Slashdot Mirror

The British were building warships with aluminum superstructures to save weight, but lost one to a fire during the Falkland Islands war.

Two corrections.

First of all, it is not easy to burn aluminum. Nowhere near as easy as magnesium. Aluminum melts (at 933.47 K) long before it burns.

Second, the ships that the British Navy lost during the Falklands War were not made of aluminum.

New York Times story and responses:

New York Times story: Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace Quote: "The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers to get them to achieve its ever-expanding ambitions." Another quote: "The internal phone directory instructs colleagues on how to send secret feedback to one another's bosses. Employees say it is frequently used to sabotage others." (New York Times story posted Aug 15, 2015. There are 5,858 comments!)

Response from Amazon: What The New York Times Didn't Tell You by Jay Carney, "Senior Vice President for Global Corporate Affairs at Amazon. Previously, he served as White House Press Secretary and spent 20 years as a reporter for TIME." (Posted on medium.com, October 19, 2015.)

Response from the New York Times: Dean Baquet Responds To Jay Carney's Medium Post by Dean Baquet, Executive Editor, The New York Times. Quote: "As I said in the beginning, this story [the New York Times story linked above] was based on dozens of interviews. And any reading of the responses leaves no doubt that this was an accurate portrait." (Posted on medium.com, October 19, 2015.)

Business Insider stories:

Amazon employees on 'ludicrously comical' NYT story: 'Some people don't belong here, maybe' Quote: "She said she enjoys the culture that pushes her to work harder." (Aug. 15, 2015)

Employees confess the worst parts about working for Amazon (Aug. 21, 2015)

Amazon abuse is an old story. From 4 years ago:

Atlantic Magazine: "... 8-12 hours shifts with no overtime for $8.72 an hour." In the Wake of Protest: One Woman's Attempt to Unionize Amazon Quote: "As that first month dragged on, I tried to tell myself I was organizing, but what I was really doing was driving across town in a beater car working 8-12 hours shifts with no overtime for $8.72 an hour." Another quote: "Time magazine named Jeff Bezos 'Person of The Year.' Yet Amazon had failed so far to show a profit and stockholder pressure was on. In January, five days before fourth-quarter earnings were to be published, Bezos laid off around 150 workers, nearly 2 percent of its workforce, and posted its first-ever gains. I was hired the following week." Another quote: "He was the one who told me Bezos was going to close the Seattle warehouse. It was too expensive to run. Huge fulfillment centers were springing up around the country. In Nevada, they were getting $5.15 an hour and people had to work 12-hour shifts, five days a week."(Dec. 12, 2011, 4 years ago)

Propaganda and patsies....

At least 7 of the 19 so-called 9/11 suicide pilots have been confirmed to be alive and well. They had their passports stolen. There has been zero evidence that Muslims carried out 9/11. That was a lie that was propagated by war criminal and terrorist supporter George "Dubya" Bush (and company).

Falsely accused hijacker Abdul Rahman Said al-Omari was even given a formal apology:

RIYADH, Sept 17 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - U.S. officials in Riyadh offered Abdul Rahman Said al-Omari an official apology in the presence of Saudi interior ministry officials for including his name among the list of suspects in the U.S. terrorist attacks, news agencies reported Monday. Original story here (Arabic)

In fact, Osama Bin Laden was never listed on the FBI's most wanted list for 9/11 because the FBI had no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to 9/11.

It is because of 9/11 that this whole bogus "war on (of?) terrorism" and Muslim hatred began. Who benefits from it? USA and Israel. Partners in crime.

Most of these other terrorist attacks are also false flag operations perpetrated by the same people and blamed on Muslims.

The 7/7 bombings in London, incredibly, were planned as crisis management exercises the night before they occured. They just happened to pick the same subway stations and the same times as the terrorists! What a freakin' coincidence! Simply, WOW!

The war on terror is a global sham designed to shift the blame from the real terrorists to the Muslim people and usher in a fascist New World Order, as announced by "Poppy" Bush on 9/11, 1990.

