What do you mean? Within 6 years of passing the second amendment it was used to attempt to throw of domestic oppression unsuccessfully. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion Also another example would be Booth (who considered himself a patriot) shooting Lincoln (who many considered a tyrant)
Yea, and wearing glasses should also be illegal. I mean I feel better when I can see and it probably produces an endorphin rush to look at things clearly. While nothing is harmless (people die from drinking water) marijuana is relatively harmless (though I agree that you probably should not operate heavy machinery). Studies have shown that people who smoke both tobacco and pot have longer lifetimes then people who just smoke tobacco. Anyways the smoke is a strawman as the main reason to smoke is because it is expensive due to being illegal. Given cheap pot there is no reason to not ingest by other means besides smoking. One of our former Prime Ministers when asked if he had ever smoked pot responded "no way would he ever smoke anything. But the wife used to make these really good brownies"
Err, we're talking a political crime here. (Look it up, the drug laws were passed to give jobs to all the out of work G-men after prohibition was repelled and also for business reasons. It competed with cheap wood pulp and nylon rope). Perhaps you also think that everyone in Russian Gulags for practicing free speech should of stayed there after the fall of communist Russia? Or perhaps all the people that the English imprisoned during the American Revolution should of stayed in jail due to the fact that they were so addicted to ideas such as free speech, and bitching about taxation without representation should of stayed in jail. I mean they knew it was illegal so they should pay the price.
It's probably like Canada, we consider that we became independent in 1867. Still since then we have become more independent up till 1982 when we got our own constitution (which was passed by Westminister). Examples are the Statute of Westminister http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Westminster_1931 which I see was ratified by Australia in 1942 and backdated to 1939. Also the Balfour declaration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1926 was in 1926.
We have a local (Canada) battery factory, http://www.molienergy.com/ , that I drive by regularly. Seems pretty clean, and we have perhaps more environmental laws then most. People I've known who have worked there were pretty happy and the pay was decent.
The polling place is the counting place. When the polls close ballots are counted by the election officials while being witnessed by any interested parties eg representatives of the main political parties and any citizens that wish to watch. Anyways that's how it is done here, (Canada) minus the computer (ballots are simple) and I have a pretty high confidence that my vote is counted. There are still weaknesses in the system like the early votes and absentee votes, still there is usually no questions raised about the counting procedure.
While it is true that there are rules about including a certain percentage of Canadian content on Canadian TV and Radio and usually in individual licenses rules about local content, eg local news and current affairs produced in the local community. There is very little censorship on TV and radio, especially when compared to the states. It is quite possible to hear fuck said or see titties and occasionally pussy even in prime time. There are usually warnings put on before the more graphic shows which I agree with. Gives people the opportunity to self censor. I receive both Canadian and American TV and radio and the American has always seemed much more censored
Pretty simple. Computer prints out your ballot. You verify that it is printed correctly. You deposit it in the ballot box. You watch the ballot box along with other interested parties. You watch the ballot boxes seal being broken and the count taking place. You have verified that your ballot along with all other ballots in the box has been counted. You also watch as ballot box is resealed for recount purposes. You have a voter verified system with full anonymity.
It may be an artificial monopoly but that $800 million represents profits. At that the profits are lower then if private industry was in charge. The government is doing a good job of heavily regulating the alcohol selling business. The reason for the regulation is because alcohol is a pretty bad drug and it is in our societies interest to regulate the consumption. When the government wanted to privatize the industry a couple of years back there was a very loud public outcry which forced them to change their plans.
They are expecting to bring in $867 million in the fiscal year ending Mar 31, up by $8 million over last year. Here is the report from 2006, http://www.planitbc.com/Articles/article0206-ldb2006.html . $2.5 billion in sales, net profits of $800.5 million. Sounds like the opposite of funded by tax payers, 800 million dollars government revenue that doesn't have to raised by taxes. (BC population is about 4.5 million) Here is a review of them as employers, http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-liquor-distribution-branch-british-columbia . According to wikipedia they also give the private liquor stores a 13% discount. So the private stores are buying alcohol for 13% less and still sell for 10-20% more.
There is also #3 Person takes antibiotic due to really needing it. Then stops early leaving a few of the toughest bacteria to survive and breed. Basically this speeds up the evolution of antibiotic resistant bacteria and is actually one of the bigger problems with antibiotics.
These are good reasons that drugs (including tobacco and alcohol) should be regulated. Here in BC tobacco products must be kept out of sight or displayed in a store where minors are not allowed. Alcohol is heavily regulated with most sold at government stores. The government stores are nice with pleasant staff who are paid enough. They somehow manage to under price the private stores by 10% to 20% and still bring in (next years projection according to the local paper) $800,000,000+ to the government + taxes. It is quite a bit harder for kids to get tobacco or alcohol compared to pot or meth. Even when I was a kid 40 years ago pot was way more available then alcohol (though tobacco was very available).
Thanks, Mozilla, for deciding that I need to change my tried and tested browsing habits of 15 years, simply because you think your way is better - you could have at least given us a way to revert to the old url bar behaviour, but you didn't.
