Slashdot Mirror

Doesn't this scream out for some kind of service for non-life-threatening conditions that's significantly less capable (and cheaper) than our existing ones?

I mean, I can understand why it's not socially optimal to send two trained EMTs and a ambulance full of cutting edge equipment for a caller that cut his hand while slicing a bagel and needs to go to the ER for stitches. The caller isn't going to die in the next 2 hours (note: if the ER is busy they'll logically wait while more dire cases are handled first), all they need is gauze (or if they already grabbed a t-shirt, it'll be fine).

What's more, sending them in a low-capability ambulance frees up the kitted one with a defibrillator and full set of drugs for someone that really needs it. That is, allocating resources efficiently saves money but it also can save lives.

Sadly, I guess we can't get our shit together here so we ad-hoc a solution with Uber, lmao.

You act like race riots and political riots don't happen. Or that domestic terrorism doesn't exist.

As far as immigration goes, Miami has a larger percentage of immigrants than San Jose and note that Los Angeles is not very far behind San Jose. And the violent crime rates of Miami and Los Angeles dwarf that of San Jose. San Jose kind of bucks the trends - I think having billions and billions of dollars in "sillycon valley" makes that happen?

Or perhaps it's not the fact they're immigrant, but whether or not those immigrants are here legally? After all, illegal immigrants are about 3.4% of the population but they overwhelmingly commit most of the violent and drug crime in the US.

Or perhaps it has to do with the race of those immigrants? You do realize that 61.4% of all immigrants in San Jose are from Asia, and Asians have some of the lowest crime rates. So maybe the fact your immigrant neighbors are here legally, making big money, and from ethnic backgrounds that for whatever reason have a much lower crime rate, you're in a unique spot and cannot being to extrapolate your experience to nationwide - because it is so different than most of the rest of the US?

Are there people who really believe Forbes?

http://www.latimes.com/project...

Thank you, that was informative. I looked it up a bit. So in the case of DirectTV v. Inburgia the articles make it sound like the customers could not file a suit. But upon further reading, are you saying that they could file a suit, and they could enjoin in a class action, but they would have to pay $480 to DirectTV for the privilege?
Supreme Court says binding arbitration clauses in consumer contracts trump California law

Remind the makers that the homeless have the power to start massive wildfires.

The residents of Southern California don't need to be reminded of that. The recent Skirball fire that swept through Bel-Air was started by a cooking fire at a homeless encampment.

Ask the washington post, cnn, nbc, or abc news. They've done a bang-up job over the last few years of making fake news all on their own. You might even remember what started it in the current era, it was Dan Rather's "fake but accurate" which offered no proof at all.

Uh no, actually, the current era began with an incident on Dateline. Of course, the fact is, those tanks did result in lots of settled lawsuits so you can be sure it wasn't entirely manufactured.

Then again, concurrent with Dan Rather, we have....real fraud that got hundreds of thousands killed, and you'll never ever bring that up.

But if you want a real conspiracy? Ask yourself why the transmovement is pushing their stuff on pre-teens, and believe that a 3yr old boy or girl "really knows they're a girl or boy." And pushing puberty blockers before they're even old enough to legally engage in sex. Think back if you can, to when you were that young and all the stupid garbage you believed. I can remember wanting to be a train. And you can bet your and my ass, that if your parents were fawning after the transmovement you'd do what they were saying just to make them happy. Why? Because your brain isn't developed enough to understand.

Man, that is a crazy conspiracy Mashiki, and you don't even have a reason to blame the reverse vampires.

Meanwhile, actual reality escapes you.

You know, you wouldn't sound so crazy if you didn't make up such hysterical bullshit, but stuck to facts. Actual provable events.

Not your foaming at the mouth hyperbole.

FYI if you want affordable healthcare, you need it to be at the state level. Not the federal level, even at that I hope you're going to enjoy shortages and healthcare rationing.

Nope, I'm a citizen of the United States, and you may not understand this, but I want healthcare EVERYWHERE in my country, and more to the point, there are some practical considerations that necessitate my ability to cross state lines to get healthcare, as the boundaries of states were not set according to population or economics. A fatal flaw, but what can we do?