Please turn off FOX news and take your xenophobic, racist b.s. and stick it where the sun don't shine.

> There must be nearer amusement parks.

Banksy's Dismaland? http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08...

Financially, it is expensive to continue to store the fuel local to the reactors, though safe.

The utility companies were told that they would have a place to store the fuel in exchange for a tax assessed per kWh for decades. When that money didn't materialize in an actual place to store fuel, the utilities sued the federal government. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04...

Then again the entire idea of "nuclear waste" boils down to politics and general misunderstanding of nuclear engineering in the population (but you really can't expect the public to understand nuclear engineering topics I guess). If we could lift the moratorium on reprocessing and create regulations favorable for new types of reactors then the "waste" issue would drastically change.

The reason I would suggest GGP talk to a psychologist is because somehow GGP has the delusion that there's anybody who would rather have a trans woman as an employee.

Employers actively discriminate against male-to-female transsexuals. Female-to-male transsexuals reported no loss of earnings, and increased respect.

Before that sex change think about your next paycheck

You might expect that anybody who has had a sex change, or even just cross-dresses on occasion, would suffer a wage cut because of social stigmatization. Wrong, or at least partly wrong. Turns out it depends on the direction of the change: the study found that earnings for male-to-female transgender workers fell by nearly one-third after their gender transitions, but earnings for female-to-male transgender workers increased slightly.

and

Ben Barres, a female-to-male transgender neuroscientist at Stanford, found that his work was more highly valued after his gender transition. “Ben Barres gave a great seminar today,” a colleague of his reportedly said, “but then his work is much better than his sister’s.”

Dr. Barres, of course, doesn’t have a sister in academia.

poverty, etc

3) Poverty is a massive problem in the trans community.

Transgender respondents were nearly four times more likely to have a household income of less than $10,000, compared to the general population, Injustice at Every Turn found. They were unemployed at twice the rate of the general population, or roughly between 10 percent and 14 percent throughout 2008, the year the survey was conducted.

Trans Americans 4 times more likely to be living in poverty

In one of its most striking findings, MAP and CAP report that trans people are nearly four times more likely to have a yearly household income below $10,000 (15 percent vs. 4 percent of the nontrans population). The numbers go up if a trans individual is a person of color, with Asian American/Pacific Islander and Latino trans folks nearly six times as likely to be living in poverty as their API or Latino cisgender counterparts.

Maybe they see us as a threat because many of us are forced to either work for (much) lower wages or work the streets.

,erb,was hardly the most popular author when new

Untrue. In his day, Burroughs was a best seller. Conservative estimates are that he sold 30 million books, while more generous estimates range up to 60 million. John Carter was popular but never his biggest seller--that, of course, was Tarzan. I note that Disney's animated Tarzan movie did quite well for itself.

; 2. Polls take non-landline owners into account. Typically, around 1/3 of respondents for most polls are on cellphones.

Citiation please.

Example: phone poll, 350 of 1000 respondents are on cellphones:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MS...

The only _legal_ way for a polling organisation to make contact with a mobile phone owner is to have the mobile initiate the contact or explicitly invite the call.

You misunderstand the law. It's legal to make unsolicited calls to cellphones, but you have to do it manually. The prohibition is only on automated dialers. So, it costs quite a bit more, but you can still do it, and the quality pollsters do. See the discussion below, about halfway through the piece. The biggest challenge that cellphones bring is higher cost.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06...

sugar in nearly all processed foods - Yes, but who's forcing you to buy processed foods? Vote with your wallet and don't buy processed foods. Simple.

I really hate this argument. Like the only option is to 'not buy processed foods' right. How about speaking up about the unhealthy stranglehold the American Sugar Industry has?

You know, the same Sugar Industry that lobbied against introducing a 10% hard limit to added sugar, which is a standard worldwide. Or more recently, lobbied hard against placing a limit on the size of drinks. Hell, they're big enough and powerful enough to keep keep foreign competitors at bay, when other industries are opening the doors to foreign competition.

