You've obviously got a different idea of accountable then I do. To me the idea is to encourage someone to realize they need to improve and become a better person. Probably hopeless as someone with no empathy will probably not acquire it. Still some people do come out of prison better people as they have become accountable for their actions and learned. This works best in systems that believe in rehabilitation. Of course some people are hopeless and just removed from society, but that's about protecting society, not making them accountable. What is the point of making someone accountable if not in the hope that they learn something from it. Now some people just like to punish and call it making them accountable and even come up with weird fantasies where they might be punished forever or at least lose out on some reward. I've never understood that, especially when they claim it is to do with love. We have our one life with whatever chance threw us, some are lucky and get a good start and take advantage of it, others not so much. Is there any point to trying to make a badly fetal alcohol victim accountable, or someone who was born with no empathy?
How would an existing god with afterlife consequences make these people accountable? If he punishes them after they die, well that makes no difference on Earth or to all the other people that got fucked up by these people. Even if they believe in a god who would punish them after the fact, most of these people honestly believe they're doing gods work and that is why god has rewarded them with money and power. Even punishing them forever won't undo the damage they did in life, at the best it is making them regret what they did forever.
We've had a right wing government that is really good friends with the American Republican Party for long enough that they've appointed the majority of the Supreme Court. They believe that we should only have enough government to repress us and no more much like small government Americans.
Perhaps you will be preventatively arrested and thrown in jail as a potential terrorist. And Harper is bankrupting the country. Inherited a surplus, complained loudly that the Liberals were paying the bills, proceeded to run a deficit for 8 years, finally balanced the budget based on high oil prices, declared that rather then actually paying off the bills, lets work less, perhaps take a vacation as those oil royalties will keep rolling in. Do you really consider it to be fiscally responsible to see work getting rolled back to not pay your bills but to not save?
How old are you? I was taught to not talk to cops somewhere around '67 or '68 when graduating kindergarten. This was a time when the counter-culture was starting to roll and the establishment was willing to do anything to break it and the cops as well as city hall declared full out war on "those weirdos" who wanted fundamental rights. Things like the drug wars were really ramped up in that time, we were getting lots of political refugees from America with their ideology that forced them to leave the "land of the free" and the war on the (certain class of) people was again ramped up.
The Conservatives have been appointing Supreme Court Justices long enough that now their appointees are the majority. Originally voted in on a "change and transparency" platform, they've since showed the change is worse for the average Canadians civil rights and the transparency is for anyone not in the government. Take appointing Supreme Court Justices, started out by at least getting Parliament somewhat involved in the act, the last appointee was done so quietly that I didn't even hear about the appointment until well after it happened and the governments attitude is that is none of the peoples business. But hey, after inheriting a surplus and blowing it, running a deficit for 8 years and finally balancing the budget based on continuing high oil prices (they've put all our eggs in the oil basket, we don't need any manufacturing or to add value to our resources), instead of paying down the deficit, they'll do some tax breaks and go on about how being Conservative they're fiscally responsible, much like the guy who finally makes all he's payments so takes an expensive vacation on his credit card including extra unpaid time off of work
Well the second amendment is kind of an anachronism. The only other bill of rights that included arms that I'm aware of is the Bill of Rights (1689) which allowed the right to bear arms for self defence. When it comes to arms, much has changed in the 200+ plus years since the 2nd amendment was written. Most countries have police that are responsible to the people, arms have totally changed, in the 18th century arms included swords and such as well as firearms and firearms were barely superiour to a sword and a long bow in trained hands was still way superiour. Really now a right to bear arms is kind of like a right to use a vehicle. I'll also note that in my country I can buy arms in the form of a long gun whereas in the States I wouldn't be allowed due to some stupidity almost 40 years previous and it is the right wing as much as anyone who likes the segregation that having a class of citizens called felons brings. Meanwhile most newer bill of rights (often under different names) have equivalent rights to most of the rest of the American bill of rights (excepting the 3rd, 9th and 10th) as they are truly fundamental. Even then they often have weasel words so we don't have Supreme Court decisions going against the clearly written rights. Things like being able to limit speech in the interest of national security or to slow down child porn. As a bonus my countries bill of rights includes electronic communications along with papers and such. Most Americans forget that the Constitution was a compromise that was only supposed to be in effect until a better one was written, not the final word.
My GSM phone is locked to my provider. They're supposed to unlock it once the contract is up (in Canada) and there are lots of directions on the net on how to do it as well as small shops offering the service but strictly speaking unlocking your own phone is now illegal due to updated laws pushed by America.
