Maybe because they want to have a large building, lower taxes, some green space, and be closer to their employees. My company moved before I joined and now has a larger building, closer to where most people who work here live.
Portland is an interesting city. Rail works somewhat well there because they have a number of things going on. First they have the urban growth boundary which is much like what our Met Council has tried to do but seems to have failed at. They also removed the main freeway through/near the down town area that use to run along the river. Finally they have some limiting geography. They still suffer the same problems that the Twin Cities does in that the rail is limited in where it run and when it runs. It gets pretty useless when going from one suburb to another especially since it is more of a hub and spoke layout. I would love to see a rails system more akin to that of Paris which is actually usable by those who don't even live in the core of the city (Zone 1).
(in all seriousness though - the Max is a pretty good deal, *especially* for going downtown).
And that is the problem. To provide the coverage that roads currently do with the convenience that roads to rail will never work. Here in the Twin Cities we have some rail running from downtown Minneapolis to the Mall of America and one from Big Lake down to Minneapolis. They are also building the Central Corridor line to connect Minneapolis to St. Paul. Now this is all fine and dandy if I actually wanted to go to any of these places but I don't and I don't live close to or work close to them either. Add to that the limited schedules and it falls down pretty quickly. I have no problem with rail when it is done well like in Paris. I don't mind walking a few blocks to and from the stations while I lived there but it was a complete system and it seems no one here really wants a system like that.
Since we have already gone that far why not have people live there as well. We could call them Arcologies and consolidate everything into one large structure. Now people can live, work, shop, and play all in one location.
Why not keep arrest lists private until convection. It would prevent people from being convicted in the court of public opinion and possibly ruining their lives. Lets say you were arrested for child molestation (wrongly), now do you think having everyone and their brother know you were "Jah-Wren Ryel Arrested for child molestation" even if later charge were dropped. Unfortunately people hear "Jah-Wren Ryel Arrested child molester" and your life become hell unless you leave town. Now this is an extreme example but is not absurd by any measure. Now add in any other heinous crimes people dislike, rape, murder, child porn, drug dealer, and even though they may not illicit as strong of a public response it will still be there and could still have disastrous effects.
Hey I don't deserve this but I am stuck with it. I have voted in every election since I was old enough to including primaries, unfortunately every candidate I have voted for has lost. I write all of my elected officials regularly (both e-mail and regular post) show up at their town hall meetings, and go down to their local offices. Unfortunately most of the time I am doing well if they pay lip service to what I have to say about the only elected official that I have had any luck with is my state senator in the Minnesota Senate as even when I disagree I get a response back addressing the specific issues I mentioned. I suppose if more people were like me then we would probably have a more responsive government.
It doesn't even have to be a nuclear device in a shipping container. Take a 40' container and pack it full of high explosives or make it into a fuel air bomb (for even more effective use of your given volume and cargo capacity) and you can easily have an explosive yield over 50,000 pounds.
He was probably watched by one and since they all share info so he ended up getting flagged by all since East Germany, and Romania were just puppets of the USSR, much like the UK is with the US.
You know you do have a say as to who runs in the primaries, but you probably don't want to do that as it requires some effort to register with one of the parties, become involved at your local precinct caucus, and then get to decide who the candidates are who are on the primary ballot. Also most people don't show up at the primaries so you can make a difference there as well but in closed primary states you need to registered with one of the parties. Also there is the option of going out on your own registering as a candidate, and getting enough signatures to get on the general election ballot but again that requires time and effort.
I didn't know some states required finger prints be submitted for purchasing a firearm, although if it is California it shouldn't surprise me. Don't let Minnesota know since they will probably add that to the requirements for purchasing Sudafed since the requirements for purchasing that are about the same as purchasing a long gun.
Well to be honest they accused is usually already convicted in the court of public opinion by the time they go trial any way. So the rest is just a formality.
The reason for the search that police can do when arresting you is to ensure that you aren't carrying dangerous items that could endanger them like a weapon, or bomb. Stolen property is some what questionable since how would they know it is stolen but drugs very often fall under what the law considers reasonable suspension. Whether you agree or not is different, but even by the most liberal interpretation of reasonable most DNA sampling seems to fall afoul of the law. About the only time I think it might be acceptable is if someone was arrested for some major crime (rape, murder, or other violent offense) and a DNA sample was taken to rule them out or not. Even then it seems this can be easily abused unless the sample is immediately destroyed after being used to rule out a suspect or not.