What do you mean? Millions more people own guns now than they did 30 years ago,

Wrong. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03...

and violence crimes of all kinds, including those involving guns, have been going steadily down, and are down 46% since the 1990's. .

That's because there are less people owning guns. See how it works now?

Funny, there's no actual link to this "old article" yet you are quoting directly from it. Where is this article actually at?

Sorry, I messed-up the A-href formatting and posted too quickly. Here is the article I was referring to.

And perhaps seeing how the banks practically destroyed the housing market with fraudulent mortgages

No, they didn't — the government did, when it forced the banks to lower their requirements for the borrowers' creditworthiness. The Social Justice Warriors, who understood every rejected mortgage-application of a minority applicant as evidence of racism , caused the crisis. They presumed, those supposedly "greedy" banks were willingly refusing money-making opportunities for racist reasons...

perhaps they do need to be nationalized

Nationalization is not a cure, it is the next stage of the decease. But thank you for admitting, that Sanders' fans like yourself would support nationalization of some industries. Obviously, not only are the two politicians alike, their supporters are similar as well.

Somehow that person always manages to get ahold of several guns. As long as that keeps happening you get to hear this over and over again until you come up with a better solution.

Maybe the solution is to NOT disarm the victims? Nobody seems to commit mass murders at police stations or NRA headquarters.

A mass shooter passed a background check, so we need universal background checks. Yeah, makes sense to me.

Oh, really?

So, tell me what "sensible" gun laws are?

A mass shooter passed a background check, so clearly we need universal background checks, to close the "gun show loophole." However, if you read about where mass shooters get their guns, NONE of them used a gun show.

http://www.nytimes.com/interac...

OK, including more mental health information might be a good idea, I concede that, but that goes against medical privacy laws that Bill Clinton himself signed into law.

Also, background checks will not stop illegal gun sales out of the back of a trunk. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, but some of the worst crime. How well has that worked out? Since criminal already own illegal guns, what additional laws would help? Make the guns MORE illegal?

Simply stated, if somebody actually came up with a law that would actually have in impact on crime without presenting an undue burden on honest people, I would have NO problem with it. However, NOBODY has come up with such a law.

Obama wants to keep people on the "no fly list" from buying guns. Yeah, a secret list that puts people in there without due process, and no legal process for getting off. No due process, no appeal, and guilty until proven innocent. Classy.

That said, Trump is not a career politician and can run his own campaign financially.

Although he doesn't.

"Mr. Trump continues to assert that he is paying for his campaign. In an interview on CNN on Wednesday, he suggested that his financial independence allows him to speak his mind, unlike typical politicians who rely on campaign donors.

But Mr. Trump has become one of those politicians.

Early in his presidential bid, Mr. Trump did supply most of his campaign’s money, providing it with about $1.8 million in loans.

But in the quarter that ended Sept. 30, Mr. Trump raised about $3.7 million in individual contributions, according to a filing with the Federal Election Commission. His own contributions in that period totaled about $101,000.

In a news release, his campaign said it had received nearly 74,000 “unsolicited donations” during the quarter with an average contribution of about $50.

At a rally in Florida in October, Mr. Trump recalled how a woman sent him $7.50 along with a four-page letter.

“How do you send the seven dollars and fifty cents back?” Mr. Trump said. “You can’t. You can’t. There’s no letter you can write. It’s true. There’s no letter that you can write to that woman to say, ‘We don’t want your money.’ ”

Mr. Trump has noted that unlike his rivals, he has no wealthy-donor "super PACs" supporting him, which he says frees him from the influence of special interests. But as for his own campaign operation, as of Sept. 30, donations from people other than Mr. Trump had accounted for about two-thirds of the total funding for his presidential bid."

http://www.nytimes.com/interac...

Many people I know have no Facebook profile whatsoever.

Sure they do, they just haven't claimed it yet. Facebook compiles as much information as it can to build dossiers about people who haven't signed up, and that "shadow profile" can be linked to their account if they do make one. The Belgian government recently banned this practice, but the rest of us are stuck with it for now.

