Don't worry, I'm sure the Liberals and Chretien's billion dollar scams, and attempts to mislead the public by trying to make people unavailable by placing them diplomatic posts was a much better government.
Compared to the Conservatives multi-billion scams? 5 billion spent on the G10 summit, all pretty well in one riding, 35 billion on the F-35 fiasco (swore they'd only cost $10 billion. Or perhaps how he just does not let anyone talk to the public. Remember his promises of open government?
Don't know about New Zealand but with Canada there is also (3) Is the punishment comparable to what would be received in Canada. This includes Canada refusing to extradite in cases involving the death penalty (agreements usually made not to pursue capital punishment) and cases where the punishment is way out of line with the crime. Sadly our law and order Conservative government has no problem breaking these laws, eg Marc Emery was extradited for selling seeds, a crime usually punished by a couple of hundred dollar fine in Canada whereas he got 5 years in the States. In the same vein I wouldn't be surprised if NZ willingly breaks its own laws and regulations to please the Americans.
VirtualBox was originally written to run OS/2 by an OS/2 vendor, Innotek who amongst other things had previously fixed Virtual PC to run OS/2 and run on OS/2. Of course then MS bought VPC. VirtualBox ended up the fabled OS/2 killer app but backwards, running OS/2 instead of running under OS/2 and took off. Unluckily Sun didn't care much for OS/2 and now...
Mars-500 was fairly spacey (19,000 cu.ft) compared to sharing a capsule. My wife and I get along pretty good and have spent a lot of time together. We still need time in separate rooms to not drive each other nuts.
The Constitution has had amendments added since it was written. First one added limited Congress from limiting free speech. Until another amendment is added allowing Congress to limit speech, any law limiting free speech is unconstitutional as the 14th amendment extended that limitation
I thought the Constitution has had amendments added that changes the Constitution with the very first one taking away the right of Congress creating laws that limit free speech. In other words, the 1st Amendment limits Article 1 Section 8
Canadian Federal government. Budget was positive from 1997 to 2005 IIRC (longer even with book keeping where the Canadian Pension Fund was transferred to general revenue).
since when is the government concerned with the price of anything?
We have a Conservative government, they need to spend money, put us back in debt (we had a balanced budget for 8 years until the right wingers got into power with their cut taxes and increase spending policy) so they can cut the things they don't like such as science.
Worst case, where the army sides with the government, see Syria. Best case, where the army doesn't side with the government, see Egypt. Even in the best case you'll probably end up worst then you are now. Imagine a rewritten Constitution with the Fundamentalists or any other special interest group having the most input. The breakup of the country might be a good outcome but with the American military, including nukes, I have a feeling it would just devolve into war, nasty war too. Another consideration is that no other country can really get involved, once again due to your immense military. Really if your country wants to be more free, you're going to have to shrink your military first as a large standing army is always a threat to freedom, and it's really hard to see that happening.
Actually in my experience every business in Canada accepts USD. They often skim a few cents from the transaction if it is paper and coins almost always trade at par and are common in change. Even the local government, last time I tried, was willing to accept USD, though at par at a time when the USD was worth quite a bit more. I'd expect that even Revenue Canada would accept payment in USD.
That's not totally true. Using something like chickens as currency would mean earning interest in the form of eggs and if nothing else, Sunday dinner, even if no-one wants to use it in an exchange. Of course it has its own problems like needing to be fed chicken scratch and tending to inflate the money supply in the presence of roosters, but the value of a chicken is pretty obvious.
I found that a 100MHz 486 was all that was required to play a MP3 smoothly, you must have used a crappy MP3 player and/or operating system. I do remember it taking days to encode a MP3 on a 33MHz 386 with no math co-processor.
It is not extortion if Nikon considers the Microsoft patents valid and a useful addition to their portfolio.
But it is extortion if Nikon is only licensing these patents because it is cheaper then fighting in court. Sadly we'll never know the real motivation of Nikon paying off Microsoft.
Sorry for reposting, Slashdot ate part of my post.
MY guys are going to have the best weapons I can make for them because I do not want my sons and daughters having to fight off kings, popes, and power mongers the way that we had to.
What is the power that kings etc. abuse most? What did our founders, who had experience in such matters, write the constitution for?
To prevent power from concentrating into the hands of one person. To make it hard for the government to start a war without a lot of public buy in. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily spy on you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily imprison you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily execute you. The structure of the US government and the Bill of Rights were designed to avoid the insanity of European monarchies.
