Technically, it is not a loophole. As far as I know, every state which has sales tax also has use tax which is the same except that the individual is responsible to pay it directly to the state rather than the merchant being required to collect it.
Sales by zip code will not work, because zip codes do not follow municipal lines. The U.S. Post Office determines the zip code for a particular address based on the particular post office which they believe it will be most convenient to deliver the mail from. This has no relationship to what local municipality that address is in. In order for this to work it would be necessary for there to be a database which contains the taxing jurisdiction for EVERY address in the United States.
Actually, I was pointing out that the idea that the earth is flat is a modern idea and the idea that it is round is the default belief throughout recorded history.
Man has known that the earth is round since at least the 6th century BC. It's circumference was calculated to within the margin of error of the method used in the 3rd century BC.
If you think the earth is flat, please explain why a sailing ship disappears over the horizon as it sails away from a person? Not only does it disappear, but the lower parts become obscured by the horizon first.
There are places where it is wasteful to dump water. However, I happen to live in an area where rainfall is heavy enough to support a much larger population than it currently has (and it is currently a rather densely populated region by U.S. standards). For the vast majority of the time the only reason to regulate how much water people use is to reduce the burden on the sewage treatment plants, not because of a concern about running out of fresh water (there have been occasional years, two I think, when some shallow wells went dry and the reservoirs which supplied water to municipalities were dangerously low, but those droughts ended just when people started to get worried and water supplies returned to more than sufficient in a matter of a month or two).
Laws are one thing...guidelines written by the guy who decides whether the department's lawyers will defend you when somebody sue or if perhaps they should refer you to the Justice Department for prosecution is something else entirely.
While I do not believe this was intentional, I think that anyone who does not consider the possibility that the NSA, or some other organization, got this designed in on purpose is naive.
Which makes you wonder if this is actually a flaw. A flaw is where something does not work the way it was designed to work. The fact that every modern processor has the same vulnerability suggests that perhaps this was designed into them at some point. I have no evidence that this was designed in, but one should at least entertain the possibility that it was.
Which would force me to stop using Windows 10 altogether. I would really miss some of the games I play and do not look forward to the effort of migrating my wife from one particular piece of software she uses which only comes in a Windows version (there exists an open source alternative which runs on Linux or Windows, but I do not want to go through the effort of learning the software she uses so that I can learn this other software well enough to teach her how to use it as proficiently as she does the current software...which she was able to find several people who would work with her to get configured the way she wants).
Once again, the problem with your idea is that The Reformation in Christianity was a return to the original scriptures that formed the basis for Christianity. Hassan-al-Banna is the Muslim Luther (or perhaps the Muslim Jan Hus). Those Muslims who have gone back to their original scriptures to reform Islam have universally taught violence. Of course, the biggest problem with your idea is that the practices of the "Christian Church" which you applaud as being "modernized" away during the Reformation were things they learned from the Muslims.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, China has a second demographic problem which results from that policy. They have what is now a rapidly aging population for which there are insufficient young people to provide support for. The question is whether China can gain sufficient technology and wealth for the leaders to believe they can win, or even survive, a war before the population ages out of the problem point. If China's population problem is going to lead them to war, it will happen in the next five years. The fact that it has not already happened gives us a basis to believe that it will not (not a basis which is at all conclusive, just a basis to make the case).
I am sorry, you are mistaking a "strong man" leader for rule of law. While a strong man leader who imposes the rule of law is the fastest way to get there, it is also inherently unreliable. Since for the strong man to rule he must be above the law, but if he is above the law then so is anyone he says is above the law. Of course, part of the reason you believe in the "strong man" method is because for too many years our society and political class have mistook democracy for rule of law. Democracy without rule of law is no better than any other form of government. One of the reasons why so many people mistake democracy for rule of law is because, at least as I see history, rule of law always results in the rise of some form of democratic government.
The problem with "reforming" Islam is that the typical way in which a religion is reformed is that someone, or multiple someones, goes back to the original scripture for that religion, ignores most of the tradition and interpretation which has grown up, and ossified, around it over the years, and freshly interprets that scripture. Doing that with the Islamic holy books is what gave us the basis for Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other groups which are promoting Islamic violence. It may be possible for a revival of Sufism to bring about the "modernization" you are calling for, but only time will tell. The original edge was taken off of the violence of Islam when it stopped working, when the expansion of Islam by conquest was halted and Islam's borders were pushed back.