This article has answers for you. Roughly, beef takes 40-80 times the water per pound than crops, but that the total water use. Pork requires roughly 11 times the "blue water" (from lakes, rivers, and aquifers) than veggies, beef about 13 time (in California).

You have unstated the difficulty in dismantling a nuclear plant. If was as easy as you claim, why would it cost about $100 million and take 5 years? There is no way that a wind farm would be that hard.

Wind turbines have the ultimate recyclability: reuse. You could easily relocate the entire wind farm to another site with less vocal neighbors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04...

http://www.npr.org/sections/mo...

It is clear that the image of a static 1 and 99 percent is largely incorrect. The majority of Americans will experience at least one year of affluence at some point during their working careers. (This is just as true at the bottom of the income distribution scale, where 54 percent of Americans will experience poverty or near poverty at least once between the ages of 25 and 60).

This isn't exactly a secret either; this has generally been known for a long time, Hirschl and Rank just put some recent numbers on it.

You're claim that it's only been brought up by Fox is false.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12...

And, your claim that it made the process faster is false. I personally went through the fiancee visa program with my ex-wife. It was long and tedious, and that was back in '88. Syrian refugees have already been settling in the U.S. faster.

Have onboard Sync send emails with truck's GPS location to IhateTerrorists@CIA.gov every day

But why? The CIA already knows where many of them are- they literally sponsor them or their allies:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
http://www.reuters.com/article...
http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
Just google for more: https://www.google.com/search?...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
All this because the US Gov wanted to destroy/weaken the Syrian Gov:
http://www.theguardian.com/com...
http://www.washingtonsblog.com...

LMAO Non paywalled link: Wade Hoyt, Toyota's spokesman in New York, who put the best corporate spin on the situation this week. "It is not our proudest product placement," he said. "But it shows that the Taliban are looking for the same qualities as any truck buyer: durability and reliability." http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11... http://www.bloombergview.com/a... Top Gear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

citation needed.

i have citations that say the opposite

This in no way "says the opposite". In fact it reinforces the point that some people (like the good people at Amoco) chose a safer (and probably more costly) means of increasing the octane rating. The rest of the industry just kept pushing the cheap toxic lead solution.

Interestingly as late as 1983 it was a personal priority for Reagan's first EPA head, Anne Gorsuch Burford, to try to remove all caps on lead content in gasoline, at at time that the evidence of harm was staggering.

Pay attention this time if you previously ignored me:

First comes registration, "so we know who's doing it" and "so we can hold 'bad actors' accountable" ... CHECK!

Then comes fees, "so the people involved pay for the cost of registration/regulation" ... CHECK! (after February, registration will cost money, and over the years ahead that price will rise to cover the bureaucracy that will grow)

With those things in place, the new drone bureaucracy will need something to do to justify its existence, so rules and rules and more rules will be created and horror stories will be pushed by the agency in an effort to propagandize voters and congress into supporting licensing. Sure, propaganda to push policy is illegal in the US, but the current administration just had to admit that its EPA has been illegally doing it, and of course when government breaks the actual LAW (not just some "rule") NOBODY goes to jail.

Note: the new rules call for thousands of dollars in penalties and up to 3 years jail time for violations already... these guys are wasting no time with the thumb screws.

After licensing, there will be criminal penalties for flying without a pilot's license of some sort and for operating an unregistered drone.

There WILL be seizures of drones at some point from some users who were harming NOBODY, just violating some rule. There's no reason to register a thing other than to be able to find and take the thing.

Of course, as usual, all of this will be just FINE with big business who will happily champion every new regulation and restriction because they will have the financial and legal power to navigate the bureaucracy AND it will help squelch any upstart companies that might want to enter the market and upset it with competition. Just watch. This is a pattern that we have seen time and time again. It's what the Big Business/Big Government collaboration does and being surprised by it is like being surprised that tigers eat other animals.

f we are to accept your reasoning, then we have to admit that the Bush Administration was inept, at the very least. But, in reality, it wasn't the president alone who made these repeated references, it was the entire administration. Then we have that ugly Powell appearance with the vial full of white powder not to mention that wonderful "artist's rendition" of the terrorist headquarters known as Tora Bora - which never existed.

