensive - reducing coverage.

But living in Mythical Land, you also are astute enough to understand that if you don't build out a sustainable business model, your competitor will immediately open up and take those more profitable locations. Of course, this gives him the competitive advantage seeing as he is making more per customer (ARPU) and since he is far more profitable than you, he is now capable of building out faster than you are while also controlling the more profitable locat

Most people claim that BMI is inaccurate because...it's inaccurate.

No, most people claim it's inaccurate because they'd rather be a special snowflake than fat. The model is simple. Take a measurement correlating with fatness. Fit a simple model to decorrelate it with respect to height, giving a single number.

Then put some nice wide error bars in the "OK" range such that most of the population fall within it.

Unless you have very good reason to believe you're not within the normal range then it applies to you. Basically if you don't have a ripped 6 pack, and BMI says you're overweight, then you're overweight.

Professional athletes

OK, right that accounts for a good 0.001% of the population.

are rated obese by BMI

I doubt most of them are. I just picked one, "Andy Murray". A very fit, muscular chap. 1.9m tall, 84 Kg. Well into the OK band for BMI. A bulkier one like Usain Bolt? Upper end, but still in the "OK" band. Most recent olympics marathon winner? Wow quite underweight! Hm let's try another. Ronaldo. Nope, also OK. More footballers? How about the first 5 from this list (my patience is limited) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/spo... Huh, one is juuuust into the overweight band and the rest are right in the middle. How about a swimmer? Let's say Phelps. Nope, ALSO OK. See the pattern here? That's a nice sampling from tennis, running, football, swimming

Even very many professional athletes are in fact not even overweight never mind obese when it comes to BMI.

So your claim doesn't even apply to most professional athletes, but to a small subset where bulk is much higher. Sure Hulk Hogan at his peak was in the "obese" range, but what proportion of the population have a physique like that? A clue: not many.

The BMI was designed to determine the overall fitness level of a large group of people, like a nation.

Fatness, not fitness and yes that's correct. It even has error bars and everything. That means it's not applicable to everyone, but it is applicable to a high percentage of the population.

It was never meant to be used as an index for an individual level of fitness.

Wasn't it? It works awfully well for such a simple number. You need colossal amounts of muscle to go overweight without having excess fat, more than many professional athletes.

Thanks to well placed news like this users, people, city and state law enforcement will still have faith in US brands.
A flood of sock puppets to contain the topics surrounding the ability of a US company to look after its brand more than follow the color of US telco laws.
Keep using that cell phone, sending images with gps, carrying a live mic with a battery thats built in.
All the brand can secure is the transit from a user level in the phone to another user.
All other hardware and software functions are open to federal law enforcement, mil as sold in the US or UK.
The security services now like voice prints as been one of the few low cost ways to get total coverage of a city to look of people they have on file.

No telco or company is going to get to lock out data recovery or a malware push down or a national hunt for voice prints due to its branding.
"Superspy in the sky could soon be patrolling over British cities to search for hidden terror cells" (26 April 2010 )
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
"The aircraft are able to identify suspects using 'voice-prints' ... "
Leaked catalogue details US surveillance hardware ( 18 December 15 ) has more on the dirt boxes.. and other devices
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/ar...
"sound files" ..."SMS data", "pictures", calendar ... "into one report"
Would any US brand be able to block collect it all?

Fails as I don't drink.

So because you don't drink, nobody every drinks? Well argued. Guess this didn't happen then. or this. or this. or this. or this. Aren't the things that don't happen amazing?

- I then stab my spouse to death because the gun wouldn't fire. outcome worse than 'bad'.

So it's ok to kill people while on methamphetamine, because people high on coke also kill people sometimes?

Well argued.

Scenario 2: (a) the burglar isn't a burglar, he's a home invader.

And also, he's constantly chasing a long legged bird with the aim of capturing/killing said bird with products he has purchased from ACME corporation. And you forgot to mention he is a coyote.

(b) daughter knows not to sneak in.

Oh. that's all right then, I guess. We don't need to worry about the dead kids.

(c) try finding this actually happening. Removing a firearm from an armed person's hands only really happens in the movies. It's too easy to just shoot somebody trying to snatch your weapon.

