"An example of the need for self-defense to enable substantial change in the Deep South took place in early 1965. Black students picketing the local high school were confronted by hostile police and fire trucks with hoses. A car of four Deacons emerged and, in view of the police, calmly loaded their shotguns. The police ordered the fire truck to withdraw. This was the first time in the 20th century, as Lance Hill observes, “an armed black organization had successfully used weapons to defend a lawful protest against an attack by law enforcement.”
"The Deacons for Defense and Justice was an armed self-defense group of African-Americans that protected civil rights organizations in the U.S. Southern states during the 1960s. Historically, the organization practiced self-defense methods in the face of racist oppression that was carried out under the Jim Crow Laws by local/state government officials and racist vigilantes.
The Deacons were a driving force of Black Power that Stokely Carmichael echoed. Carmichael speaks about the Deacons when he writes, “Here is a group which realized that the ‘law’ and law enforcement agencies would not protect people, so they had to do it themselves...The Deacons and all other blacks who resort to self-defense represent a simple answer to a simple question: what man would not defend his family and home from attack?”[3] The Deacons, according to Carmichael and many others, were the protection that the Civil Rights needed on local levels, as well as the ones who intervened in places that the state and federal government fell short.
The Deacons were not the first champions of armed-defense during the Civil Rights Movement, but they were the first as an organized force. Many individual activists and other proponents of non-violence protected themselves with guns. Fannie Lou Hamer, the eloquently blunt Mississippi militant who outraged Lyndon B. Johnson at the 1964 Democratic Convention, confessed that she kept several loaded guns under her bed.[4] Others such as Robert F. Williams also practiced self-defense. Williams transformed his local NAACP branch into an armed self-defense unit, for which transgression he was denounced by the NAACP and hounded by the federal government (he found asylum in Cuba).[4]
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was no stranger to the idea of self-defense. According to Annelieke Dirks, “Even Martin Luther King Jr.—the icon of nonviolence—employed armed bodyguards and had guns in his house during the early stages of the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1956. Glenn Smiley, an organizer of the strictly nonviolent and pacifist Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), observed during a house visit that the police did not allow King a weapon permit, but that ‘the place is an arsenal."[5] Efforts from those such as Smiley convinced Dr. King that any sort of weapons or “self-defense” could not be associated with someone holding King's position. Dr. King agreed.
In many areas of the “Deep South” the federal and state governments had no control of local authorities and groups that did not want to follow the laws enacted. One such group, the Ku Klux Klan, is the most widely known organization that openly practiced acts of violence and segregation based on race. As part of their strategy to intimidate this community [African Americans], the Ku Klux Klan initiated a “campaign of terror” that included harassment, the burning of crosses on the lawns of African-American voters, the destruction by fire of five churches, a Masonic hall, a Baptist center, and murder.[6] These incidents were not isolated since a significant amount of victimization of African Americans occurred in Jonesboro, Louisiana in 1964.
The African-American community felt that a response of action was crucial in curbing this terrorism given the lack of support and protection by State and Federal authorities. A group of African-American men in Jonesboro in Jackson Parish in north Louisiana
Media latches on to the "positives", ignores the negatives.
"According to the study, gun dealer licensing, dealer state record reporting requirements, dealer police inspections, gun owner fingerprinting, closing of the “gun show loophole,” ammunition purchaser recordkeeping, child handgun restrictions, child access laws, juvenile handgun purchases, magazine bans, and may-issue carry permits, have little to no effect on firearm-related deaths. Further, their results show, semi-auto bans, firearms locks, “bulk purchase limitations,” and mandatory theft reporting, increase firearm-related deaths.
Other anti--gun researchers seem to think the study is flawed at best, possibly manipulated.
David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, said of the findings, “That’s too big -- I don’t believe that.”
The claim "Women in the United States are paid only 79 cents on the dollar compared with men doing the same job." has been dismissed by any number of studies. Women's collective average pay is about 80% of men's collective average pay, but that is a different notion altogether and is explained largely by women's self-selection in traditionally low-paying jobs, albeit jobs with generally higher flexibility.
