One company is more stable than the other. They may be concerned about the long-term and the best interest of their shares in the newly-formed company.
Are you talking about when the Republican Congress forced the Clinton administration to balance the budget? The current Democrats claiming they support fiscal responsibility but freaking out about any cuts? Or are you referring to the budget Clinton proposed in 1995? That's the one that never, ever even considered balancing the budget. And that was after the 1993 tax increases.
One last thing, for the record: tax revenues increased 6.1% last year (the horrors of tax cuts! It's draining the treasury!). Unfortunately, Congress spent 10.5% more last year as well. This reduced the annual deficit by about 150 billion dollars to about 360 something.
We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.
Beyond that, it would be interesting to look at the details of how this works. Does it mimic UV light and other things trying to break down early life? Is the mutation rate random?
It may not prove evolution, but it is an interesting experiment.
Sometimes what looks like corruption is just birds of a feather flocking together.
Say you are writing a pro-conservation and people find out (cue spooky music) your article is funded by the Sierra Club. Maybe it's because the Sierra Club finds value in the person's work. Maybe the NRA backs politicians who pro-gun control, instead of trying to bribe a politician.
A special interest is just an interest that isn't your's.
Like the person feeding the crocodile, they will be eaten last.
The U.S. is the nation trying to kill the croc.
But Canada, unlike France, Germany, Russia and China, isn't helping countries like Iran. I will give them credit on that.
One sidenote: To the person who thinks I was trolling. I firmly believe the "we'll just talk and sort things out without any threat of force" is both naive and dangerous. History will bear this out so I am not sweating the negative moderation points.
If I were Iran or North Korea, I would be loving Canada right now.
The U.S. is taking on the bad guys with little thanks from the rest of the world, but with great benefit to countries like Canada.
The lack of understanding about human nature displayed in your post is truly dangerous. Understanding and compromise? That works if people are reasonable and good. Otherwise, that will be a recipe for disaster.
we played games with fake teams and players. Will kids not buy a good game with fake "almost real" names. The Cows with Mikail Syria or something like that.
with facts, that is the only thing we should be concerned about. Not about whether his views shatter our pre-conceived notions about how the world should work.
They've been re-running it frequently in the last week.
Re:They Weren't Even Measuring Output From the Sun
on
BBC on Global Dimming
·
· Score: 1
I saved the article if anyone is interested in looking it up. Philadelphia Inquirer, Monday April 14, 2003 page d3.
They Weren't Even Measuring Output From the Sun
on
BBC on Global Dimming
·
· Score: 1
Around April 13th, 2003 I read a news article which mentioned that scientists were not measuring the output from the sun. So without knowing how much the orbit is wobbling (which has caused warming and cooling trends in the past) or how much energy is actually coming out of the sun (which I assume fluctuates), we are going to get these predictions?
Slashdot Mirror
http://news.newkerala.com/health-news-india/?actio n=fullnews&id=67718
showed usefulness. Creating absolutely no moral dilemmas. And it got oh so much press ink.
The government is a beast which is never satisfied with less. That would diminish their power. No one should be surprised with this.
Case in point. Do you think these states actually want you to stop smoking? Of course not.
One company is more stable than the other. They may be concerned about the long-term and the best interest of their shares in the newly-formed company.
Are you talking about when the Republican Congress forced the Clinton administration to balance the budget? The current Democrats claiming they support fiscal responsibility but freaking out about any cuts? Or are you referring to the budget Clinton proposed in 1995? That's the one that never, ever even considered balancing the budget. And that was after the 1993 tax increases.
One last thing, for the record: tax revenues increased 6.1% last year (the horrors of tax cuts! It's draining the treasury!). Unfortunately, Congress spent 10.5% more last year as well. This reduced the annual deficit by about 150 billion dollars to about 360 something.
We don't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.
Someone DESIGNED a system to prove evolution.
Beyond that, it would be interesting to look at the details of how this works. Does it mimic UV light and other things trying to break down early life? Is the mutation rate random?
It may not prove evolution, but it is an interesting experiment.
That could land him and Google in major SEC-related trouble. Unintentional insider-trading? That can be bad, bad new.
How much time to administrators have to spend fighting off spyware on Windows systems? Is there a numerical figure for this yet?
What do you have against T.O.?
I don't think Paramount wants to deal with the financial headache of simply setting this up.
1) They won't take you the wrong way down one-way streets.
2) They will get you to your destination instead of 95% of the way there.
Isn't unmanaged code only an issue for C/C++, not C#, in the .NET system?
Isn't a lot of the problem with Internet Explorer and how it integrates with Windows?
Better question? Will anyone be reading post # 1600 in this thread?
Family Guy, which I love, is different and very similar to the Simpsons (which I also love) at the same time.
My first thought is people will be looking for any similarities to Simpsons games.
Sometimes what looks like corruption is just birds of a feather flocking together.
Say you are writing a pro-conservation and people find out (cue spooky music) your article is funded by the Sierra Club. Maybe it's because the Sierra Club finds value in the person's work. Maybe the NRA backs politicians who pro-gun control, instead of trying to bribe a politician.
A special interest is just an interest that isn't your's.
Like the person feeding the crocodile, they will be eaten last.
The U.S. is the nation trying to kill the croc.
But Canada, unlike France, Germany, Russia and China, isn't helping countries like Iran. I will give them credit on that.
One sidenote: To the person who thinks I was trolling. I firmly believe the "we'll just talk and sort things out without any threat of force" is both naive and dangerous. History will bear this out so I am not sweating the negative moderation points.
If I were Iran or North Korea, I would be loving Canada right now.
The U.S. is taking on the bad guys with little thanks from the rest of the world, but with great benefit to countries like Canada.
The lack of understanding about human nature displayed in your post is truly dangerous. Understanding and compromise? That works if people are reasonable and good. Otherwise, that will be a recipe for disaster.
we played games with fake teams and players. Will kids not buy a good game with fake "almost real" names. The Cows with Mikail Syria or something like that.
One person's business interest is another person's job.
That aside, this is bad law.
Is that why revenues are up 10.5% this year? Because the tax cuts are draining the treasury?
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york20050114080 7.asp
Radical conservatives like Clinton were calling it a crisis in 1998-1999. Didn't the late-Dem. Patrick Moynihan call for partial privitzation?
that seems to be the main difference.
with facts, that is the only thing we should be concerned about. Not about whether his views shatter our pre-conceived notions about how the world should work.
They've been re-running it frequently in the last week.
I saved the article if anyone is interested in looking it up. Philadelphia Inquirer, Monday April 14, 2003 page d3.
Around April 13th, 2003 I read a news article which mentioned that scientists were not measuring the output from the sun. So without knowing how much the orbit is wobbling (which has caused warming and cooling trends in the past) or how much energy is actually coming out of the sun (which I assume fluctuates), we are going to get these predictions?