Whether it's in Canada, Sweden, France or the UK, we all have rationed healthcare even if it's free.

Everybody everywhere has rationed healthcare. That's because health care resources are not infinite or unlimited.

Letting you buy some healthcare at my expense because you have more money is not a gain.

Oh, and I still have medical insurance here in Canada because that "free healthcare" doesn't cover everything.

That's a choice. Not a necessary element. If you don't like it, write your Prime Minister.

And if you want to see wait times, you can look here. I hope you don't mind waiting 30-50 days for cancer treatment to start, or 150 days for bypass surgery or 11 months to get into a pain management clinic.

And what happe

The rich want us to eat whole, crushed insects while they eat steak.

The rich want us working class slobs to abandon affordable gasoline vehicles, while they drive around in luxury Teslas, partially paid for with generous $7500 subsidies.

The rich warn us of rising oceans, but then buy $9 million mansions on the coastline.

Global warming is an artificial religion cooked up for the purpose of driving down the standard of living for the 99%, while the 1% buy carbon indulgences. Environmentalism is just the velvet glove over the iron fist of misanthropy.

The rich want us to eat whole, crushed insects while they eat steak.

The rich want us working class slobs to abandon affordable gasoline vehicles, while they drive around in luxury Teslas, partially paid for with generous $7500 subsidies.

The rich warn us of rising oceans, but then buy $9 million mansions on the coastline.

Global warming is an artificial religion cooked up for the purpose of driving down the standard of living for the 99%, while the 1% buy carbon indulgences. Environmentalism is just the velvet glove over the iron fist of misanthropy.

What are you talking about? They have lockers. Use them. For schools that don't have lockers either forbid them to bring the phones or come up with a secure box to store them during the day.

You should learn how many schools are removing lockers these days.

I have to ask this. What planet are you living on?

This one, and I'll respond to that in response to your next sentence

Here you go my misandryst compadre: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... A North Carolina man's daughter lied when she accused him of raping her.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... A man's wife falsely accused him of molesting his daughter.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/trav... A woman accused a man of sexually molesting his daughter, while they were on an airplane flight, because she thought his skin was too dark ? I guess she just knew that he was pimping her out or something.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... A social worker accuses a man of molesting his daughter - again, falsely, Apparently mens fault she did that

http://www.latimes.com/local/l... Man falsely accused of molesting a child. http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/man-... Man falsely accused of sexual assault by teenage girl. NOw on the the never occuring false accusations of sexual harassment in the workplace.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... Yup, woman accuses a man of sexual harassment, ruins him.

Here's one that should make you happy a man falsely accused of rape. He hung himself, ismn't that what men deserve? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men...''

https://www.dailywire.com/news... et us not forget The Rolling Stone's shining moment, when what you probably were partying about, when the Rolling stone and "Jacie" a victim of gang rape by the patriarcial members of a Fraternity this was the real dirt on all men ar pigs, and rapid justice was needed. THere was just one little teeny weenie problem.

It was completely false, as in a lie. Don't worry though, after all of the trouble for th eUniversity and th eFraternity, Jackie was never charge - and that is the important thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Perhaps you agree that the problem is so awful that innocent men must be destroyed to get rid of this probelm - after all you wrote in another pose that all men are assholse. Here is a link to re-affirm your cognitive dissonance.https://www.dailywire.com/news/23892/teen-vogue-columnist-claims-shes-not-concerned-if-emily-zanotti

So anyhow - no, it is not likely that men will be falsely accused of sexual harassment. That much is true. Most women just want to get along in life and find love and friends, and happiness, and to avoid being abused. I suspect you disagree based on some of your remarks, but the same is true of most men.

But there is a fair non zero chance of being falsely accused of something that will end your career without any chance of response, and that might get you sent to jail, and have to register as a sex offender.

And society and the legal system is on her side, not yours. Even if you are eventually exonerated, you

As per this one.

