But wait, the fuel used to make those paper bags has all been turned into CO2 as opposed to being sequestered in the ground as would be the case for a polystyrene cup. That's a bad thing, right? (It's a Monday before you answer that, by the way).
Then calculate the externalities and have a genuine conversation. The whole paper vs plastic thing has been based on very short-sighted and emotional arguments.
Oh, I agree. Cost/benefit analysis is what is required. The problem comes in when low-information people jump on a bandwagon of knee-jerk changes (often being pushed by vested interests) and stuff gets pushed through without sound underpinnings. Ethanol in gasoline is a prime example.
You need to use a ceramic cup 1000 times for the resources used in making it to to match the equivalent single uses of polystyrene cups. You can argue that you might but it only takes a couple of mugs being mishandled and your average is way down.
Of course, I prefer a ceramic cup anyway but you really have to be careful when you assert some things are green over others. Especially when things are price driven. Price tends to (but not always) be an indicator of resource usage.
My grammar is all to pot above. Hope it makes sense.
I was talking in general rather than in specific. That there is a long history of dissension within the supreme court is an easy way to explain that it is not invalid to disagree with the supreme court on any issue, even when they are unanimous. There are other arguments that support this position to, of course, it's just the easiest way to demolish this appeal to authority.
Last time I wanted to bring this up, I was unable to find a direct link to US police enforcement. As you say, it is based off of the British system but is not directly descended, it seems.
We did nothing about the hole in the ozone layer. We did a bunch of stuff that gave people the warm fuzzies and made dupont a lot of money and, of course, advanced politicians careers but the hole in the ozone layer? Pretty much doing its own thing.
It usually turns out that those things use *more* resources than the alternative, hence why they are more expensive. You may save an ounce of oil from the plastics but you use two on the paper processing.
Many devices do not have a 100% available duty cycle. Welders, compressors etc. They tend to rely on your work-practices involving periods where you're not using the device. For a 3D pen, possibly would would be repositioning your work or considering your next step.
OK. I think we may be talking at cross purposes. I think I gave too much emphasis to your "(the pound was slightly different then today I believe)". Interesting link though, I was never even aware of those coins Though I have heard of the phrase before.
Yes, I believe the interstate commerce clause has been stretched to cover way more than a plain reading of it allows. Supreme court decisions frequently are split, often along partisan lines so it's not like even internally that they agree that they are always correct so why should it be wrong for me to be on the dissenting side?
Could you offer some pointers to some documentation on this? I am genuinely interested. Certainly the pennies I know pre and post decimalisation were made of copper, not silver. Google and Wikipedia offer little enlightenment.
The word "intrinsic" makes many assumptions, most of which may not be true. It is a term best avoided. Knowing why it should be avoided is an important step in understanding. Use it and you're lying to yourself. Keep using it and you build on the lie.
I assumed you were talking about decimalisation since you were talking about when the pound was worth 240 pence.. The pound nominally stayed the same throughout that process.
I must say I'm not familiar with the silver penny though I do have several pre-decimal coins still.
True enough. I actually don't really oppose the FAA and think they are probably one of the few forces for good (on average) in the US government. I just have questions about the way their authority is constituted. It would be fairly easy to flip them over to a properly legal authority with very little change. For me, it's very much a "choose your battles" scenario.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, if only Pratchett were up to writing of helmet imps...
But wait, the fuel used to make those paper bags has all been turned into CO2 as opposed to being sequestered in the ground as would be the case for a polystyrene cup. That's a bad thing, right? (It's a Monday before you answer that, by the way).
Then calculate the externalities and have a genuine conversation. The whole paper vs plastic thing has been based on very short-sighted and emotional arguments.
Oh, I agree. Cost/benefit analysis is what is required. The problem comes in when low-information people jump on a bandwagon of knee-jerk changes (often being pushed by vested interests) and stuff gets pushed through without sound underpinnings. Ethanol in gasoline is a prime example.
http://www.theguardian.com/mon...
You need to use a ceramic cup 1000 times for the resources used in making it to to match the equivalent single uses of polystyrene cups. You can argue that you might but it only takes a couple of mugs being mishandled and your average is way down.
Of course, I prefer a ceramic cup anyway but you really have to be careful when you assert some things are green over others. Especially when things are price driven. Price tends to (but not always) be an indicator of resource usage.
My grammar is all to pot above. Hope it makes sense.
Straight, empty interstate on a sunny day. Though there are many other examples that could be trotted out.
This was not "knowing about something", this was advocacy of government controlled bank accounts.
(Of course, they effectively are anyway but still).
I was talking in general rather than in specific. That there is a long history of dissension within the supreme court is an easy way to explain that it is not invalid to disagree with the supreme court on any issue, even when they are unanimous. There are other arguments that support this position to, of course, it's just the easiest way to demolish this appeal to authority.
The Peelian principles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Last time I wanted to bring this up, I was unable to find a direct link to US police enforcement. As you say, it is based off of the British system but is not directly descended, it seems.
Or, y'know, a guy smoking a joint or someone exceeding the speed limit in a safe manner.
We did nothing about the hole in the ozone layer. We did a bunch of stuff that gave people the warm fuzzies and made dupont a lot of money and, of course, advanced politicians careers but the hole in the ozone layer? Pretty much doing its own thing.
It usually turns out that those things use *more* resources than the alternative, hence why they are more expensive. You may save an ounce of oil from the plastics but you use two on the paper processing.
Many devices do not have a 100% available duty cycle. Welders, compressors etc. They tend to rely on your work-practices involving periods where you're not using the device. For a 3D pen, possibly would would be repositioning your work or considering your next step.
And funnily enough, that rediscussion is provided for and there are legal ways to go about it.
Thank you for your comment, Mr deputy director of the NSA.
Round here, we call that "starting my own business"
Maybe more like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I suspect that many of the non-superstars have just realised that being a superstar doesn't really get you much more than early burnout.
OK. I think we may be talking at cross purposes. I think I gave too much emphasis to your "(the pound was slightly different then today I believe)". Interesting link though, I was never even aware of those coins Though I have heard of the phrase before.
Yes, I believe the interstate commerce clause has been stretched to cover way more than a plain reading of it allows. Supreme court decisions frequently are split, often along partisan lines so it's not like even internally that they agree that they are always correct so why should it be wrong for me to be on the dissenting side?
Could you offer some pointers to some documentation on this? I am genuinely interested. Certainly the pennies I know pre and post decimalisation were made of copper, not silver. Google and Wikipedia offer little enlightenment.
Utility value?
The word "intrinsic" makes many assumptions, most of which may not be true. It is a term best avoided. Knowing why it should be avoided is an important step in understanding. Use it and you're lying to yourself. Keep using it and you build on the lie.
I assumed you were talking about decimalisation since you were talking about when the pound was worth 240 pence.. The pound nominally stayed the same throughout that process.
I must say I'm not familiar with the silver penny though I do have several pre-decimal coins still.
True enough. I actually don't really oppose the FAA and think they are probably one of the few forces for good (on average) in the US government. I just have questions about the way their authority is constituted. It would be fairly easy to flip them over to a properly legal authority with very little change. For me, it's very much a "choose your battles" scenario.
As a pilot, you suck. and your mother wears army boots. See how that works?