Men and women with the same experience, education, and job *and* who put in the same number of work hours per week tend to make virtually identical the same earnings. When the former is true, but the later is not, even among same-gender groups, any difference is strongly tied to the fewer number of hours worked. I.e., men who work fewer hours than other men get paid less and those men are paid at commensurate with the wages of similarly situated women.
This is all true even in industries where women outnumber men by large margins and where the barriers are almost all self-imposed. For example, women real-estate brokers running their own business tend to earn less than men in the same situation.
The countdown for the Top 30 Murder Capitals of America:
Rank City 30 Chicago Heights, IL 29 Baton Rouge, LA 28 Buffalo, NY 27 Hattiesburg, MS 26 East Chicago, IN 25 Birmingham, AL 24 Desert Hot Springs, CA 23 Compton, CA 22 Myrtle Beach, SC 21 Fort Pierce, FL 20 Harvey, IL 19 Bridgeton, NJ 18 Flint, MI 17 Rocky Mount, NC 16 Pine Bluff, AR 15 Petersburg, VA 14 Newark, NJ 13 Baltimore, MD 12 Harrisburg, PA 11 Jackson, MS 10 Wilmington, DE 9 Trenton, NJ 8 Riviera Beach, FL 7 New Orleans, LA 6 Camden, NJ 5 Detroit, MI 4 Gary, IN 3 St. Louis, MO 2 Chester, PA 1 East St. Louis, IL
"when asked of the TSA has a theory on why so many more guns are being brought onboard airlines"
I would thought that preventing people from taking guns "onboard airlines" was sort of the sine qua non for a TSA checkpoint.
I suppose the sentence should be "why so many guns are being brought into security checklanes". Or maybe not, as TSA has been shown to be an abject farce.
While I'm sure the climate is warming, and I'm sure that humans are exacerbating the trend, it is hard to be impressed with the alarmist rants when the models used and raw data are not made available. When even the people developing the models cannot explain what they are doing. When the data is massaged beyond recognition. Not to mention that rather than being treated as a ecological problem, AGW has morphed into a treatise on income inequality, rich nations vs poor ones, etc.
"In early 2001, CPC was requested to implement the 1971-2000 normal for operational forecasts. So, we constructed a new SST normal for the 1971-2000 base period and implemented it operationally at CPC in August of 2001" (Journal of Climate). Read that again: "we constructed a new SST normal", that's not science, that's manipulation of data to fit the model.
Just the abstract to that particular paper reveals how fragile the models are, being based on assumptions piled on top of assumptions, and unveiling a tendency to massage data.
"SST predictions are usually issued in terms of anomalies and standardized anomalies relative to a 30-yr normal: climatological mean (CM) and standard deviation (SD). The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) suggests updating the 30-yr normal every 10 yr."
How can a normal be updated--the data is the data, and its normal is its normal? This sentence implies that the data is somehow massaged every ten years or so. There may be legitimate reasons to do so, but anytime you massage data, there have to be questions as to the legitmacy of the alteration.
"Using the extended reconstructed sea surface temperature (ERSST) on a 28 grid for 1854-2000 and the Hadley Centre Sea Ice and SST dataset (HadISST) on a 18 grid for 1870-1999, eleven 30-yr normals are calculated, and the interdecadal changes of seasonal CM, seasonal SD, and seasonal persistence (P) are discussed."
This says that data is being assembled from widely disparate data sources, with different measurement techniques, and that some of the data was made with instrumentation that simply cannot be validated (data from 1854?).
"Both PDO and NAO show a multidecadal oscillation that is consistent between ERSST and HadISST except that HadISST is biased toward warm in summer and cold in winter relative to ERSST."
Now we see that different data sets, ostensibly of the same population, disagree. And the fact that one data set exhibits bias to the extreme (too warm in summer and too cold in winter) raises questions about the proper use of this data. One scientist may be able to make a valid claim that the more stable data is in error and "correct" it to be more in line with the more volatile data; another scientist may do the opposite. And how is the bias measured? Why, against the model! Which one is right? Who's model is now more correct?
Virtually every glacier in the world is in full-on retreat.
Ice chunks the size of small US states have broken off of Antarctica in the last few years.
Rising surface temperatures in the subarctic are melting permafrost, permitting decay (with associated methane release) and destabilizing shallow methane calthrate deposits of unknown but possibly substantial extent.