Oliver Schmidt, who was general manager of the engineering and environmental office for VW of America

A regional department manager is not a senior executive. Most sources, including the one /. chose, attempt to imply he was a C*O of VP of something, to make the audience think something meaningful and unprecedented has happened. This guy is middle management. Geographically significant middle management, but in a global company, that's still just middle management.

There's an interesting story behind why the number of characters is limited to 160 in SMS.

See here

News flash to Americans: there exists a world outside America.

As I'm sure you know, there are electric vehicle subsidies across Europe and Asia as well. So I'm not sure of your point. (As a side note, if the U.S. subsidies are truly so insignificant, why did Tesla's stock drop like a brick when the U.S. Congress announced its intent to end the subsidies?)

As to your broader thesis, were it really true that EVs are less expensive both off the lot and over their useful life, they would be selling like hotcakes on their own merits and there would be no reason for all those governments to offer all those incentives. So let's try to figure out why your analysis doesn't reflect real-world consumer behavior.

The most glaring issue seems to be your premise that the proper peer comparison is BMW rather than one of many other more cost-effective ICE vehicles. Just taking as true your claim that Tesla comes out on top (while squeezing my eyes shut and trying to pretend I didn't notice that the Tesla base model you're comparing doesn't even have power seats), that may work for the market segment that would have bought a BMW, but is a purely theoretical advantage for someone who isn't shopping for that level of finish in the first place. And I'm going to take a wild guess that you can't use any other EV to make this kind of comparison since all the rest are sustainably priced rather than effectively a loss leader like the Model 3.

A close second is your pairing of the shorter-range Tesla with a BMW with a V4 engine and the longer-range Tesla with a BMW with a V6 -- that's apples and oranges by definition. If my issue is range, the V4 BMW will be just fine. To the extent you're using a few tenths off the 0-60 time to draw that comparison, that's a metric that most people don't care about since they use their cars for things other than street drag racing. You seem to be engaging in the same single-issue myopia that you say people shouldn't with respect to long-range trips.

A third is comparing a vehicle I can actually buy today with one that I can get in a year to a year and a half -- maybe (note that Tesla's own website says that "12-18 months" ends in "mid 2018" and thus apparently hasn't been updated for a while).

A related fourth is assuming that Elon can still keep attracting investor capital and/or shoveling profit from high-end models into the massive money hole that is the Model 3 and won't have to substantially raise the price over the long haul.

But hey -- other than all that, I completely agree that everything is rainbows and unicorns.

Costs will have to rise much faster for that to happen.

If you like citizens better than non-citiziens, I guess I'd ask why. They're people, we're people, where you're born should make about as much difference as your sign.

But that's beside the point. This is what we eat. Run this experiment for nationalism on an industry less vital than food. Try it with the restaurant industry first? See if getting rid of undocumented workers makes wages rise enough that comparatively lazy citizens will bus tables enough for the industry to survive.

The Obama administration had 8 years to do something better, and they didn't get it done.

Get what done? Why would they bother with the barking Chihuahua that is a non-relevant pest which ~90% of Americans forgot about until Bush the Lesser decided to add them to his pointless Axis of Evil speech?

After 10 months the Trump administration already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than the Obama administration accomplished, and Trump's team did it with the United Nations and diplomacy, including diplomacy with allied nations. That must be a bitter pill to swallow.

Yeah, here's a hint, all those sanctions have done is kill off millions of North Koreans, you might as well praise Trump for reverting back to treating Cuba under an Embargo, when the real accomplishment would be doing the opposite. You should stop taking poison pills and praising the taste.

Is the "magic" fading for you?

Is the gaslighting getting too much for you? It seems to be too much for Trump.

You don't somehow think that all of the missiles that North Korea has been firing were somehow summoned by magic since the start of the Trump administration, do you? They were obviously being worked on during the Obama administration. What we are seeing is the flowering of Obama's work. (Or do you blame Her?)

For what? North Korea wasting their limited resources on a tool that's only useful when you want to provoke an ill-tempered boob who will go off on freak out over them, then erroneously claim to send an aircraft carrier to deal with it?

So what you're saying is that at best, he's par for the course. "Par" is not what we were told to expect.