Or, we could have just gotten false information from people supposedly in the know.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

When taken as a whole, we find that no other answer can be arrived at other than this was a deliberate, false dialog meant to confuse the American people and did so successfully.

Nope. If you are only looking at half the facts, I can see how you would come to that conclusion. But I never made any claim to the validity of the prewar intelligence, just that Bush never made the claim that Iraq was involved in 9/11. So I don't really know why you are bringing it up. It doesn't refute my claim which you seemed to sidestep quite nicely.

The problem is what we are seeing is a need to create a false narrative which proves those who originally created these lies know that they have been pegged as liars. Does it bother you that you are one of those people spreading a false narrative designed to cover the deceit which caused tens of thousands of Iraqis to be killed with a likely hundred thousand or so maimed? Can't you understand that it was those actions which you are trying to hide that led to us having to deal with ISIS?

I should as much as ask you the same. I mean your position is only valid if you ignore quite a lot of reality which makes it not real at all. We had faulty intelligence reports, over stated reliability of these reports, and outright lies by captured Al Qaeda personnel. To say misinformed statements (which is what it really boils down to) is a lie while ignoring the lies that caused the misinformation itself is a lot dishonest to say the least. It is as if you have a narrative and damn anything getting in it's way. You are what you are claiming Bush and Co to be.

Either way, what you need to know is that you are the problem, not part of the solution.You should stand in front of a mirror while saying that. First, I never said we didn't get things wrong, I said that Bush's position was never that Iraq was connected to 9/11, his position was that we couldn't operate as usual after 9/11 because of the magnitude of it. You have offered nothing to discredit that and only started on tired old already discredited Bush Lied people Died propaganda that frankly does not pass the smell test in this day and age.

The Idea that Sadam Husein was tied to 9/11 is completely fabricated. They tried to tie him to Al Qaeda and as I previously said, the only connections to 9/11 was in how we treated threats after 9/11. Your link, as biased and opinionated as it is (of course it has to be because it is discussing other people's opinions), even supports that if you bothered to read it.

When we went to war in Iraq, there were known Al Qaeda and Taliban leadership officials in Iraq given safe harbor while being treated for injuries sustained in the battlefields of Afghanistan. We had reports from other countries of supposed connections to Al Qaeda that even the administration downplayed after they appeared to be bogus. We had Al Qaeda officials claiming there was a link that later turned out to be falsely given to avoid torture by the Egyptians. As far as your link is concerned, it only says that Al Qaeda and Iraq did not cooperate in any attack on the US but never says anything about their connections or connections in the future and Al Qaeda is not the only terrorist organization we needed to worry about. It was the War on Terror not was on Iraq.

You are correct in that Saddam and Al Qaeda likely would not have collaborated on anything. But that does nothing to negate the fact that Bush's primary claim on the war on terror wasn't Iraq being behind 9/11, it was that we have to preemptively end threats before they become 9/11 stile attacks and that we can no longer wait for it to happened before taking actions (which had primarily been the operational tactics previous to 9/11).

New York Times just had an article on engineers who make apartments quiet. They also had pictures of a lot of different types of materials http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12...

Perhaps the most fundamental aspect of the human condition is that we are all trapped in overwhelming ignorance. I don't disagree that Trump is clueless. But I don't see that any of the mainstream politicians and commentators are significantly better.

If only there was a group who takes the time to measure how full of shit each politician is. Oh wait, there is. Others have even taken time to aggregate the claims of each major 2016 presidential nominee (and some past ones).

On one end you have Ben Carson and Donald Trump whose claims are 85% / 76% mostly false or worse respectively, and on the other you have Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton who come it at 28% mostly false or worse. Not to say all GOP are that bad, with Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio coming in at 32% and 40% respectively.