You must have been really upset when the Laurentide Ice Sheet almost completely melted. 5 million square miles of ice up to 2 miles thick just *melted*. Damn those cavemen. Why didn't they think that their campfires 10,000 years ago would melt all that ice and ruin the whole Earth's ice-based ecosystem?
I know a few anti-gun folks who blather on and on about closing loopholes using "common-sense gun control".
Some of them are also quad-copter enthusiasts.
I've very much enjoyed using this phrase on them now that it's their ox getting gored. Of course, I point out that while the RTK&BA actually appears in the Constitution and "shall not be infringed", quad-copters do not.
And then I got a quad-copter for Christmas and have to decide if I'm going risk my CCW by not registering the damn toy drone.
You provided a single example, I provided an example from the other side. Neither of those sides is one I've voted for, but I found it quite hilarious a the time that so many self-proclaimed "most intelligent people in in the room" claimed later to have been duped by someone they repeatedly named a dunce.
Cheney may have been the brains behind the puppet, but that's not what those Dems said at the time or since, really, because "Bush lied! People died!" is such a nice bumper-sticker itself, and you can't fit "Bush stupidly repeated lies fed to him by Cheney and Democrats were so easily distracted that they voted for a war that they would later repudiate with 'I was for the war before I was against it' and endlessly blame Bush for any and all problems that might ever follow! People died!" on a bumper sticker.
Back when George Bush--the idiot who couldn't walk and breathe at the same time, the goofball who only got elected because of his Daddy, etc.--somehow managed to trick a large number of the Democrats in Congress to support his Iraq war.
If Bush was somehow able to scheme up a lie that convinced John Kerry and Hillary Clinton (among others) to vote for the Iraq war, how stupid could he be? Or for that matter if Kerry and Clinton were duped by the simpleton Bush, how can we take anything the say or do seriously either?
"A corporation may write its check to the Internal Revenue Service for payment of the corporate income tax, but that money must come from somewhere: from reduced returns to investors in the company, lower wages to its workers, or higher prices that consumers pay for the products the company produces." [CBO report "THE INCIDENCE OF THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX"]
This report goes on to say:
Although economists are far from a consensus about exactly who bears how much of the burden of the corporate income tax, the existing studies highlight the significant types of economic mechanisms as well as the empirical estimates necessary for further quantifying the burdens. CBO's review of the studies yields the following conclusions:
o The short-term burden of the corporate tax probably falls on stockholders or investors in general, but may fall on some more than on others, because not all investments are taxed at the same rate.
o The long-term burden of corporate or dividend taxation is unlikely to rest fully on corporate equity, because it will remain there only if marginal investment is not affected by those taxes. Most economists believe that the corporate tax system has some effect on investment decisions.
o Most evidence from closed-economy, general-equilibrium models suggests that given reasonable parameters, the long-term incidence of the corporate tax falls on capital in general.
o In the context of international capital mobility, the burden of the corporate tax may be shifted onto immobile factors (such as labor or land), but only to the degree that the capital and outputs of different countries can be substituted.
o In the very long term, the burden is likely to be shifted in part to labor, if the corporate tax dampens capital accumulation.
o Most attempts to distribute the burden of corporate taxation have neglected the possible importance of effects on the relative prices of products.
I have no choice in the matter, so I will be unable to get my yahoo email. The last reason I had for using yahoo just went away (I've had a yahoo email account for a *very* long time).
Seriously, $2400 ($200/month) for 2-phone plan? Mine is $70 for two iPhones with unlimited talk, text, and shared 4G of data (we've got wi-fi everywhere so why pay for 10G or more?).
And $100/month for the triple play is not bad, but that adds up to only $1200, not the $5200 you deducted for it.
And if you can't afford all the expenses of having a kid on top of the other things you're spending on, perhaps you ought rethink the decision to have one. Or maybe you could cut the TV and landline if you need to buy diapers.
who shoot handguns competitively for sport would disagree. Personally, none of my handguns has ever inflicted any damage on a human body, let alone lethal damage despite having fired thousands of rounds through them. I have no intention of ever inflicting any damage to any human being with any of my guns (indeed, none of my guns has ever harmed any animals either, if you don't count the rats executed in the trap with my pellet gun).