Trump hasn't even been in office for a year yet and he already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than Obama achieved, has China cooperating, and missile defense is getting a big boost in funding.

Except it turns out those sanctions are a failed policy that only harms the innocent North Korean people, China is, as usual, lying, and putting money into missile defense has been a favorite way to waste tax dollars since the Reagan years.

He seems to be making progress that Obama couldn't.

So far, your examples are only repeated examples of waste, fraud, and failure.

That's not a common definition of progress. Admittedly, to somebody trying to sabotage America, it would seem different.

Lets see what happens between now and the end of the eighth year of the Trump administration.

Let's see what happens between now and the end of the next year.

I'd say this year, but eh, you won't have any results.

Trump is doing a magnificent job. One of the all-time great brains. His tough talk has really put Kim Jong-un in his place.

The Obama administration had 8 years to do something better, and they didn't get it done. After 10 months the Trump administration already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than the Obama administration accomplished, and Trump's team did it with the United Nations and diplomacy, including diplomacy with allied nations. That must be a bitter pill to swallow.

Is the "magic" fading for you?

We're gonna turn into Portugal, and it's going to be a big fuckin mess.

Let me introduce you to T-Mobile's Binge On feature, which apparently is perfectly acceptable under the outgoing rules.

In summary: on capped mobile data plans, video streaming at 480p will not count against the cap, as long as the content is from a list of 100 streaming service providers. In the Portuguese version, you pay $6 for 10GB of additional data in the type you want.

We're gonna turn into Portugal, and it's going to be a big fuckin mess.

> This balance was moved with flights where sharp objects and liquids are banned.

You mean 9/11 being used as the excuse for the complete and total joke of Theater Security Logic or Security Retards ?

The bigger crime is that the sheeple do fuck all about it.

Yet a professor of nutrition managed to lose 27 pounds eating mostly sugar and junk food - just to prove the point that calorie count is what matters.

And your point being? If people choose to ignore the warnings because they're smarter than the experts, why should everyone else scramble to do anything for them?

You probably have that cute saying, 'Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part', hanging around somewhere. This is no different. People have been warned about the dangers of drug use for close to 100 years yet, instead of heeding those warnings, people continue to ignore them because it's nothing but the government trying to prevent them from having a good time.

Now, with the ability to do your own biohacking, with no controls or safety protocols in place, people are being warned not to try this at home.

In both cases, after ignoring the warnings, people die yet for some odd reason, we're supposed to bend over backwards, spending our time and resources, to protect them. Remember that guy who was essentially liquefied at Yellowstone Park last year? And why did it happen? Because he and his sister thought it would be fun to ignore all the posted warnings about the dangers of the hot springs. As a result, park rangers had to risk their lives to a) find out if the body was still there and b) try to recover whatever was left (effectively zero).

The same with this. If people choose to ignore the warnings and injure or kill themselves, they have only themselves to blame. We shouldn't have to pay the price for their stupidity.

It isn't just a matter of covering the cost of theft, it is a matter of safeguarding the lives of yourself and your employees.

FBI crime statistics show clear patterns among different demographics for the rate of violent crime and armed robbery. Choosing to ignore these patterns is to invite greater risk.

The remarkable story of Lance Thomas is an example of what a high-value small goods store can experience when located in the wrong area.

Hollywood is rallying behind the fugitive filmmaker. Top filmmakers are signing a pro-Polanski petition, Whoopi Goldberg says the director didn't really commit rape, and Debra Winger complains "the whole art world suffers" in such arrests.

More than 100 industry leaders and prominent authors -- including directors Martin Scorsese, David Lynch, Michael Mann, Mike Nichols, Woody Allen and Neil Jordan -- have signed a petition asking that Polanski be released from Swiss custody. "Filmmakers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision," the petition says.

According to this article, that's not true. The original research apparently didn't do a good job of identifying conservatives or liberals. More recent research finds that political affiliation has no impact on the amount of giving, but rather it impacts the type of giving. Conservatives are more likely to donate to churches and liberals are more likely to donate to secular charities. In the end, that reduces the impact of a lot of conservative charitable giving because around 75% of church donations used to maintain the church. On the other hand, secular charities should be spending 75% or more of the raised funds on the actual charitable work.