Guys like Trump prey on people who hold the false belief that all politicians lie equally. Everyone lies, but there is a big difference between people who may stretch the truth and people who will flat out say anything.

Conservatives can (and often do) make a lot of sense. Not all of them of course, but enough to listen to their general point of view. People like e.g. Dick Cheney,

LOL if you are praising Dick Cheney then you are most definitely NOT a liberal. According to PolitiFact Dick Cheney lies 59% of the time:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/opinion/campaign-stops/all-politicians-lie-some-lie-more-than-others.html

Dick Cheney is not "sane voice of conservatism" that you seem to think he is...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12...

I read a NYT's article about this last night. Seems very timely: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12... A few years ago I soundproofed the area around my furnace and this article sums up what I found nicely.

You don't have the slightest idea what life is like there, and you hardly even have the experience required to imagine it.

Oh that's rich. You have no clue what life is like in Iceland but you see fit to lecture me on it. And most of your whole bloody nation sees fit as well when most of them couldn't even point to Iceland on a map.

And you're bitching because people in Reykjavik can't buy whale meat at the supermarket.

Where'd you get that idea? You absolutely can. It's just not that commonly eaten, due to price and health reasons.

Icelanders shouldn't have hunted whales to near-extinction

Icelanders have never hunted any whale species to near extinction. That was Americans who did that. *coughs and stares in your general direction* Learn your whaling history. At one point 735 of the world's 900 whaling ships were American.

Icelanders primarily hunt minke whales, which are an incredibly abundant species (rated LC/"Least Concern")

The whale population in Northern Alaska is substantially bigger than the human population

As is the Icelandic minke population.

But hey, come on, lecture me some more about not talking about places I know nothing about!

Not igloos, but the buildings do look a little silly what with the stilts

Really, you're going to lecture someone who lives in Iceland about silly-looking buildings?

The money from the government doesn't make up for the insane costs of food and fuel

Oh PLEASE, you're going to lecture someone in Iceland about expensive prices? You know that half of all children's clothing here was bought overseas because it's cheaper when parents are expecting to take an overseas trip and come back with a suitcase full of clothe then to buy them here? I recently bought a printer that retails in the US for $200. I had to buy it from Europe for $250, pay $40 to have it shipped overseas, then $70 in customs fees. But that still saved me $100 over buying it locally. A month ago I bought a small item on ebay. The purchase price was $1. Shipping made it $5. Customs charged me $11 on top of that. $17 for a $1 item. Don't lecture me about "high prices". :P

And the key point is you get money from the government *and* you don't pay state taxes. You only pay US federal faxes. Do you know what the tax rate on a person working as a contractor is here? It's about 60%. As a salaried employee I pay over 40% of my salary in income tax. Now factor in those purchase prices / customs fees on top of that. Oh yeah, those poor impoverished natives and us rolling-in-the-cash volcano dwellers...

And it is subsistence hunting -- the meat obtained cannot be sold.

That's not what "subsistence hunting" means. Look up the definition of subsistence in the dictionary. Subsistence hunting means "hunting for survival". Nobody in Barrow is going to starve if they don't get whale.

And FYI, Americans in general don't give a rat's arse whether whale is sold or shared, they just care whether it's "indians" doing it or not, because only indians have "cultures" and "history", everyone else is just white devils or evil japs or the like out to destroy the world. If they actually gave a rat's arse about sharing then they wouldn't be raising such a fury over the Faroese whale hunt (they share it too).

Sadly our leaders are too often willing to pander to fear to obtain power rather than work to eliminate the need for the fear.

Like the president urging congress to strip the rights of citizens based on a secret government watch list created with no judicial review and no avenue of appeal? That kind of pandering?

To say that anything about the New York Times is extreme is to be extreme yourself to the point of inanity. The New York Times is about as mainstream as it gets.

What alternate universe are YOU posting from?

The New York Times has an editorial policy that the time for objective coverage of the gun control debate is over and the job of journalists is to advocate for gun bans.

For an example see this editorial. It was published three days ago on page A1, the first time NYT has published an editorial on their front page since 1920.