OK then

(d) bad conservative/libertarian police: So what? It's the intruder's fault for breaking in. If he doesn't want to risk getting shot, he shouldn't be breaking in.

Sure. We don't need to worry about the dead kids. Just pile em up out back.

No. I didn't link back to the same piece. Slashdot autocorrect did. Here are the URL: http://www.wired.com/2008/05/v... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci... www.am-online.com/news/2013/2/1/volvo-predicts-crash-proof-cars-by-2020-but-uk-drivers-remain-skeptical/32308/

I can see the muslims putting it to the test.

No. America uses those. I'm Canadian and I find Amazon is great for reviews, and so-so on pricing. Their prime offering is a hilarious joke that needs to die ($80 and all I get is 'free' shipping on a very few items? LOL!)

Really so when I travel to Asia and see people using iPhones, that is all my imagination? When I am in Europe and see people using Windows, I must have had hallucinations? You seem to have a very binary way of thinking about who uses what. In Asia, they do use iPhones. They also use Galaxy phones too. It's not binary.

Microsoft could cease to exist and I wouldn't care.

Yes, you don't care. Companies that use Microsoft products do care.

Apple could cease to exist and nobody here would care. I know one person with an iPhone. They've dumped it for Android.

You, you, you, and your world. That does not reflect the actual world.

For 2015 alone, Apple sold more than 231 million iPhones worldwide. Now according to you that must just the US. Considering that the US has about 323 million people, that would be the most marketshare I've seen in any country by a product. That would mean most men, women, and children bought an iPhone in 2015 alone.
OR
You simply have no idea who owns an iPhone and live in your own reality.

The trouble is the USA thinks they are the world. It's really odd. I hear news from the USA about this Craigslist thing selling access to hookers for roses. Never heard of it otherwise. The site looks quite shitty.. Canadians use Kijiji. Your household brands are simply more replaceable than you think.

The companies listed are known worldwide. They are used worldwide. These are simple facts to look up. But you won't, will you? For example, Facebook usage by country definitely shows that more than Americans use it. A survey in 2013 shows that that Google is used worldwide. While they are places like China and Japan that use prefer other engines, calling Google only an American company is just denying facts.

there are others who try to duplicate the results

Please don't give us that Popper crap. Journals don't generally publish negative results do they. If you want to get published (and you usually do for career and funding reasons) there's a strong motivation to make sure you show what you set out to show. I would trust an area like physics more though, because it's so competitive and tightly focused. Everything else is up for grabs. Replicability of studies is pretty bad elsewhere.

No sorry, you are simply wrong. Your idea of scientists marching goosestep in lockstep, crushing any dissent, and deciding what the truth is and making certain no one strays from it is a ridiculous completel;y incorrect politically based view brought about by politically based people who simply are incapable of understanding that not everyone thinks as they do.

I've worked with scientists for 30 plus years. None of them fit your mold, and since anyone caught falsifying their research is instantly disgraced. Sometimes with terrible results, as when Yoshiki Sasai, the senior researcher who supervised and co-authored a falsified stem cell research paper, committed suicide by hanging himself. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... Haruko Obokata, the scientist who actually committed the fraud, had her doctorates degree rescinded by Waseda University. http://ajw.asahi.com/article/s...

The Italian group was not found engaging in fraud by politicians, Ir was other scientists who found them engaging in fraud.

The Japanese researcher who committed fraud was not found out by politicians, but by other scientists.

Remote sensing, the open access journal, found itself in a mess after Roy Spencer and Danny Braswell published a paper in it named, "On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance” which in title alone raised some red flags since scientists seldom name reports that way, but http://www.realclimate.org/ind... It was debunked soon afterwards, retracted, and important questions raised about the impartiality of the journal raised due to it's benefactors. http://retractionwatch.com/201... Even a pro AGW paper linking Conspiracy ideation to denials has been retracted, scientists will go after anyone.

http://retractionwatch.com/2014/03/21/controversial-paper-linking-conspiracy-ideation-to-climate-change-skepticism-formally-retracted/ All of the scientists I have worked with take this kind of stuff seriously. Deadly seriously.