The real purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet toward whatever you aimed it at.
Well, there was that one time hot brass flew into my shirt. And one time I got bit by the slide action when it nipped a bit of skin off my thumb.
Same here. Sometimes called Israeli Carry, carrying without a round chambered in a semi-automatic handgun that lacks an integral positive safety seems like asking for trouble, given that I can rack the slide and flip the safety off in about 1-2 seconds (less if I've been practicing, maybe 3-4 if not).
Total number of U.S. heatstroke deaths of children left in cars, 2015: 23 Total number of U.S. heatstroke deaths of children left in cars, 2014: 31 Total number of U.S. heatstroke deaths of children left in cars, 1998-present: 660 Average number of U.S. child heatstroke fatalities per year since 1998: 37
Children involved in 2014 Nontraffic Fatalities (as of 6/18/15):
Backovers: 71 Frontovers: 63 Vehicle set in motion: 5 Underage Driver: 16 Drowning: 3 Power Window Strangulation: 2 Fall from Vehicle: 1 Other: 1 Total: 194
Every year, thousands of children are hurt and dozens are killed because a driver, usually a parent, backing up didn't see them.
Every year, thousands of children are hurt or and dozens are killed because a driver, usually a parent, moving forward very slowly didn't see them. These incidents for the most part take place in residential driveways or parking lots and are referred to as ‘frontovers.’ (the opposite of a backover).
Polystyrene would keep that CO2 sequestered for what, 1000 years or so? And now they've just released more into the atmosphere with the cow farts and Volkswagen emissions!
Slashdot Mirror
]Wikipedia]
"An example of the need for self-defense to enable substantial change in the Deep South took place in early 1965. Black students picketing the local high school were confronted by hostile police and fire trucks with hoses. A car of four Deacons emerged and, in view of the police, calmly loaded their shotguns. The police ordered the fire truck to withdraw. This was the first time in the 20th century, as Lance Hill observes, “an armed black organization had successfully used weapons to defend a lawful protest against an attack by law enforcement.”
"The Deacons for Defense and Justice was an armed self-defense group of African-Americans that protected civil rights organizations in the U.S. Southern states during the 1960s. Historically, the organization practiced self-defense methods in the face of racist oppression that was carried out under the Jim Crow Laws by local/state government officials and racist vigilantes.
The Deacons were a driving force of Black Power that Stokely Carmichael echoed. Carmichael speaks about the Deacons when he writes, “Here is a group which realized that the ‘law’ and law enforcement agencies would not protect people, so they had to do it themselves...The Deacons and all other blacks who resort to self-defense represent a simple answer to a simple question: what man would not defend his family and home from attack?”[3] The Deacons, according to Carmichael and many others, were the protection that the Civil Rights needed on local levels, as well as the ones who intervened in places that the state and federal government fell short.
The Deacons were not the first champions of armed-defense during the Civil Rights Movement, but they were the first as an organized force. Many individual activists and other proponents of non-violence protected themselves with guns. Fannie Lou Hamer, the eloquently blunt Mississippi militant who outraged Lyndon B. Johnson at the 1964 Democratic Convention, confessed that she kept several loaded guns under her bed.[4] Others such as Robert F. Williams also practiced self-defense. Williams transformed his local NAACP branch into an armed self-defense unit, for which transgression he was denounced by the NAACP and hounded by the federal government (he found asylum in Cuba).[4]
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was no stranger to the idea of self-defense. According to Annelieke Dirks, “Even Martin Luther King Jr.—the icon of nonviolence—employed armed bodyguards and had guns in his house during the early stages of the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1956. Glenn Smiley, an organizer of the strictly nonviolent and pacifist Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), observed during a house visit that the police did not allow King a weapon permit, but that ‘the place is an arsenal."[5] Efforts from those such as Smiley convinced Dr. King that any sort of weapons or “self-defense” could not be associated with someone holding King's position. Dr. King agreed.