His remarks about Africans were in fact based on IQ test results. How is that not science?
Did they correct for leading causes of low intelligence such as malnutrition? Were the tests culturally targeted? A century ago the IQ test was introduced and used to show that Eastern Europeans had lower IQ tests. Tests that had questions like who won the world series or what does Smith & Wesson (sp?) manufacture. These tests were used to limit immigration into the States as science had proved that Slavs were stupid. Funny enough the guy who basically invented the IQ test and vigorously backed the results even with people pointing out all he was doing was measuring knowledge of American culture eventually did a 180 and came to believe the IQ test was pretty well useless for testing intelligence.
Wish I could get punished to the tune of $350,000 a year. Besides unlike him, I have enough intelligence to live on that. Actually I can't decide if he's a scammer or so stupid that he's truly broke.
Come to Canada and publish something in the media calling bitumen tar instead of oil and you'll see how crazy the conservatives become about political correctness. It's gotten to the point where no-one dares call that tar like substance tar. Conservatives have a long history of censoring things they disagree with. They just don't notice as to them it is proper
At first the Model T had the hand operated throttle besides the steering column, a hand operated brake and pedals to shift the planetary gears with the reverse pedal often used as a brake, as well as other levers for things like spark advance. Some older cars actually had a tiller instead of a steering wheel. It took a while to standardize the automobiles controls and the average person probably couldn't even get an older Model T started and might well break their arm trying.
Many people do something stupid when young and dumb and then grow up. The idea that getting caught with a joint or 6 dildos means that your going to be forever a criminal is wrong in many cases.
What would the employer be sued for? Most countries don't allow frivolous lawsuits and damages have to be real. In the thief case he would probably be ordered to make restitution as part of sentencing after conviction.
Here in Canada the government really lucked out with a crackhead. After trying to get help for his mental illness, begging to be thrown in jail and getting his passport cancelled so he couldn't go to Libya to get clean, he finally cracked and found a rifle in a cabin and attacked Parliament. Perfect for the government who had been looking for an excuse to take more of our rights away by screaming "Terrorist". Not only do they now need to monitor everyone, they also need to be able to arrest and lock up anyone who might be a terrorist, and of course find out the politics of every citizen to make sure only the correct people vote. Also of course go to war as that is one way to get the people riled up and get voted in again.
Even if true, it is still basically life as we know it, but since on-one else has been able to replicate the findings... Besides Mono lake is not a volcanic vent under the ocean. I think the poster was just thinking about how some life has different means of acquiring energy. http://www.nature.com/news/ars... http://news.nationalgeographic...
Actually the first recorded modern scientific experiment disproved the spontaneous springing into being of life, or at least of maggots. 2 pieces of meat, one sealed in a jar and one open to the air, only the piece of meat open to the air became maggot invested.
I thought that President Jackson put them in their place some time back? Something about who had an army and the right of the President to do genocide IIRC.
When all those right-wingers are screaming about minimum wage being too high, they're really advocating more socialism, because you can't have wages that low without social welfare programs. Without welfare, no-one would take a job for so little because they would be unable to survive.
That's not really true. They figure that the Walmart workers can live in a cardboard box along with 10 friends to split the rent, live on a pot of rice (cooked on their dried feces) a day and if they get sick, wander into the forest and die. Hey it's still better then the worse place in Africa and they should be happy to have a job in the richest country on Earth and they have no one to blame but themselves for not being born in better circumstances.
It's more complex then that. Under a Libertarian system, if not enough people pay their $100 then everyone is likely to suffer when the big fire destroys the town. Both due to the fire feeding on the property of people who didn't pay up and the insurance company going bankrupt due to the large amount of damage. This is why the insurance industry lobbied so hard for socialized fire protection. This of course brings up the other advantage of taxes, stability for the companies in different forms. The extreme example being the banking industry who really benefited from the taxpayers when they totally overextended themselves in 2008. Other benefits include the workers being able to fall back on government help when times are tough including medical in most countries. And of course supplementing income so companies can pay less for labour and make bigger profits. Would Walmart be as successful if they had to pay a living wage to keep employees?
Slashdot Mirror
You've obviously got a different idea of accountable then I do. To me the idea is to encourage someone to realize they need to improve and become a better person. Probably hopeless as someone with no empathy will probably not acquire it. Still some people do come out of prison better people as they have become accountable for their actions and learned. This works best in systems that believe in rehabilitation. Of course some people are hopeless and just removed from society, but that's about protecting society, not making them accountable. What is the point of making someone accountable if not in the hope that they learn something from it.