You should read some history. The American Constitution was written to make a more powerful central government while attempting to not make it too powerful. America had just gone through almost a decade of independence under the Articles of Confederation and most everyone agreed that the Articles created a useless federal government that couldn't do anything without unanimous support of the States. That is why they gave the President way more power then the King of Great Britain had. At the time of the Revolution the King had little more power then the current Queen has. A hundred years before the American Constitution was written England had re-realized that Kings having too much power was bad, had a (second) revolution where they kicked the King out (replacing him with a King and Queen who knew who held the power), made Parliament Supreme and wrote a Bill of Rights and most Americans at the time of the Revolution still considered themselves Englishmen and revolted as their rights as Englishmen were being infringed. Some of those rights were ancient, the Magna Carta included Habeas Corpus and the whole point of Parliament was that the King could only tax his subjects with their approval. Being proficient with Arms was an ancient responsibility that every freeman had to meet and was written into the Bill of Rights of 1689 as a right (for self defence). Most of the other rights spelled out in the American Bill of Rights were considered ancient Rights which was why the American Englishman was so pissed at them being ignored. Parliament being Supreme had its own problems such as being to over rule the Bill of Rights with a simple law which was another driving force to write a Constitution that was Supreme. The thing is that the American Constitution was not perfect and most of the authours considered it to be temporary with the idea that after a couple of decades a better replacement would be written based on the lessons learned. This never happened and now we have the condition where the American President has way too much power. Congress is corrupted by the need to raise lots of money for election purposes and the Senate never did really work out. The very first proposed Amendment tried to deal with the House of Representatives having to much power concentrated in to too few Representatives. Perhaps ratifying it would improve things, the second proposed one did finally get ratified so it is a possibility. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proposed_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Congressional_Apportionment_Amendment It would be good if something can be done about your list below, ideally in a non-partisan manner but is probably going to take a major Constitutional Amendment, perhaps called for by the States.
Look at where we are now:
-- Libya: President can wage war even in the face of congressional disapproval. Result: unlimited power to make war, like a king.
MY guys are going to have the best weapons I can make for them because I do not want my sons and daughters having to fight off kings, popes, and power mongers the way that we had to.
What is the power that kings etc. abuse most? What did our founders, who had experience in such matters, write the constitution for?
To prevent power from concentrating into the hands of one person. To make it hard for the government to start a war without a lot of public buy in. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily spy on you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily imprison you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily execute you. The structure of the US government and the Bill of Rights were designed to avoid the insanity of European monarchies.
You should read some history. The American Constitution was written to make a more powerful central government while attempting to not make it too powerful. America had just gone through almost a decade of independence under the Articles of Confederation and most everyone agreed that the Articles created a useless federal government that couldn't do anything without unanimous support of the States. That is why they gave the President way more power then the King of Great Britain had. At the time of the Revolution the King had little more power then the current Queen has. A hundred years before the American Constitution was written England had re-realized that Kings having too much power was bad,
The thing is that it isn't that expensive in the west. The problem is the rich insisting that they have a right to get richer at an increasing rate. If the wealth was spread out a bit better, everyone could have a not bad job and the rich would still be quite rich.
The way things are going, we'll come full circle and once again N. America will be the place for industry since we won't have any environmental laws left. Here in Canada the Federal government is gutting all the environmental laws as quick as they can and they don't care at all that parts of Alberta are more polluted then China. America has very similar politicians who would love to get rid of all those pesky environmental regulations.
That's true, the first thing the United States of America did was get rid of slavery, then they restored all the stolen land to the natives, proving that the War of Independence was about the rights of men everywhere.
It's not just weed. Way too many people think that if a certain dosage is called for, then it is better to double or quadruple it. When it comes to pesticides it is quite important to follow the directions including stopping well before harvest.
The electoral college isn't much different then most modern democracies except your electors are pretty faithful. I vote for a MP who is (usually) a member of a Party. The winning Party forms the government. There is nothing stopping that MP from changing Parties the day after election which in the case of a close election can cause a different Party to form the government. In other words, my vote is an opinion as well. (In theory the MP represents their constituents but in practice the Parties always vote as a block.)
Slashdot Mirror
Don't worry, I'm sure the Liberals and Chretien's billion dollar scams, and attempts to mislead the public by trying to make people unavailable by placing them diplomatic posts was a much better government.
