Finland has an excellent law in this regard: fines are scaled in proportion to the perp's wealth. This means that an average person might pay (say) 25 euros for a moving violation, but a really rich person would pay tens of thousands.
If the purpose of a fine is to dissuade people from doing something, then this is an excellent idea - a rich person would never notice 25 currency units, nor would a company.
I dunno. One of the best episodes of Star Trek:TNG had at least four, and they may have stopped there because at the time they couldn't credit any more.
The episode? Yesterday's Enterprise.
Re:Economist: Republicans are at fault.
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
Debt as a percentage of GDP was shrinking steadily since World War II until St. Reagan (pbuh) decided to run up the deficits, you know. That's not "dozens of presidents" ago.
So in summary, "wharrgarbl let the poor people starve because I'm a selfish dick and I don't understand what a pyramid scheme really is but I've got a nice slogan".
Again, telling you anything is a waste of time if you really value wealthy people having all their money they "earned" more than poor people being able to get food, medical care, and a place to live.
Your position is extremist and a departure from status quo, therefore you can do the justifying.
Point of order: the money you pay into SS isn't yours and never will be. It's for the people who need that money right now, with a bit put away for the future.
I mean, when SS was instituted they didn't say "this is for when today's kids retire, you old folks who need the money now can starve, kthxbye". They made sure the old folks back then got enough to get by.
Slashdot Mirror
Notice how much more expensive big vehicles are?
Notice how laws tend to favor richer people because they can buy congressweasels?
Why yes! Old cars /are/ less safe than modern ones. I'd much rather have a wreck in my '05 Civic than the '89 Mustang I once had.
Funnily enough, that crashworthiness was one reason I bought this car.
This story is from a politically-motivated group with an axe to grind.
Deliberately biased summary much?
Finland has an excellent law in this regard: fines are scaled in proportion to the perp's wealth. This means that an average person might pay (say) 25 euros for a moving violation, but a really rich person would pay tens of thousands.
If the purpose of a fine is to dissuade people from doing something, then this is an excellent idea - a rich person would never notice 25 currency units, nor would a company.
No, the guy's incorrigible and has been in legal trouble for spamming before.
Plus, as mentioned, the illegal access of other peoples' accounts. I'm thinking a long jail term is indicated.
It could run. It would not run well. It wouldn't run particularly well on my old Radeon 9600XT.
Not that I would have played it much anyway. Never could get into a game whose main selling point was how dark it was.
Assuming the packages will build. A nontrivial number of packages or their prerequisites from Macports didn't compile last time I used it.
Will he direct another prosecutor to bring charges? If not, he's guilty as well, assuming the law doesn't preclude it.
I dunno. One of the best episodes of Star Trek:TNG had at least four, and they may have stopped there because at the time they couldn't credit any more.
The episode? Yesterday's Enterprise.
Debt as a percentage of GDP was shrinking steadily since World War II until St. Reagan (pbuh) decided to run up the deficits, you know. That's not "dozens of presidents" ago.
Pretty much; it's down to a matter of degree.
Does BSA require you to give an identity? If not, it could be an anonymous accusation.
which is why I think a somewhat lesser goal set for a shorter timeframe, then ramping up to this in 2025, would have been better.
Bull-fucking-shit. If it was that simple I wouldn't be seeing mommy SUVs speeding down the highway anymore, because gas is so expensive.
See also: commons, tragedy of the.
It's about page hits, not journalism.
I see by the manner that you call him "Dr. Roy Spencer" that you agree with him; sounds a bit like argument by authority to me.
It's like how certain RON PAUL fanboys will say "Dr. Ron Paul", actually.
More like they've got their cells with them and don't have to remember to bring a nicer camera.
Convenience.
And then there are those of us who drink single-malt Scotch and can tell the differences between different expressions and where they came from.
Laphroaig FTW.
So in summary, "wharrgarbl let the poor people starve because I'm a selfish dick and I don't understand what a pyramid scheme really is but I've got a nice slogan".
Yeah, I'm convinced.
Again, telling you anything is a waste of time if you really value wealthy people having all their money they "earned" more than poor people being able to get food, medical care, and a place to live.
Your position is extremist and a departure from status quo, therefore you can do the justifying.
I won't bother until you stop decrying people who disagree with you as Marxist, because it's obviously a waste of time.
Well, /no/. I've been saying it for years, but things are coming to a head so that it takes a blind man not to see it.
You, sir, are being willfully ignorant. Let me enlighten you:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/those_who_wont_take_yes_for_an030606.php
The Dems are the problem only inasmuch as they're spineless wimps who don't know how to negotiate.
Point of order: the money you pay into SS isn't yours and never will be. It's for the people who need that money right now, with a bit put away for the future.
I mean, when SS was instituted they didn't say "this is for when today's kids retire, you old folks who need the money now can starve, kthxbye". They made sure the old folks back then got enough to get by.