The population of the US has been roughly evenly divided on this issue, with the pro-gun side somewhat ahead. (It has also been making substantial gains for a number of years, thanks to:
  - First research, then the results of legislation, showing that increased concealed-carry results in lowered crime and victimization.
  - Supreme Court decisions recognizing the RKBA as a civil right and "incorporating" the Second Amendment against the states.
  - Incidents like this recent one, which have shown that the government can't protect the citizenry from immediate threats.)

That puts the NYT squarely OUTSIDE the mainstream, and getting more so, as measured by US public opinion.

As measured by the political positions of the elements of "The Mainstream Media" it may well be "as mainstream as it gets". But this just confirms the contention that the mainstream media is strongly left-biased.

Really? "Design flaws and engine fires sidelined the plane during the Persian Gulf war and have limited its capabilities since." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12...

The A-10 Warthog is more valuable.

Yes. An individual can deduct the amount minus ($100 + 10% of AGI) Source: NY Times, Extortion counts as theft. IRS

Businesses get treated more favorably, they can deduct actual losses.

That's subjective.

It may be subjective, but I was asking your opinion. Please, state for the record, whether you consider cultures, where kai-kaiing people is acceptable (and even heroic) to be neither better nor worse than those, where eating people is considered an outrage?

And, should your answer be affirmative, why is it, that neither UNESCO nor any other prominent organization has yet organized a Cannibalism Month (or Week) — complete with recipe-exchanges and denunciations of the evil West appropriating the authentic practice while adopting "knee-jerk" laws against it? Is not ignoring such cultures — and their unique contributions to the wonderful tapestry of diversity — evidence of despicable bigotry and closed-mindedness? Should the Western colonizers not atone for extinguishing most of such rituals?

Given your already demonstrated tendency to puh-puh inconvenient questions, I regret to inform you, that a post not containing direct answer(s) to the above will be returned unopened.

Here you go.

From this Dec 3, NY Times article How Mark Zuckerberg’s Altruism Helps Himself:

(Why an L.L.C.?)
An L.L.C. can invest in for-profit companies (perhaps these will be characterized as societally responsible companies, but lots of companies claim the mantle of societal responsibility). An L.L.C. can make political donations. It can lobby for changes in the law.

(Why not a charitable foundation?)
... a charitable foundation is subject to rules and oversight. It has to allocate a certain percentage of its assets every year. The new Zuckerberg L.L.C. won’t be subject to those rules and won’t have any transparency requirements.

(Tax implications)
... if the L.L.C. sold stock, Mr. Zuckerberg would pay a hefty capital gains tax, particularly if Facebook stock kept climbing. If the L.L.C. donated to a charity, he would get a deduction just like anyone else. That’s a nice little bonus. But the L.L.C. probably won’t do that because it can do better. The savvier move, Professor Fleischer explained, would be to have the L.L.C. donate the appreciated shares to charity, which would generate a deduction at fair market value of the stock without triggering any tax.

All legal. Don't hate the player, hate the game... (or so I'm told)

The LAST thing republicans and democrats want is all of america's citizens arming themselves heavily and organizing.

Well, they're already arming themselves.
"In Wake of Shootings, a Familiar Call to Arms Drives Latest Jump in Weapon Sales"

The shah was not overthrown. He was sick and going to die. I won't say the US is nearly as responsible as the UK and Europe, which have much deeper interests in the region. There's a lot of *wagging the dog* going on. Yes, keeping the communists out was and is paramount. The "radical Islamists" are doing what they are hired to do. I hope you don't think they work for free! Russia's market share is down significantly.

Typically, only about 10-20% of pollution in a city is because of traffic. Most pollution is due to industries. The right solution is moving coal plants and heavy industries away from the city.

The government do know that their air pollution has more than one cause. From another article:

The government also said it would shut down a power plant in the capital that burns coal and inspect trucks at the border to make sure they comply with emissions regulations.

This is a short-term solution to fix the urgent problem. They are looking at how to deal with this in the long term, and it will not just be limited to cars.