Compared to the Conservatives multi-billion scams? 5 billion spent on the G10 summit, all pretty well in one riding, 35 billion on the F-35 fiasco (swore they'd only cost $10 billion. Or perhaps how he just does not let anyone talk to the public.
Remember his promises of open government?
Don't know about New Zealand but with Canada there is also
(3) Is the punishment comparable to what would be received in Canada.
This includes Canada refusing to extradite in cases involving the death penalty (agreements usually made not to pursue capital punishment) and cases where the punishment is way out of line with the crime. Sadly our law and order Conservative government has no problem breaking these laws, eg Marc Emery was extradited for selling seeds, a crime usually punished by a couple of hundred dollar fine in Canada whereas he got 5 years in the States.
In the same vein I wouldn't be surprised if NZ willingly breaks its own laws and regulations to please the Americans.
In most civilized countries the defendant has a right to see the evidence against themselves so that they can defend themselves.
VirtualBox was originally written to run OS/2 by an OS/2 vendor, Innotek who amongst other things had previously fixed Virtual PC to run OS/2 and run on OS/2. Of course then MS bought VPC.
VirtualBox ended up the fabled OS/2 killer app but backwards, running OS/2 instead of running under OS/2 and took off. Unluckily Sun didn't care much for OS/2 and now...
Mars-500 was fairly spacey (19,000 cu.ft) compared to sharing a capsule. My wife and I get along pretty good and have spent a lot of time together. We still need time in separate rooms to not drive each other nuts.
We're talking about Canada and Harper, not Clinton or Bush.
The Constitution has had amendments added since it was written. First one added limited Congress from limiting free speech.
Until another amendment is added allowing Congress to limit speech, any law limiting free speech is unconstitutional as the 14th amendment extended that limitation
I thought the Constitution has had amendments added that changes the Constitution with the very first one taking away the right of Congress creating laws that limit free speech. In other words, the 1st Amendment limits Article 1 Section 8
Canadian Federal government. Budget was positive from 1997 to 2005 IIRC (longer even with book keeping where the Canadian Pension Fund was transferred to general revenue).
since when is the government concerned with the price of anything?
We have a Conservative government, they need to spend money, put us back in debt (we had a balanced budget for 8 years until the right wingers got into power with their cut taxes and increase spending policy) so they can cut the things they don't like such as science.
Pressure from the American government?
Worst case, where the army sides with the government, see Syria. Best case, where the army doesn't side with the government, see Egypt. Even in the best case you'll probably end up worst then you are now. Imagine a rewritten Constitution with the Fundamentalists or any other special interest group having the most input.
The breakup of the country might be a good outcome but with the American military, including nukes, I have a feeling it would just devolve into war, nasty war too.
Another consideration is that no other country can really get involved, once again due to your immense military.
Really if your country wants to be more free, you're going to have to shrink your military first as a large standing army is always a threat to freedom, and it's really hard to see that happening.
The US dollar is backed up with a very large military which enforces its use as the common currency of the world.
Actually in my experience every business in Canada accepts USD. They often skim a few cents from the transaction if it is paper and coins almost always trade at par and are common in change. Even the local government, last time I tried, was willing to accept USD, though at par at a time when the USD was worth quite a bit more. I'd expect that even Revenue Canada would accept payment in USD.
That's not totally true. Using something like chickens as currency would mean earning interest in the form of eggs and if nothing else, Sunday dinner, even if no-one wants to use it in an exchange.
Of course it has its own problems like needing to be fed chicken scratch and tending to inflate the money supply in the presence of roosters, but the value of a chicken is pretty obvious.
I found that a 100MHz 486 was all that was required to play a MP3 smoothly, you must have used a crappy MP3 player and/or operating system.
I do remember it taking days to encode a MP3 on a 33MHz 386 with no math co-processor.
It is not extortion if Nikon considers the Microsoft patents valid and a useful addition to their portfolio.
But it is extortion if Nikon is only licensing these patents because it is cheaper then fighting in court. Sadly we'll never know the real motivation of Nikon paying off Microsoft.
Sorry for reposting, Slashdot ate part of my post.
What is the power that kings etc. abuse most? What did our founders, who had experience in such matters, write the constitution for?