Now some people just like to punish and call it making them accountable and even come up with weird fantasies where they might be punished forever or at least lose out on some reward. I've never understood that, especially when they claim it is to do with love.
We have our one life with whatever chance threw us, some are lucky and get a good start and take advantage of it, others not so much. Is there any point to trying to make a badly fetal alcohol victim accountable, or someone who was born with no empathy?
How would an existing god with afterlife consequences make these people accountable? If he punishes them after they die, well that makes no difference on Earth or to all the other people that got fucked up by these people.
Even if they believe in a god who would punish them after the fact, most of these people honestly believe they're doing gods work and that is why god has rewarded them with money and power. Even punishing them forever won't undo the damage they did in life, at the best it is making them regret what they did forever.
We've had a right wing government that is really good friends with the American Republican Party for long enough that they've appointed the majority of the Supreme Court.
They believe that we should only have enough government to repress us and no more much like small government Americans.
Perhaps you will be preventatively arrested and thrown in jail as a potential terrorist.
And Harper is bankrupting the country. Inherited a surplus, complained loudly that the Liberals were paying the bills, proceeded to run a deficit for 8 years, finally balanced the budget based on high oil prices, declared that rather then actually paying off the bills, lets work less, perhaps take a vacation as those oil royalties will keep rolling in.
Do you really consider it to be fiscally responsible to see work getting rolled back to not pay your bills but to not save?
How old are you? I was taught to not talk to cops somewhere around '67 or '68 when graduating kindergarten. This was a time when the counter-culture was starting to roll and the establishment was willing to do anything to break it and the cops as well as city hall declared full out war on "those weirdos" who wanted fundamental rights.
Things like the drug wars were really ramped up in that time, we were getting lots of political refugees from America with their ideology that forced them to leave the "land of the free" and the war on the (certain class of) people was again ramped up.
The Conservatives have been appointing Supreme Court Justices long enough that now their appointees are the majority.
Originally voted in on a "change and transparency" platform, they've since showed the change is worse for the average Canadians civil rights and the transparency is for anyone not in the government.
Take appointing Supreme Court Justices, started out by at least getting Parliament somewhat involved in the act, the last appointee was done so quietly that I didn't even hear about the appointment until well after it happened and the governments attitude is that is none of the peoples business.
But hey, after inheriting a surplus and blowing it, running a deficit for 8 years and finally balancing the budget based on continuing high oil prices (they've put all our eggs in the oil basket, we don't need any manufacturing or to add value to our resources), instead of paying down the deficit, they'll do some tax breaks and go on about how being Conservative they're fiscally responsible, much like the guy who finally makes all he's payments so takes an expensive vacation on his credit card including extra unpaid time off of work
Well the second amendment is kind of an anachronism. The only other bill of rights that included arms that I'm aware of is the Bill of Rights (1689) which allowed the right to bear arms for self defence. When it comes to arms, much has changed in the 200+ plus years since the 2nd amendment was written. Most countries have police that are responsible to the people, arms have totally changed, in the 18th century arms included swords and such as well as firearms and firearms were barely superiour to a sword and a long bow in trained hands was still way superiour. Really now a right to bear arms is kind of like a right to use a vehicle. I'll also note that in my country I can buy arms in the form of a long gun whereas in the States I wouldn't be allowed due to some stupidity almost 40 years previous and it is the right wing as much as anyone who likes the segregation that having a class of citizens called felons brings.
Meanwhile most newer bill of rights (often under different names) have equivalent rights to most of the rest of the American bill of rights (excepting the 3rd, 9th and 10th) as they are truly fundamental. Even then they often have weasel words so we don't have Supreme Court decisions going against the clearly written rights. Things like being able to limit speech in the interest of national security or to slow down child porn. As a bonus my countries bill of rights includes electronic communications along with papers and such.
Most Americans forget that the Constitution was a compromise that was only supposed to be in effect until a better one was written, not the final word.
My GSM phone is locked to my provider. They're supposed to unlock it once the contract is up (in Canada) and there are lots of directions on the net on how to do it as well as small shops offering the service but strictly speaking unlocking your own phone is now illegal due to updated laws pushed by America.
Some of us are still stuck on dial-up as we live in big sparsely populated countries with shitty broadband providers.