After Trump pulled out of Paris there was a worldwide rush to see who could virtue signal the hardest about the environment, but unfortunately for China it looks like they forgot that actually doing things can cause more economic damage than they're worth. They should've stuck to snarky tweets or pointless 'summits'.

https://www.thrillist.com/trav...
7 Countries Where You're Most Likely to Get Kidnapped

Brazil

Around 1,000 kidnappings in 2012.

Where you're getting kidnapped: Mostly in major cities like Sao Paolo and Rio de Janiero.

Whoâ(TM)s getting kidnapped: Wealthy businessmen, their family members, and -- in an odd trend a few years back -- soccer moms. Or at least the mothers of professional soccer players. Tourists, for the most part, are left alone.

Whoâ(TM)s doing the kidnapping: Mostly poor residents of the citiesâ(TM) notorious favelas.

How they're kidnapping you: Unlike drug-motivated kidnappings, almost all abductions in Brazil are financially motivated. Which means if you're âoeexpress kidnappedâ and the abductors realize youâ(TM)re worth more than your ATM card, theyâ(TM)ll keep you until a ransom is paid.

How to avoid it: Kidnappers admit to targeting people who are both well dressed and appear not to speak Portuguese. So instead of dropping $500 on that Gucci shirt, perhaps put it towards Rosetta Stone.

http://articles.latimes.com/19...

DUQUE DE CAXIAS, Brazil â" Cleiton, 12, used to steal from the stores in a shopping gallery near the center of Duque de Caxias, one of the grimy, violent suburbs on the sprawling northern outskirts of Rio de Janeiro. He belonged to the ragged legion of street kids who live by their wits and sometimes die by the gun.

Cleiton's killers caught up with him one night last January as he slept on a sidewalk near the gallery. A boy called A.G., who knew Cleiton, tells the story in a few words.

"He was sleeping," A.G. said, "and they filled his face with bullets."

Cleiton's death was not an isolated incident. Hundreds of deprived and delinquent Brazilian minors are killed every year.

According to people who monitor the situation, an alarming number of youngsters are killed by "extermination groups"--death squads bent on cleaning up crime-plagued areas.

Death squads have been at work for years in Brazil, but concern has risen in the past year because of the number of youngsters being killed, not only in Rio but also in other urban areas, including Sao Paulo and Recife.

----
You were saying Mr. Anonymous tough guy?

Extreme poverty and lack of opportunity and social welfare programs means young children crime so common that death squads kill hundreds of them per year. Can you think what you have to be like to walk up to a sleeping homeless 12 year old and shoot them in the head without personal provocation?

Absolutely all political views are fungible and will be changed to meet the demands of defending or attacking whoever needs to be defended or attacked in a given moment. This isn't partisan, it's universal. A lifelong commie Berniebro-type may suddenly find themselves defending massive corporations if it means opening up an angle to attack Trump, or on the other hand he may start voting Trump and exploring white identitarianism after one too many idiots call him a nazi white supremacist for drinking milk or posting decade-old frog memes. On the other side, a conservative may flip his position on Obamacare provisions depending on whether Obama's name is attached, and a limited-government type may openly endorse a stealth coup by unelected bureaucrats just because he doesn't like who was elected.

Politics is about tribalism, not issues. Hating or liking someone is more important than agreeing or disagreeing with them. Once you realize this, all political discourse becomes infinitely more understandable and less enraging (or, at least, enraging in different ways). Apparent doublethink or hypocrisy aren't logical flaws that can be used to defeat arguments, they're merely irrelevant side effects of the basic rules of the game.

Of course, we also need to charge drivers the full cost of the roads

If drivers were charged the real cost of the roads, trucks would face a very large increase in costs. Cars do almost zero damage to roads, while almost all the wear and tear is due to trucks.

"The federal government has estimated that a 40-ton, 18-wheel truck causes the same damage as 9,600 midsize cars."
http://beta.latimes.com/opinio...