Perhaps you should try Seamonkey ver2. Same rendering engine as Firefox, most extensions work fine and the address bar works much the same as always. I also personally find it faster then Firefox.
The idea that software development will somehow become obsolete because there are open source programs freely available is a fallacy. It is like when 20 farm workers are replaced by a mechanized piece of farm machinery, they don't just starve and die. Those twenty farm workers end up operating, repairing, and building those pieces of farm machinery instead of breaking their backs in a field and every benefits from the productivity increase.
Actually with the introduction of mechanized machinery farm workers found it harder and harder to make a living. Competition drove wages down and people ended up rioting. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_Riots also the article on luddites is similar except it was weaving machines putting people out of work.
You could buy the Presentation Manager (16 bit version) from Microsoft, then run OS/2 1.x PM programs on NT. While you're right about IBM getting pissed about Microsoft changing NT from OS/2 NT ver 3 to Windows NT v3.1 there were other big problems including major arguments about putting the graphics driver into the kernel with Microsoft wanting the graphics in the kernel for performance reasons and IBM not wanting it for stability. That pretty well summed up the difference in their philosophies.
It is the same in Canada, you can move around all you want and don't have to register or anything. Only exception is if you have a drivers license, then legally you have to update your address within a certain time. Of course the government does have quite a few carrots to encourage you to keep your info up to date such as tax refunds, even if you didn't pay tax and I'd guess the States also has various carrots as well as the weird idea that all young males have to register for selective service as a stick.
Why would there be less entitlements if only the rich were allowed to vote? I think that there would be tons of entitlements, just that the flow would be from the poor to the rich.
That is weird. Here in Canada I remember reading (in about 1982) about a famous case where the guy picked up the girl at the bar (when the drinking age was 21) went back to her place and bonked her. Her parents came home, freaked about what their 15 yr old was doing and the guy got charged with statutory rape. The judge was very apologetic when he sentenced the poor guy to the minimum 5 yrs. After this the law was changed so that if you honestly believed the girl was of age, that was a legitimate defense. Not sure what the law is now though. The sex crime laws have been rewritten a few times and statutory rape isn't on the books any more, at least with that name.
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to look at the old Social Credit system, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit
And yet in practice the European version seems to be what the American system follows.
What do you mean? Within 6 years of passing the second amendment it was used to attempt to throw of domestic oppression unsuccessfully. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion
Also another example would be Booth (who considered himself a patriot) shooting Lincoln (who many considered a tyrant)
Yea, and wearing glasses should also be illegal. I mean I feel better when I can see and it probably produces an endorphin rush to look at things clearly.
While nothing is harmless (people die from drinking water) marijuana is relatively harmless (though I agree that you probably should not operate heavy machinery).
Studies have shown that people who smoke both tobacco and pot have longer lifetimes then people who just smoke tobacco.
Anyways the smoke is a strawman as the main reason to smoke is because it is expensive due to being illegal. Given cheap pot there is no reason to not ingest by other means besides smoking.
One of our former Prime Ministers when asked if he had ever smoked pot responded "no way would he ever smoke anything. But the wife used to make these really good brownies"
Err, we're talking a political crime here. (Look it up, the drug laws were passed to give jobs to all the out of work G-men after prohibition was repelled and also for business reasons. It competed with cheap wood pulp and nylon rope).
Perhaps you also think that everyone in Russian Gulags for practicing free speech should of stayed there after the fall of communist Russia?
Or perhaps all the people that the English imprisoned during the American Revolution should of stayed in jail due to the fact that they were so addicted to ideas such as free speech, and bitching about taxation without representation should of stayed in jail. I mean they knew it was illegal so they should pay the price.
It's probably like Canada, we consider that we became independent in 1867. Still since then we have become more independent up till 1982 when we got our own constitution (which was passed by Westminister). Examples are the Statute of Westminister http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Westminster_1931 which I see was ratified by Australia in 1942 and backdated to 1939. Also the Balfour declaration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1926 was in 1926.
We have a local (Canada) battery factory, http://www.molienergy.com/ , that I drive by regularly. Seems pretty clean, and we have perhaps more environmental laws then most.
People I've known who have worked there were pretty happy and the pay was decent.
The polling place is the counting place. When the polls close ballots are counted by the election officials while being witnessed by any interested parties eg representatives of the main political parties and any citizens that wish to watch.
Anyways that's how it is done here, (Canada) minus the computer (ballots are simple) and I have a pretty high confidence that my vote is counted. There are still weaknesses in the system like the early votes and absentee votes, still there is usually no questions raised about the counting procedure.
While it is true that there are rules about including a certain percentage of Canadian content on Canadian TV and Radio and usually in individual licenses rules about local content, eg local news and current affairs produced in the local community. There is very little censorship on TV and radio, especially when compared to the states. It is quite possible to hear fuck said or see titties and occasionally pussy even in prime time. There are usually warnings put on before the more graphic shows which I agree with. Gives people the opportunity to self censor.