Individual single young men are not a problem for society, but large quantities of them are. Or, to be precise, too high a percentage of the population being single young men creates problems for a society. On the other hand, I suspect that having a limited number of single men is probably as beneficial for society as having too many. We can debate the reasons why having too many single young men is a problem, but history shows us that any society which has large numbers of single young men, especially single young men who have little chance of becoming married young men, tends to go to war (either with itself, or its neighbors).
Actually, if you adjust for being raised in a single parent household vs being raised by both parents, the difference in conviction rates between whites and blacks disappears (or, at least drops to the margin of error of studies on the subject). The same thing happens to poverty rates.
It might make more sense, but that is not the way it is. I think we have found your problem. You think the world will make sense, with a thought process like that the next thing you will do is conclude that someone must have designed it that way.
Of course, the end result was that there is now another company producing two competing medicines which it is selling for less than the company Martin Shkreli bought originally charged for it.
I live in the U.S., I can but vitamins, with no prescription, in every grocery store and most convenience stores in the country. So, you completely misunderstood this.
That being said, you are correct that this is only possible because of government control...of course, I suspect that the end result of this will be similar to what happened when Martin Shkreli pulled his game. Another company looked at the product and said, "There is not patent on that. We can make that, and make a good profit on it, for less than they were selling it for before this all happened." Martin Shkreli is a complete jerk, but the result of his action was that the drug in question is now available for less than it was before he tried to profiteer off of it. If he had not proved himself such a selfish jerk in other ways, I might suspect he did it to create just that outcome.
Slashdot Mirror
Trump also wants to increase immigration from Asian countries which are predominantly inhabited by dark-skinned people.
I see no reason to believe a theory about the earth which was invented in the 19th century and then attributed to ignorant people from the past.
Technically, it is not a loophole. As far as I know, every state which has sales tax also has use tax which is the same except that the individual is responsible to pay it directly to the state rather than the merchant being required to collect it.
Sales by zip code will not work, because zip codes do not follow municipal lines. The U.S. Post Office determines the zip code for a particular address based on the particular post office which they believe it will be most convenient to deliver the mail from. This has no relationship to what local municipality that address is in. In order for this to work it would be necessary for there to be a database which contains the taxing jurisdiction for EVERY address in the United States.
Actually, I was pointing out that the idea that the earth is flat is a modern idea and the idea that it is round is the default belief throughout recorded history.
Man has known that the earth is round since at least the 6th century BC. It's circumference was calculated to within the margin of error of the method used in the 3rd century BC. If you think the earth is flat, please explain why a sailing ship disappears over the horizon as it sails away from a person? Not only does it disappear, but the lower parts become obscured by the horizon first.
There are places where it is wasteful to dump water. However, I happen to live in an area where rainfall is heavy enough to support a much larger population than it currently has (and it is currently a rather densely populated region by U.S. standards). For the vast majority of the time the only reason to regulate how much water people use is to reduce the burden on the sewage treatment plants, not because of a concern about running out of fresh water (there have been occasional years, two I think, when some shallow wells went dry and the reservoirs which supplied water to municipalities were dangerously low, but those droughts ended just when people started to get worried and water supplies returned to more than sufficient in a matter of a month or two).
Absolutely, the "Always Connected PC" will be able to report how it is being used, even if YOU don't have a data plan for it to connect for.
And the best part is, the cloud host gets to sell it to other people!
Laws are one thing...guidelines written by the guy who decides whether the department's lawyers will defend you when somebody sue or if perhaps they should refer you to the Justice Department for prosecution is something else entirely.
While I do not believe this was intentional, I think that anyone who does not consider the possibility that the NSA, or some other organization, got this designed in on purpose is naive.
And exactly what processors are they going to buy instead? According to several sources, EVERY modern processor has this "flaw".
Are you sure it is unintended?
"“Meltdown” and “Spectre”: Every modern processor has unfixable security flaws" https://arstechnica.com/gadget...