I don't like this kind of stuff very much. It seems like this administration is willing to get us involved in every conflict on the globe... but not very much involved. Enough to piss all the locals off, but not enough to affect the outcome of whatever is going on. I'd rather see the US adhere to the so-called "Powell Doctrine" (much older than Powell) - stay out of other peoples' business until significant national interests are really at stake. And if you have to go to war you don't do it half-assed.

The target countries specified are part of the larger war being fought against Al-Qaeda and Daesh (IS) :

Somalia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Yemen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.businessinsider.com...

No, I get annoyed because one isn't addressing some key points. Which have been raised numerous times by criticis:

http://bravenewclimate.com/200...

http://www.resilience.org/stor...

http://bravenewclimate.com/201...

http://www.windaction.org/post...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

One of the key points, for instance, is the economical viability of it. Let me simplify the issue: say, you have country 1 and country 2. both have judged the way to go is 100% for renewable energy, like wind. say, there is no wind in country 1. What the authors now say is: no problem, we'll create a smart grid, and that will transport it from country 2.

HOWEVER... what they then don't realise is, that if country 2 has made more or less enough windmills to get going, it CAN NOT sustain a complete other country, unless they have double the amount needed to sustain their own (assuming both countries use roughly the same amount).

Thus they need far more capacity, if they are going to provide another country. However, this also means that for most of the time, there will be a HUGE overcompensation (namely all the times there is wind). Which means half of those windmills will have nothing to do at that time, while yet having been costly to built.

The same goes for country 2 in regard to country 1. Worse, if there is a large weather-front which is wind-poor, it could be that both countries need to get the electricity from a third or fourth country. Which in turn has to provide enough electricity for BOTH countries, then. so even more over-compensating must happen, to deal with this possibility.

Now, I don't know how things go in the USA, but that sure as hell wouldn't work in Europe, where the countries are much smaller, and much more heavily populated. And it would be quite economically unsound to have a windmill-park that is much larger than needed for ones' own demand, just in case another country would fall without.

Now, I read the rosy look that "storage of heat in soil and water" will deal with that, but I just don't think that's plausible. The current best systems, don't let you recuperate the stored energy for more than a couple of hours at best.

I find such claims, and especially the lack of answers and facts in these sort of papers wholly unsatisfactory. There have been many, many valid counterarguments and criticism on it, yet I see it nowhere addressed let alone refuted by the authors of any of those pro-renewable papers.

I just ordered me one of these babies:
  Leaf blower

Propaganda versus actual evidence... http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix... http://www.parikiaki.com/wp-co... http://usvsth3m.com/wp-content... http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-i... http://www2.pictures.zimbio.co...

Oh, and as for the size of the crane you need? This size (right hand side, yellow - the cab is in white for a size comparison). And as for how you transport them? Like this. Same way as they already do.

But I'm still waiting on how you make Mexico pay for it..

While not a fan of Trump, I recognize that as a business person he starts with a more out there proposal which he can then back off from during negotiations... which this sounds to be too.

The only ways I've come up with involve military force or some kind of new tax/tariff etc.. Just sending them a bill marked "over due, please pay now" is unlikely to be effective.

You aren't thinking creatively enough.

If $23 billion is in fact being sent from the US to Mexico... just tack a 20% 'wall' tax and you pay for a $49 billion dollar wall in just 10 years.

Granted, such projections are based on more or less static accounting and discounts any changes in behavior.

Like I said, if you are not willing to recover the cost of the wall by force of arms, all you can do is add a tax or tariff on economic activity.

But as others have pointed out, putting a tax on money transfers to/from Mexico really doesn't solve the problem because then folks would change their behavior and just send cash directly...

But I'm still waiting on how you make Mexico pay for it..

While not a fan of Trump, I recognize that as a business person he starts with a more out there proposal which he can then back off from during negotiations... which this sounds to be too.

The only ways I've come up with involve military force or some kind of new tax/tariff etc.. Just sending them a bill marked "over due, please pay now" is unlikely to be effective.

You aren't thinking creatively enough.

If $23 billion is in fact being sent from the US to Mexico... just tack a 20% 'wall' tax and you pay for a $49 billion dollar wall in just 10 years.

Granted, such projections are based on more or less static accounting and discounts any changes in behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

Read this article, clearly it isn't a male issue. Catfights over handbags and tears in the toilets. When this producer launched a women-only TV company she thought she'd kissed goodbye to conflict... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem...