I receive both Canadian and American TV and radio and the American has always seemed much more censored
Pretty simple. Computer prints out your ballot. You verify that it is printed correctly. You deposit it in the ballot box. You watch the ballot box along with other interested parties. You watch the ballot boxes seal being broken and the count taking place. You have verified that your ballot along with all other ballots in the box has been counted. You also watch as ballot box is resealed for recount purposes.
You have a voter verified system with full anonymity.
It may be an artificial monopoly but that $800 million represents profits. At that the profits are lower then if private industry was in charge.
The government is doing a good job of heavily regulating the alcohol selling business.
The reason for the regulation is because alcohol is a pretty bad drug and it is in our societies interest to regulate the consumption.
When the government wanted to privatize the industry a couple of years back there was a very loud public outcry which forced them to change their plans.
They are expecting to bring in $867 million in the fiscal year ending Mar 31, up by $8 million over last year.
Here is the report from 2006, http://www.planitbc.com/Articles/article0206-ldb2006.html . $2.5 billion in sales, net profits of $800.5 million. Sounds like the opposite of funded by tax payers, 800 million dollars government revenue that doesn't have to raised by taxes. (BC population is about 4.5 million)
Here is a review of them as employers, http://www.eluta.ca/top-employer-liquor-distribution-branch-british-columbia .
According to wikipedia they also give the private liquor stores a 13% discount. So the private stores are buying alcohol for 13% less and still sell for 10-20% more.
Perhaps the religious right folks did choose to be straight?
Why would I pay $600 an oz at the liquor store when I can buy it at the local dealer for $200 an oz?
There is also
#3 Person takes antibiotic due to really needing it. Then stops early leaving a few of the toughest bacteria to survive and breed.
Basically this speeds up the evolution of antibiotic resistant bacteria and is actually one of the bigger problems with antibiotics.
These are good reasons that drugs (including tobacco and alcohol) should be regulated.
Here in BC tobacco products must be kept out of sight or displayed in a store where minors are not allowed.
Alcohol is heavily regulated with most sold at government stores. The government stores are nice with pleasant staff who are paid enough. They somehow manage to under price the private stores by 10% to 20% and still bring in (next years projection according to the local paper) $800,000,000+ to the government + taxes.
It is quite a bit harder for kids to get tobacco or alcohol compared to pot or meth. Even when I was a kid 40 years ago pot was way more available then alcohol (though tobacco was very available).
Thanks, Mozilla, for deciding that I need to change my tried and tested browsing habits of 15 years, simply because you think your way is better - you could have at least given us a way to revert to the old url bar behaviour, but you didn't.
Perhaps you should try Seamonkey ver2. Same rendering engine as Firefox, most extensions work fine and the address bar works much the same as always.
I also personally find it faster then Firefox.
In Canada they're supposed to destroy your finger prints after 6 months if you are not convicted of a crime.
The idea that software development will somehow become obsolete because there are open source programs freely available is a fallacy. It is like when 20 farm workers are replaced by a mechanized piece of farm machinery, they don't just starve and die. Those twenty farm workers end up operating, repairing, and building those pieces of farm machinery instead of breaking their backs in a field and every benefits from the productivity increase.
Actually with the introduction of mechanized machinery farm workers found it harder and harder to make a living. Competition drove wages down and people ended up rioting. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_Riots also the article on luddites is similar except it was weaving machines putting people out of work.
You could buy the Presentation Manager (16 bit version) from Microsoft, then run OS/2 1.x PM programs on NT.
While you're right about IBM getting pissed about Microsoft changing NT from OS/2 NT ver 3 to Windows NT v3.1 there were other big problems including major arguments about putting the graphics driver into the kernel with Microsoft wanting the graphics in the kernel for performance reasons and IBM not wanting it for stability.
That pretty well summed up the difference in their philosophies.
I have pinball.vxd installed in Win2k. Unluckily it is broken and destroys HPFS partitions larger then 2 GBs.
It is the same in Canada, you can move around all you want and don't have to register or anything. Only exception is if you have a drivers license, then legally you have to update your address within a certain time.
Of course the government does have quite a few carrots to encourage you to keep your info up to date such as tax refunds, even if you didn't pay tax and I'd guess the States also has various carrots as well as the weird idea that all young males have to register for selective service as a stick.
Why would there be less entitlements if only the rich were allowed to vote? I think that there would be tons of entitlements, just that the flow would be from the poor to the rich.
Here in Canada, the public funding is divided based on how many votes parties received last election.
That is weird. Here in Canada I remember reading (in about 1982) about a famous case where the guy picked up the girl at the bar (when the drinking age was 21) went back to her place and bonked her. Her parents came home, freaked about what their 15 yr old was doing and the guy got charged with statutory rape. The judge was very apologetic when he sentenced the poor guy to the minimum 5 yrs.
After this the law was changed so that if you honestly believed the girl was of age, that was a legitimate defense.
Not sure what the law is now though. The sex crime laws have been rewritten a few times and statutory rape isn't on the books any more, at least with that name.