I never said that they didn't have internal passageways. They are minuscule compared to the volume of the Great Pyramid. Here's an article discussing the latest voids Compare the volume of the chamber vs the pyramid. Most of the pyramid is solid rock with a little left over.

Philippines, the call center capital of the world, since 2010.

Um, John walker spied on the US Navy for like 16 years and only got caught because his ex wife turned him in....

Umm yourself, muchacho. Seriously, you aren't even arguing the same thing I am. I said that Occam's razor was in effect, that A group with Kremlin ties that had root level access to a computer that some dumfuk illegally stored classified data on would be interested in that data, and would send that data up the line. I mean I've been trying to stop picking on Russian trolls here, but that should be obvious to anyone who isn't simply supporting the FSI or FIS.

And that is in opposition to the rather complicated idea that another poster - guruevi - wrote:

"Nobody has ever said the Russians had the malware. Russian government involvement is a red herring spun to distract you from the Russia-Clinton-Obama inconvenience."

That, Friend, is a conspiracy theory. Although it shouldn't be necessary, my definition of conspracy theories dovetails with the Wikipedia entry of the same -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory . From the article:

A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes an unwarranted conspiracy, generally one involving an illegal or harmful act carried out by government or other powerful actors. Conspiracy theories often produce hypotheses that contradict the prevailing understanding of history or simple facts. The term is a derogatory one......conspiracy theories rely on the view that the universe is governed by design, and embody three principles: nothing happens by accident, nothing is as it seems, and everything is connected. Another common feature is that conspiracy theories evolve to incorporate whatever evidence exists against them, so that they become, as Barkun writes, a closed system that is unfalsifiable, and therefore "a matter of faith rather than proof".

And you seem to think that I for some reason don't think there were ever any American spies working for Russia? How odd. And in a fit of irony, you get all insulting about it when you haven't figgered it out. Reread both the thread and what a conspiracy theory is.

Now if you are actually following the conversation, and want to make a point, Here's what you need to do with your argument:

Show how John Walker was a red herring or a complicated and misleading and widespread conspiracy.

The same with the Rosenbergs and all of your other examples.

Now there is a conspiracy theory is in regards to to Rosenberg's of which Alan Dershowitz claims they were framed. http://articles.latimes.com/19...

But that's into grassy knoll, Ted Cruz's father being involved in the Kennedy Assassination and chemtrail and Pizzagate and water spray rainbows and faked moon landing territory, and gets a real weird twist by claiming that the Rosenberg's were both guilty of their crime, and framed.

So unless you can show how those are actual conspiracy theories involved in teh commission of the crimes, you are just wasting both of our times. Buh-Bye.

We're not allowed to sue them anymore, so it's not like anything bad can happen to them: SAD TROMBONE

It's almost as if Trump is incredibly corrupt and giving massive amounts of money to his friends and supporters for doing nothing.

Drain the swamp was not about getting rid of lobbyists and corrupt deals. It was always about getting rid of competent government employees. That's why just about everyone he's nominated for cabinet jobs are literally anti-qualified (FFS Rick Perry campaigned on eliminating the DoE and now he's the DoE secretary). Bannon fully admitted it too when he (illiterately) said the goal is the "deconstruction of the administrative state."

when a company loses business, they lower the damn prices.... but NOOOOOO not pay television services. they gouge the remaining subscribers to try to "make up" the lost profits instead.

It's like insurance pricing. You need a large pool of healthy people paying premiums to support the smaller pool of sick(er) people using services. In this case, the smaller the pool of people forced to also pay for things, like Disney requiring providers to carry ESPN (and other Disney networks) in order to carry The Disney Channel, the higher the prices for the rest of us (who don't give a shit about ESPN1-n).

For the record, even the oil companies are saying that climate change is a major concern. Being to the right of those guys on an environmental issue really takes a particular kind of dumb-ass.

How do you know they weren't just toadying up to Obama?

It's not like Obama wouldn't use his "pen and phone" to illegally funnel billions of dollars of federal funds to companies advancing his agenda...

Federal judge rules Obamacare is being funded unconstitutionally

The Constitution says "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law," Collyer noted, but the administration has continued to pay billions to insurers for their extra cost of providing health coverage.