To prevent power from concentrating into the hands of one person. To make it hard for the government to start a war without a lot of public buy in. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily spy on you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily imprison you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily execute you. The structure of the US government and the Bill of Rights were designed to avoid the insanity of European monarchies.
You should read some history. The American Constitution was written to make a more powerful central government while attempting to not make it too powerful. America had just gone through almost a decade of independence under the Articles of Confederation and most everyone agreed that the Articles created a useless federal government that couldn't do anything without unanimous support of the States.
That is why they gave the President way more power then the King of Great Britain had. At the time of the Revolution the King had little more power then the current Queen has. A hundred years before the American Constitution was written England had re-realized that Kings having too much power was bad, had a (second) revolution where they kicked the King out (replacing him with a King and Queen who knew who held the power), made Parliament Supreme and wrote a Bill of Rights and most Americans at the time of the Revolution still considered themselves Englishmen and revolted as their rights as Englishmen were being infringed.
Some of those rights were ancient, the Magna Carta included Habeas Corpus and the whole point of Parliament was that the King could only tax his subjects with their approval. Being proficient with Arms was an ancient responsibility that every freeman had to meet and was written into the Bill of Rights of 1689 as a right (for self defence). Most of the other rights spelled out in the American Bill of Rights were considered ancient Rights which was why the American Englishman was so pissed at them being ignored. Parliament being Supreme had its own problems such as being to over rule the Bill of Rights with a simple law which was another driving force to write a Constitution that was Supreme.
The thing is that the American Constitution was not perfect and most of the authours considered it to be temporary with the idea that after a couple of decades a better replacement would be written based on the lessons learned.
This never happened and now we have the condition where the American President has way too much power. Congress is corrupted by the need to raise lots of money for election purposes and the Senate never did really work out.
The very first proposed Amendment tried to deal with the House of Representatives having to much power concentrated in to too few Representatives. Perhaps ratifying it would improve things, the second proposed one did finally get ratified so it is a possibility. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proposed_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Congressional_Apportionment_Amendment
It would be good if something can be done about your list below, ideally in a non-partisan manner but is probably going to take a major Constitutional Amendment, perhaps called for by the States.
Look at where we are now:
-- Libya: President can wage war even in the face of congressional disapproval. Result: unlimited power to make war, like a king.
-- FISA, AT&T immunity: Any American c
What is the power that kings etc. abuse most? What did our founders, who had experience in such matters, write the constitution for?
To prevent power from concentrating into the hands of one person. To make it hard for the government to start a war without a lot of public buy in. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily spy on you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily imprison you. To make it hard for the government to arbitrarily execute you. The structure of the US government and the Bill of Rights were designed to avoid the insanity of European monarchies.
You should read some history. The American Constitution was written to make a more powerful central government while attempting to not make it too powerful. America had just gone through almost a decade of independence under the Articles of Confederation and most everyone agreed that the Articles created a useless federal government that couldn't do anything without unanimous support of the States.
That is why they gave the President way more power then the King of Great Britain had. At the time of the Revolution the King had little more power then the current Queen has. A hundred years before the American Constitution was written England had re-realized that Kings having too much power was bad,
The thing is that it isn't that expensive in the west. The problem is the rich insisting that they have a right to get richer at an increasing rate. If the wealth was spread out a bit better, everyone could have a not bad job and the rich would still be quite rich.
The way things are going, we'll come full circle and once again N. America will be the place for industry since we won't have any environmental laws left.
Here in Canada the Federal government is gutting all the environmental laws as quick as they can and they don't care at all that parts of Alberta are more polluted then China. America has very similar politicians who would love to get rid of all those pesky environmental regulations.
That's true, the first thing the United States of America did was get rid of slavery, then they restored all the stolen land to the natives, proving that the War of Independence was about the rights of men everywhere.
Lots of things eat mosquito, especially their larvae. The mails live on nectar so they may also be pollinators.
It's not just weed. Way too many people think that if a certain dosage is called for, then it is better to double or quadruple it. When it comes to pesticides it is quite important to follow the directions including stopping well before harvest.
The electoral college isn't much different then most modern democracies except your electors are pretty faithful.
I vote for a MP who is (usually) a member of a Party. The winning Party forms the government. There is nothing stopping that MP from changing Parties the day after election which in the case of a close election can cause a different Party to form the government. In other words, my vote is an opinion as well. (In theory the MP represents their constituents but in practice the Parties always vote as a block.)