In many areas of the “Deep South” the federal and state governments had no control of local authorities and groups that did not want to follow the laws enacted. One such group, the Ku Klux Klan, is the most widely known organization that openly practiced acts of violence and segregation based on race. As part of their strategy to intimidate this community [African Americans], the Ku Klux Klan initiated a “campaign of terror” that included harassment, the burning of crosses on the lawns of African-American voters, the destruction by fire of five churches, a Masonic hall, a Baptist center, and murder.[6] These incidents were not isolated since a significant amount of victimization of African Americans occurred in Jonesboro, Louisiana in 1964.
The African-American community felt that a response of action was crucial in curbing this terrorism given the lack of support and protection by State and Federal authorities. A group of African-American men in Jonesboro in Jackson Parish in north Louisiana
Media latches on to the "positives", ignores the negatives.
"According to the study, gun dealer licensing, dealer state record reporting requirements, dealer police inspections, gun owner fingerprinting, closing of the “gun show loophole,” ammunition purchaser recordkeeping, child handgun restrictions, child access laws, juvenile handgun purchases, magazine bans, and may-issue carry permits, have little to no effect on firearm-related deaths. Further, their results show, semi-auto bans, firearms locks, “bulk purchase limitations,” and mandatory theft reporting, increase firearm-related deaths.
Other anti--gun researchers seem to think the study is flawed at best, possibly manipulated.
David Hemenway, director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, said of the findings, “That’s too big -- I don’t believe that.”
P.S. Why is this a headline topic on Slashdot?
I recall there was some trick at the turnover about charging the sails an using the lasers for deceleration too.
The claim "Women in the United States are paid only 79 cents on the dollar compared with men doing the same job." has been dismissed by any number of studies. Women's collective average pay is about 80% of men's collective average pay, but that is a different notion altogether and is explained largely by women's self-selection in traditionally low-paying jobs, albeit jobs with generally higher flexibility.
Men and women with the same experience, education, and job *and* who put in the same number of work hours per week tend to make virtually identical the same earnings. When the former is true, but the later is not, even among same-gender groups, any difference is strongly tied to the fewer number of hours worked. I.e., men who work fewer hours than other men get paid less and those men are paid at commensurate with the wages of similarly situated women.
This is all true even in industries where women outnumber men by large margins and where the barriers are almost all self-imposed. For example, women real-estate brokers running their own business tend to earn less than men in the same situation.
Sounds like a rip-off of PC-104, i.e. they are a few decades late.
PC104 has been doing this for decades.
No reason given. No announcement or warning. Just boom, new bill.
The countdown for the Top 30 Murder Capitals of America:
Rank City
30 Chicago Heights, IL
29 Baton Rouge, LA
28 Buffalo, NY
27 Hattiesburg, MS
26 East Chicago, IN
25 Birmingham, AL
24 Desert Hot Springs, CA
23 Compton, CA
22 Myrtle Beach, SC
21 Fort Pierce, FL
20 Harvey, IL
19 Bridgeton, NJ
18 Flint, MI
17 Rocky Mount, NC
16 Pine Bluff, AR
15 Petersburg, VA
14 Newark, NJ
13 Baltimore, MD
12 Harrisburg, PA
11 Jackson, MS
10 Wilmington, DE
9 Trenton, NJ
8 Riviera Beach, FL
7 New Orleans, LA
6 Camden, NJ
5 Detroit, MI
4 Gary, IN
3 St. Louis, MO
2 Chester, PA
1 East St. Louis, IL
http://www.neighborhoodscout.c...
"when asked of the TSA has a theory on why so many more guns are being brought onboard airlines"
I would thought that preventing people from taking guns "onboard airlines" was sort of the sine qua non for a TSA checkpoint.
I suppose the sentence should be "why so many guns are being brought into security checklanes". Or maybe not, as TSA has been shown to be an abject farce.
While I'm sure the climate is warming, and I'm sure that humans are exacerbating the trend, it is hard to be impressed with the alarmist rants when the models used and raw data are not made available. When even the people developing the models cannot explain what they are doing. When the data is massaged beyond recognition. Not to mention that rather than being treated as a ecological problem, AGW has morphed into a treatise on income inequality, rich nations vs poor ones, etc.