His remarks about Africans were in fact based on IQ test results. How is that not science?
Did they correct for leading causes of low intelligence such as malnutrition?
Were the tests culturally targeted? A century ago the IQ test was introduced and used to show that Eastern Europeans had lower IQ tests. Tests that had questions like who won the world series or what does Smith & Wesson (sp?) manufacture. These tests were used to limit immigration into the States as science had proved that Slavs were stupid.
Funny enough the guy who basically invented the IQ test and vigorously backed the results even with people pointing out all he was doing was measuring knowledge of American culture eventually did a 180 and came to believe the IQ test was pretty well useless for testing intelligence.
Wish I could get punished to the tune of $350,000 a year. Besides unlike him, I have enough intelligence to live on that.
Actually I can't decide if he's a scammer or so stupid that he's truly broke.
Come to Canada and publish something in the media calling bitumen tar instead of oil and you'll see how crazy the conservatives become about political correctness. It's gotten to the point where no-one dares call that tar like substance tar.
Conservatives have a long history of censoring things they disagree with. They just don't notice as to them it is proper
Most countries have a loser pays setup to avoid these types of frivolous lawsuits. Using lawsuits like you describe just leads to more injustice.
At first the Model T had the hand operated throttle besides the steering column, a hand operated brake and pedals to shift the planetary gears with the reverse pedal often used as a brake, as well as other levers for things like spark advance. Some older cars actually had a tiller instead of a steering wheel.
It took a while to standardize the automobiles controls and the average person probably couldn't even get an older Model T started and might well break their arm trying.
Many people do something stupid when young and dumb and then grow up. The idea that getting caught with a joint or 6 dildos means that your going to be forever a criminal is wrong in many cases.
What would the employer be sued for? Most countries don't allow frivolous lawsuits and damages have to be real. In the thief case he would probably be ordered to make restitution as part of sentencing after conviction.
Here in Canada the government really lucked out with a crackhead. After trying to get help for his mental illness, begging to be thrown in jail and getting his passport cancelled so he couldn't go to Libya to get clean, he finally cracked and found a rifle in a cabin and attacked Parliament. Perfect for the government who had been looking for an excuse to take more of our rights away by screaming "Terrorist". Not only do they now need to monitor everyone, they also need to be able to arrest and lock up anyone who might be a terrorist, and of course find out the politics of every citizen to make sure only the correct people vote. Also of course go to war as that is one way to get the people riled up and get voted in again.
Yes, and look how well Mexico is doing with all those good jobs.
Even if true, it is still basically life as we know it, but since on-one else has been able to replicate the findings...
Besides Mono lake is not a volcanic vent under the ocean. I think the poster was just thinking about how some life has different means of acquiring energy.
http://www.nature.com/news/ars...
http://news.nationalgeographic...
Actually the first recorded modern scientific experiment disproved the spontaneous springing into being of life, or at least of maggots. 2 pieces of meat, one sealed in a jar and one open to the air, only the piece of meat open to the air became maggot invested.
There's been non-carbon non-water based life discovered?
I thought that President Jackson put them in their place some time back? Something about who had an army and the right of the President to do genocide IIRC.
When all those right-wingers are screaming about minimum wage being too high, they're really advocating more socialism, because you can't have wages that low without social welfare programs. Without welfare, no-one would take a job for so little because they would be unable to survive.
That's not really true. They figure that the Walmart workers can live in a cardboard box along with 10 friends to split the rent, live on a pot of rice (cooked on their dried feces) a day and if they get sick, wander into the forest and die. Hey it's still better then the worse place in Africa and they should be happy to have a job in the richest country on Earth and they have no one to blame but themselves for not being born in better circumstances.
It's more complex then that. Under a Libertarian system, if not enough people pay their $100 then everyone is likely to suffer when the big fire destroys the town. Both due to the fire feeding on the property of people who didn't pay up and the insurance company going bankrupt due to the large amount of damage.
This is why the insurance industry lobbied so hard for socialized fire protection.
This of course brings up the other advantage of taxes, stability for the companies in different forms. The extreme example being the banking industry who really benefited from the taxpayers when they totally overextended themselves in 2008. Other benefits include the workers being able to fall back on government help when times are tough including medical in most countries. And of course supplementing income so companies can pay less for labour and make bigger profits. Would Walmart be as successful if they had to pay a living wage to keep employees?
And then use the power generated by the solar panels to drive the electric heater?