Stuff is being built but imports to run them are down - here's a bit about expected excess capacity.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11...
It's worth noting that there is a wait of years just to get a turbine rotor so even with sensible planning stuff can come on line a few years after it's clear it's not needed. In this situation it doesn't look like sensible planning.

Actually you are:

1. L.L.C. can donate to a charity and get a deduction 2. L.L.C. can donate appreciated shares to charity, which would generate a deduction at fair market value of the stock without triggering any tax. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015...

Fuck off you ass-hole.

Really? "have the L.L.C. donate the appreciated shares to charity, which would generate a deduction at fair market value of the stock without triggering any tax." http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015...

Reading is fundamental and people are too fucking stupid to read.

Wrong ass-hole.

"If the L.L.C. donated to a charity, he would get a deduction just like anyone else. That’s a nice little bonus. But the L.L.C. probably won’t do that because it can do better. The savvier move, Professor Fleischer explained, would be to have the L.L.C. donate the appreciated shares to charity, which would generate a deduction at fair market value of the stock without triggering any tax." http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015...

You can stop dick sucking Zuckerberg.

Actually, It was Ronnie Reagan who started shuttering mental heath facilities strictly to cut spending.
He used deplorable conditions within as an excuse. Living on the street so much more attuned to
freedom of expression and libertarian damages

Nope.

Actually, It was Ronnie Reagan who started shuttering mental heath facilities strictly to cut spending.
He used deplorable conditions within as an excuse. Living on the street so much more attuned to
freedom of expression and libertarian damages

Bullshit.

When "highly trained" police officers shoot nine innocent civilians [cnn.com] when trying to shoot a suspect, what are the chances that Joe Blow (who hasn't been to the range since he got his concealed carry permit) will avoid collateral damage?

Low.

It takes dedication to get a CCW, and Joe Blow will get sued for millions and become the Public Enemy of America if he screws up.

Joe Blow has skin in the game. The police don't have a legal duty to protect you.

Yes. Discussing it sure beats covering one's ears and saying "Lalalanoproblemherelalala", eh?

That's literally exactly what ALREADY HAPPENS to Israel and what you're demanding be allowed to happen with no recourse whatsoever. You aren't criticising government policies you're attacking the very existence of Israel as a state, and you're doing it with double standards so outrageous and hypocritical that the only reasonable explanation is pure anti-semitism.

If YOU were actually for equal treatment you'd be up in arms over the fact that Hamas literally exists for the sole purpose of genocide (and even quotes the Protocols), Fatah routinely glorifies terrorists and incites further attacks, and even Jordan officially teaches that jews murder babies and use their blood to make matza. But you're not. You have no problem with the constant invasions by surrounding arab states for the sole purpose of genocide, you have no problem with the literal thousands of bombings and terrorist attacks for the sole purpose of genocide, you have no problem with the universal anti-semitism of the entire arab world. You're fine with anything and everything done TO israel no matter how extreme, and refuse to tolerate anything Israel does no matter how reserved. Israel is the only country in the entire world that is condemned for protecting its civilians from thousands of bombings, the only country in the entire world blamed as the bad guy because not enough israelis die when Israel is attacked to satisfy your bloodlust.

You throw around words like "apartheid" and "nazi" when there are probably more arabs and muslims living in Israel with full rights of citizenship, serving at all levels of the military and government, than there are jews living in the entire freaking arab world put together. Meanwhile in every single neighboring arab state there are crowds screaming for the death of all jews everywhere, demanding the eradication of Israel, and governments teaching age old myths like blood libel and the protocols as fact.

As for your UN report it's bullshit to put it mildly. This is the same UN whose employees publish pro-terrorist anti-semitic materials, the same UN that ignores african genocides to condemn Israel dozens of times, the same UN that condemns Israel more than every other country on earth COMBINED, the same UN that claims all of Judaism's most holy sites are not Jewish but rather Muslim holy sites, the same UN composed of arab states that throw gays off the tops of buildings and lash women for being raped.