"In early 2001, CPC was requested to implement the 1971-2000 normal for operational forecasts. So, we constructed a new SST normal for the 1971-2000 base period and implemented it operationally at CPC in August of 2001" (Journal of Climate). Read that again: "we constructed a new SST normal", that's not science, that's manipulation of data to fit the model.
Just the abstract to that particular paper reveals how fragile the models are, being based on assumptions piled on top of assumptions, and unveiling a tendency to massage data.
www dot ncdc dot noaa dot gov/oa/climate/research/sst/papers/xue-etal.pdf
"SST predictions are usually issued in terms of anomalies and standardized anomalies relative to a 30-yr normal: climatological mean (CM) and standard deviation (SD). The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) suggests updating the 30-yr normal every 10 yr."
How can a normal be updated--the data is the data, and its normal is its normal? This sentence implies that the data is somehow massaged every ten years or so. There may be legitimate reasons to do so, but anytime you massage data, there have to be questions as to the legitmacy of the alteration.
"Using the extended reconstructed sea surface temperature (ERSST) on a 28 grid for 1854-2000 and the Hadley Centre Sea Ice and SST dataset (HadISST) on a 18 grid for 1870-1999, eleven 30-yr normals are calculated, and the interdecadal changes of seasonal CM, seasonal SD, and seasonal persistence (P) are discussed."
This says that data is being assembled from widely disparate data sources, with different measurement techniques, and that some of the data was made with instrumentation that simply cannot be validated (data from 1854?).
"Both PDO and NAO show a multidecadal oscillation that is consistent between ERSST and HadISST except that HadISST is biased toward warm in summer and cold in winter relative to ERSST."
Now we see that different data sets, ostensibly of the same population, disagree. And the fact that one data set exhibits bias to the extreme (too warm in summer and too cold in winter) raises questions about the proper use of this data. One scientist may be able to make a valid claim that the more stable data is in error and "correct" it to be more in line with the more volatile data; another scientist may do the opposite. And how is the bias measured? Why, against the model! Which one is right? Who's model is now more correct?
Virtually every glacier in the world is in full-on retreat.
Ice chunks the size of small US states have broken off of Antarctica in the last few years.
Rising surface temperatures in the subarctic are melting permafrost, permitting decay (with associated methane release) and destabilizing shallow methane calthrate deposits of unknown but possibly substantial extent.
You must have been really upset when the Laurentide Ice Sheet almost completely melted. 5 million square miles of ice up to 2 miles thick just *melted*. Damn those cavemen. Why didn't they think that their campfires 10,000 years ago would melt all that ice and ruin the whole Earth's ice-based ecosystem?
took over Uganda. Millions cheered Hitler, Lenin, and Mao. Hugo Chavez was swept in to power by the people.
I know a few anti-gun folks who blather on and on about closing loopholes using "common-sense gun control".
Some of them are also quad-copter enthusiasts.
I've very much enjoyed using this phrase on them now that it's their ox getting gored. Of course, I point out that while the RTK&BA actually appears in the Constitution and "shall not be infringed", quad-copters do not.
And then I got a quad-copter for Christmas and have to decide if I'm going risk my CCW by not registering the damn toy drone.
You provided a single example, I provided an example from the other side. Neither of those sides is one I've voted for, but I found it quite hilarious a the time that so many self-proclaimed "most intelligent people in in the room" claimed later to have been duped by someone they repeatedly named a dunce.
Cheney may have been the brains behind the puppet, but that's not what those Dems said at the time or since, really, because "Bush lied! People died!" is such a nice bumper-sticker itself, and you can't fit "Bush stupidly repeated lies fed to him by Cheney and Democrats were so easily distracted that they voted for a war that they would later repudiate with 'I was for the war before I was against it' and endlessly blame Bush for any and all problems that might ever follow! People died!" on a bumper sticker.
Back when George Bush--the idiot who couldn't walk and breathe at the same time, the goofball who only got elected because of his Daddy, etc.--somehow managed to trick a large number of the Democrats in Congress to support his Iraq war.
If Bush was somehow able to scheme up a lie that convinced John Kerry and Hillary Clinton (among others) to vote for the Iraq war, how stupid could he be? Or for that matter if Kerry and Clinton were duped by the simpleton Bush, how can we take anything the say or do seriously either?