Why the heck should women get special treatment? Women wanted equal rights. Well news flash women should have the same standards are men do. That means having the balls to deal with idiots who start trouble. Let's see how women treat each other in a women's only company. LOL The company went bankrupt because they were competing at each other, mainly treating them like crap. Catfights over handbags and tears in the toilets. When this producer launched a women-only TV company she thought she'd kissed goodbye to conflict... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem...

In social matters, moreso than anything else, majority rules.
That is unfortunate for those who are not members of the majority.

Poo flinging monkeys rule.
Literally.
Those who are considered more "advanced" at social skills soon dominate a group.

Interesting take on this behaviour:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

It's likely also true for general desktops because of things like CPU instruction sets in Intel's microcode. But for smartphones, a previous article seems to indicate that Apple stands alone: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

Why are the blades exposed? Shouldn't they be covered with a ring shroud at the edge perimeter of the blades, or a mesh of some sort? In two separate incidences, one toddler was insured while another lost an eye.

Are you aware of the danger of a simple mechanical failure? These are raster machines so they scan you by bombarding you with a paper thin plane beam than pans down your body. If that beam stops, even for a few seconds then it would irradiate the cells along that plane with a massive dose. Not "pseudo science".

I thought the TSA retired all of their backscatter X-ray scanners and replaced them with millimeter wave RF scanners?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

All those black or blue solar panels aren't 100% efficient, while they convert 1/5 of the sun's energy they absorb into electricity, the remaining 4/5 is emitted as heat. It nearly like taking those fields and paving them with asphalt, it is going to heat up the local area. Solar panels make sense on areas that are already black like a roof, but taking large undeveloped areas and installing panels you are just creating a large heat island. Let's not forget the reflections they make in latitudes further north where they are angled such that they reflect light into neighboring homes. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

In some case it makes more sense to collect the solar heat directly, rather than covert the light into electricity. Depends what you are going to use it for, and where you want to use it.

I generally wear socks even when in bed in the summer - even when I lived in the south. I've a pretty pointless saying that I use with alarming frequency when someone asks me what I think.

"What do you think?"
"I think most people's feet are ugly and there's not a damned thing they can do about it."

I'm not sure where I picked it up or if it's something I've always thought but I've been saying for probably 35+ years. I have no idea if the dress code is the same way but when I was in school I had to wear socks at all times - except on a beach or at the pool. Then, in the Marines, I was *technically* supposed to wear them at the beach. (I'm not exactly sure how we were supposed to swim and we didn't wear them for our swim quals unless they were full dress quals.)

Hmm.... I dunno? I'm used to wearing socks. I've had more than one girlfriend tell me that I'm odd. I take off my socks and wait a while and then I put them on their feet. They tell me to put my socks back on.

Come to think of it, I think we were supposed to wear our socks still in full-dress quals - some of them. One of them was rather silly but effective. You take off your boots (but not your socks) and your pants. Then you can blow your pants up and make a life-preserver out of them. You tied the ends, cinched a belt (maybe? this was a lot of years ago), and then kept blowing into 'em to keep them inflated.

I can't say that I ever found it particularly useful or maintained such a skill. I guess, I could probably go hit the pool and try and figure it out and make a video. :/ I don't think I've brass berries enough to share said video of me spending an hour treading water while figuring it out. It might just come back? Also, I don't think I have any gabardine fabric pants with me.

I don't think that I've maintained many of the skills learned. I'd be really pissed if someone made me dig a foxhole with an e-tool. I own a tractor. I'm sure as hell not using it as an ax. I own a chainsaw. I might kill someone with it but, really, I'd rather not??? I've got better tools. I could probably still manage a bayonet attack if you don't mind me stopping for a smoke along the way. I'm skinny but lazy as all hell now. If I can drive there then we're good, I'll bayonet them then. I'm pretty sure my MCT is still squared away, that seems to stick with you for life. I can still take out target after target from a prone position. I can drive, that was my MOS for quite a while. But I don't think I can turn my pants into a flotation device.

Heh... I don't need to:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

There you go. Now you can save yourself from drowning by wearing pants.