Which makes you wonder if this is actually a flaw. A flaw is where something does not work the way it was designed to work. The fact that every modern processor has the same vulnerability suggests that perhaps this was designed into them at some point. I have no evidence that this was designed in, but one should at least entertain the possibility that it was.
Which would force me to stop using Windows 10 altogether. I would really miss some of the games I play and do not look forward to the effort of migrating my wife from one particular piece of software she uses which only comes in a Windows version (there exists an open source alternative which runs on Linux or Windows, but I do not want to go through the effort of learning the software she uses so that I can learn this other software well enough to teach her how to use it as proficiently as she does the current software...which she was able to find several people who would work with her to get configured the way she wants).
Once again, the problem with your idea is that The Reformation in Christianity was a return to the original scriptures that formed the basis for Christianity. Hassan-al-Banna is the Muslim Luther (or perhaps the Muslim Jan Hus). Those Muslims who have gone back to their original scriptures to reform Islam have universally taught violence. Of course, the biggest problem with your idea is that the practices of the "Christian Church" which you applaud as being "modernized" away during the Reformation were things they learned from the Muslims.
Fortunately, or unfortunately, China has a second demographic problem which results from that policy. They have what is now a rapidly aging population for which there are insufficient young people to provide support for. The question is whether China can gain sufficient technology and wealth for the leaders to believe they can win, or even survive, a war before the population ages out of the problem point. If China's population problem is going to lead them to war, it will happen in the next five years. The fact that it has not already happened gives us a basis to believe that it will not (not a basis which is at all conclusive, just a basis to make the case).
I am sorry, you are mistaking a "strong man" leader for rule of law. While a strong man leader who imposes the rule of law is the fastest way to get there, it is also inherently unreliable. Since for the strong man to rule he must be above the law, but if he is above the law then so is anyone he says is above the law. Of course, part of the reason you believe in the "strong man" method is because for too many years our society and political class have mistook democracy for rule of law. Democracy without rule of law is no better than any other form of government. One of the reasons why so many people mistake democracy for rule of law is because, at least as I see history, rule of law always results in the rise of some form of democratic government.
The problem with "reforming" Islam is that the typical way in which a religion is reformed is that someone, or multiple someones, goes back to the original scripture for that religion, ignores most of the tradition and interpretation which has grown up, and ossified, around it over the years, and freshly interprets that scripture. Doing that with the Islamic holy books is what gave us the basis for Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other groups which are promoting Islamic violence. It may be possible for a revival of Sufism to bring about the "modernization" you are calling for, but only time will tell. The original edge was taken off of the violence of Islam when it stopped working, when the expansion of Islam by conquest was halted and Islam's borders were pushed back.
Individual single young men are not a problem for society, but large quantities of them are. Or, to be precise, too high a percentage of the population being single young men creates problems for a society. On the other hand, I suspect that having a limited number of single men is probably as beneficial for society as having too many. We can debate the reasons why having too many single young men is a problem, but history shows us that any society which has large numbers of single young men, especially single young men who have little chance of becoming married young men, tends to go to war (either with itself, or its neighbors).
Actually, if you adjust for being raised in a single parent household vs being raised by both parents, the difference in conviction rates between whites and blacks disappears (or, at least drops to the margin of error of studies on the subject). The same thing happens to poverty rates.
It might make more sense, but that is not the way it is. I think we have found your problem. You think the world will make sense, with a thought process like that the next thing you will do is conclude that someone must have designed it that way.
I mean, processing rates haven't been subject to competitive pricing... ever.
That is not true. I worked for at least two retail businesses which changed their credit card processor for a better rate.
Of course, the end result was that there is now another company producing two competing medicines which it is selling for less than the company Martin Shkreli bought originally charged for it.
I live in the U.S., I can but vitamins, with no prescription, in every grocery store and most convenience stores in the country. So, you completely misunderstood this.
That being said, you are correct that this is only possible because of government control...of course, I suspect that the end result of this will be similar to what happened when Martin Shkreli pulled his game. Another company looked at the product and said, "There is not patent on that. We can make that, and make a good profit on it, for less than they were selling it for before this all happened." Martin Shkreli is a complete jerk, but the result of his action was that the drug in question is now available for less than it was before he tried to profiteer off of it. If he had not proved himself such a selfish jerk in other ways, I might suspect he did it to create just that outcome.