Now the happy couple should go off and spawn some pirates!
Was confused there for a second.
Those fools hate everything and everybody.
"A corporation may write its check to the Internal Revenue Service for payment of the corporate income tax, but that money must come from somewhere: from reduced returns to investors in the company, lower wages to its workers, or higher prices that consumers pay for the products the company produces." [CBO report "THE INCIDENCE OF THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX"]
This report goes on to say:
Although economists are far from a consensus about exactly
who bears how much of the burden of the corporate income tax, the existing studies
highlight the significant types of economic mechanisms as well as the empirical
estimates necessary for further quantifying the burdens. CBO's review of the studies
yields the following conclusions:
o The short-term burden of the corporate tax probably falls on
stockholders or investors in general, but may fall on some more than
on others, because not all investments are taxed at the same rate.
o The long-term burden of corporate or dividend taxation is unlikely to
rest fully on corporate equity, because it will remain there only if
marginal investment is not affected by those taxes. Most economists
believe that the corporate tax system has some effect on investment
decisions.
o Most evidence from closed-economy, general-equilibrium models
suggests that given reasonable parameters, the long-term incidence of
the corporate tax falls on capital in general.
o In the context of international capital mobility, the burden of the
corporate tax may be shifted onto immobile factors (such as labor or
land), but only to the degree that the capital and outputs of different
countries can be substituted.
o In the very long term, the burden is likely to be shifted in part to
labor, if the corporate tax dampens capital accumulation.
o Most attempts to distribute the burden of corporate taxation have
neglected the possible importance of effects on the relative prices of
products.
I have no choice in the matter, so I will be unable to get my yahoo email. The last reason I had for using yahoo just went away (I've had a yahoo email account for a *very* long time).
It's no wonder you have problems.
Seriously, $2400 ($200/month) for 2-phone plan? Mine is $70 for two iPhones with unlimited talk, text, and shared 4G of data (we've got wi-fi everywhere so why pay for 10G or more?).
And $100/month for the triple play is not bad, but that adds up to only $1200, not the $5200 you deducted for it.
And if you can't afford all the expenses of having a kid on top of the other things you're spending on, perhaps you ought rethink the decision to have one. Or maybe you could cut the TV and landline if you need to buy diapers.
You joke now, but I'm sure this "feature" is in the works.
who shoot handguns competitively for sport would disagree. Personally, none of my handguns has ever inflicted any damage on a human body, let alone lethal damage despite having fired thousands of rounds through them. I have no intention of ever inflicting any damage to any human being with any of my guns (indeed, none of my guns has ever harmed any animals either, if you don't count the rats executed in the trap with my pellet gun).
The real purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet toward whatever you aimed it at.
Well, there was that one time hot brass flew into my shirt. And one time I got bit by the slide action when it nipped a bit of skin off my thumb.
Same here. Sometimes called Israeli Carry, carrying without a round chambered in a semi-automatic handgun that lacks an integral positive safety seems like asking for trouble, given that I can rack the slide and flip the safety off in about 1-2 seconds (less if I've been practicing, maybe 3-4 if not).
Total number of U.S. heatstroke deaths of children left in cars, 2015: 23
Total number of U.S. heatstroke deaths of children left in cars, 2014: 31
Total number of U.S. heatstroke deaths of children left in cars, 1998-present: 660
Average number of U.S. child heatstroke fatalities per year since 1998: 37
Children involved in 2014 Nontraffic Fatalities (as of 6/18/15):
Backovers: 71
Frontovers: 63
Vehicle set in motion: 5
Underage Driver: 16
Drowning: 3
Power Window Strangulation: 2
Fall from Vehicle: 1
Other: 1
Total: 194
Every year, thousands of children are hurt and dozens are killed because a driver, usually a parent, backing up didn't see them.
Every year, thousands of children are hurt or and dozens are killed because a driver, usually a parent, moving forward very slowly didn't see them. These incidents for the most part take place in residential driveways or parking lots and are referred to as ‘frontovers.’ (the opposite of a backover).
Polystyrene would keep that CO2 sequestered for what, 1000 years or so? And now they've just released more into the atmosphere with the cow farts and Volkswagen emissions!