"Paying [those] reimbursements without an appropriation thus violates the Constitution," she wrote. "Congress is the only source for such an appropriation, and no public money can be spent without one."

Maybe i'm just paranoid (most likely) but...does this look like preparing the public for a planned nuclear war?

More likely Sec Energy Perry's attempt to get subsidies for nuke and coal plants. But I also wonder about the WIPP The WIPP is a DOE project. Maybe Perry wants to change the standards to make underground storage less dangerous.

Good catch, that link pointed to the earlier failure.

Here's a link to the failure on the pad http://spacenews.com/spacex-narrows-down-cause-of-falcon-9-pad-explosion which was attributed to a helium tank failure http://www.latimes.com/nation/ct-spacex-explosion-20170102-story.html, or http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a23652/spacex-falcon-explosion-cause-helium-loading/.

Sorry I inadverently linked to a different failure that was linked to a different helium tank failure.

Of course it's falsifiable, but you have to prove the evidence presented is not true.

* * *

http://www.latimes.com/nation/...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics...

* * *

There are emails . . . There are receipts.

Um, ok. Unsurprisingly, neither of the articles you linked show any of the actual emails or receipts you claim to be evidence of "a deal to exchange the lifting of sanctions for campaign help." In fact, the original WaPo article your ABC News link mentions says exactly the opposite -- that the new emails bolster the Russian lawyer's story that the meeting had nothing at all to do with campaign help:

It could offer evidence backing up the Russian lawyer’s claims that she was meeting with Trump Jr. solely to discuss a 2012 law despised by the Kremlin that imposed financial sanctions on wealthy Russians as punishment for human rights abuses.

If there's some specific "evidence" you'd like to specifically direct me to and specifically say why you feel it proves the deal you mention, I'm very happy to talk about it. But I'm frankly not holding my breath given your well-established tendency to... er, embellish.

It's not at all clear to me why this non-falsifiable

Of course it's falsifiable, but you have to prove the evidence presented is not true.

That's how evidence works: The prosecution (or scientist) presents the evidence, and it is proven up by a court (or peers). The defense can try to cast doubt on that evidence (falsification) or on witnesses. A prosecution (in this case a political prosecution) is not a hypothesis.

We're past hypothesis now. Hypotheses can be falsifiable (or not). We're now at the proving up stage. There is hard evidence that Russia endeavored to influence the 2016 election in favor of Donald Trump. We have hard evidence of meetings between Trump campaign officials and agents of the Russian government where a deal to exchange the lifting of sanctions for campaign help. And this is only one small part of the entire Russian effort to illegally influence the election.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics...

This is not fake news. There are emails from Trump officials about the meetings and testimony from Russian officials about the intent. There are receipts. If there's some part of that you believe is false, you are free to falsify.

I recall the typical lifespan of a car is about 10 years.

According to http://www.latimes.com/busines... the average age of a car on the US in 2016 was 11.6 years and that number has been creeping upwards over recent decades.

Furthermore most cars are scrapped not because they can't be repaired but because the cost of the repairs are more than the value of the repaired car.

If people really want ICE cars and the government bans new ICE cars then the logical outcome is that the value of used cars will increase and it will become viable to repair cars that would otherwise have been scrapped.

Yes, enlightenment is good. Single-payer in CA isn't dead; it's tabled until it's done correctly - http://www.latimes.com/politic...

Judicial Watch, Inc. appears to be rather biased, as evidenced by the below:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com...
http://www.snopes.com/dhs-quie...
http://www.politifact.com/pers...
I'd take their filings with a grain of salt...or two or three.

While they couldn't use propaganda as overtly racist, crack was preferred by poor black people, while powder cocaine was preferred by rich white people. So thinly veiled racist propaganda led to requiring 100x as much powder cocaine to trigger the same mandatory prison terms as crack.

This contradicts the historical record. The Black Leaders of the time were the ones calling for the stiff penalties due to out of control crime. For example gangs were massively prevalent in the 80s - urban homicide rates corroborate this.

Cite 0
Cite 1
Cite 2
Cite 3

I've always wondered how many people would be driving electric cars if it wasn't for the state/Fed subsidies (rebates) or other benefits like Leaf's free charging. Though Elon Musk, as of 2015 had benefited from almost $5B in Gov't subsidies.

I see people driving $100k Teslas, and they're not doing it to be green. It's the new status symbol of wealth (used to be BMW/Benz).

In the US you have a mass shooting with 4 or 5 involved nearly every week.

Do you have any sources to support that claim? The person that you're arguing with posted a source that indicates that you're wrong.

"If you look at the record for the US, we've had 37 mass shooting with 5 more killed, in the last 30 years."

This whole interference thing is a joke. So what, how many elections has the US interfered with in the last 100 years. Probably can't count it with all your fingers and toes. Heck Billy boy meddled in the Russian elections for Yeltsin during his presidency. This article from the LA Times might shed some light on some of out meddling. http://www.latimes.com/nation/... The witch hunts are all show to distract the public and the Presidency from what is happening around the world.

My point is you said there was like one or two in the last 30 years. You are off by an order of magnitude. If you look at the record for the US, we've had 37 mass shooting with 5 more killed, in the last 30 years. So it's not that different. And again, an order of magnitude different than you state.

• Your income is quickly your faucet fills a bucket.
• Your expenses are how quickly the water drains out of a hole at the bottom of the bucket.
• Your wealth is how much water is in the bucket.

Add to that:

• Income taxes are water diverted straight from the faucet (reduces the flowrate of water into the bucket).
• Sales taxes are a slight enlarging of a hole at the bottom, increasing the flowrate of water out of the bucket by a small percentage.

The key point here is the income taxes. They're subtracted as the water enters the bucket, before it's turned into wealth. In other words, wealth has already been taxed. If you want to tax rich people, you can accomplish the exact same thing just by raising the income tax rate on rich people (because they control the government).

On top of this, the amount of water in the bucket depends on three factors - income flowrate, expenses flowrate, and how much time this bucket has been there. A wealth tax based on the amount of wealth is a conflation of all three of these factors, and thus cannot distinguish between them. People who've been alive longer would unfairly have to pay more wealth tax. People who've reduced their expenses because they believe in saving up a nest egg would unfairly have to pay more wealth tax. The wealth tax would be lowest (as a percentage) on people who live paycheck-to-paycheck not because they have to, but because they blow their entire paycheck every month on toys, entertainment, and frivolities. I'll repeat - two people with identical incomes can owe very different wealth taxes - the one who saves will owe more wealth tax than the one who spends their entire paycheck every month.

A wealth tax basically says if you act financially responsibly and save up money for a rainy day, you will be punished by owing more taxes. It's an unfair and fiscally irresponsible tax, favored only by people who either don't know better, or deliberately wish to increase society's dependence on government safety nets so they can gain more power.

(Excise taxes, like property taxes, are technically a wealth tax. But they serve as an incentive for people to act fiscally responsibly, not a disincentive. Say someone owns a farm and the surrounding area has become developed into an area of higher economic activity. The increase in his property tax encourages him to find a more economically efficient use of the land than farming, or to sell it to someone else who will. Unless the people have passed a law preventing the property tax from appreciating to reflect increasing value of land. Then the farmer can stick around for decades, using now-valuable land for an economically inefficient activity, driving up costs for all his neighbors.)

The problem is that Nestle doesn't follow the law:
http://www.latimes.com/busines...
"Environmental groups sued the U.S. Forest Service on Tuesday, alleging that the agency has allowed Nestle Waters to draw water from a creek in the San Bernardino Mountains under a permit that expired more than 25 years ago.

The company, owner of the Arrowhead bottled water brand, has drawn millions of gallons from the west fork of Strawberry Creek under a permit it apparently acquired in 2002.

At a time when residents have been asked to cut back water use during the record-setting drought, the diversion for commercial bottling to consumers once again has put Nestle in the cross hairs of the state's water squabbles. The company faces scrutiny over its water withdrawal activities elsewhere in the state."