Personally this sounds more like what we should have spent money on instead of the space shuttle since it doesn't seem too far away from being like the old space planes that were being developed. Most of those were rocket assisted and/or dropped from a B52.
I would propose that we add a law that states that pointing a firearm at someone is the same as attempted murder. Everything I have ever learned about proper handling of firearms supports this as you know to never point it as something you don't intend to shoot. So logically, according to all the firearm training I have had, if someone is point a firearm at me they intend to shoot me. Personally I think too many people think that firearms are an extension of the penis and we are far to lenient on people who basically treat them as toys (yes I know they are fun as hell to shoot) and don't have the proper respect for them.
Also I do feel that there is a need for training with a firearm as there are an awful lot of people who I would never want to own a firearm as they would be a danger to themselves and others. I have had a fair amount of firearms training since I was about 8 starting with the grandpa's intro to shooting and firearms out on the farm (my grandpa was a WWII marine), hunter safety (age 12), Boy Scouts shotgun and rifle merit badges, and the Minnesota carry permit training. By far the most intensive, detailed and complete was the rifle or shotgun merit badge in Boy Scouts, they each covered the same detailed safety training, specifics on effectively shooting the specific type of weapon, and had a real proficiency requirement.
Not quite, you missed the first few steps. First you need to vilify the weapon usually calling it something like an AK style assault weapon not a real class of weapon but a really scary sounding description. Now you also need to make the individual out to be a really scary person who had severe mental illness (probably did in reality) to make it seem like only crazies own these. Step 3 is to convince people that these types of weapons have no hunting or sporting purpose (even though a SKS makes a good entry level deer rifle especially if you are hunting in heavy woods) usually by further obfuscating the issue by claiming that no one needs to hunt with a fully automatic rifle even though the weapon used by the shooter was only a semi auto rifle. Now at this point you can push through various laws that further expand government all in the name of keeping people safe.
But you don't understand we as the western world liked those Arab rioters, these ones in London must be mentally disturbed individuals who are bent on bringing down western civilization. If left to their own devices dogs and cats might start getting along. In a free country one should not be able to freely assemble and petition their government.
Now that I have that out of the way this seems like the perfect reason to crack down and expand police powers. While there is a difference between protesters and rioters it isn't hard to turn the former into the latter if the situation is already charged. As I haven't been following the story very closely I don't know how these riots have been playing. Buy hey government perspective why let a good crisis go to waste.
We also will need to figure out how to replace that income to the general fund, but I would lump the bonds that are held by the Social Security administration in with the retirement plan since that is basically what it is. I have on numerous occasions mentioned the issues with the trust fund and people either think I am a nut job or some political hack even though the Social Security Trustees Annual Report says the exact same thing.
So you want to compare the total take of the entire citizenry to the debt of just the federal government. Ok I raise you the total debt held by the Fed, states, businesses, local governments, and individuals to the GDP, hint it is the red number in the middle that is about $54.9 trillion. That seems like a better comparison, our GDP is only $14.8 trillion so as a total nation we have a debt to GDP ration of about 4:1.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe because they want to have a large building, lower taxes, some green space, and be closer to their employees. My company moved before I joined and now has a larger building, closer to where most people who work here live.
Portland is an interesting city. Rail works somewhat well there because they have a number of things going on. First they have the urban growth boundary which is much like what our Met Council has tried to do but seems to have failed at. They also removed the main freeway through/near the down town area that use to run along the river. Finally they have some limiting geography. They still suffer the same problems that the Twin Cities does in that the rail is limited in where it run and when it runs. It gets pretty useless when going from one suburb to another especially since it is more of a hub and spoke layout. I would love to see a rails system more akin to that of Paris which is actually usable by those who don't even live in the core of the city (Zone 1).
Heh - they're working on that already.
(in all seriousness though - the Max is a pretty good deal, *especially* for going downtown).
And that is the problem. To provide the coverage that roads currently do with the convenience that roads to rail will never work. Here in the Twin Cities we have some rail running from downtown Minneapolis to the Mall of America and one from Big Lake down to Minneapolis. They are also building the Central Corridor line to connect Minneapolis to St. Paul. Now this is all fine and dandy if I actually wanted to go to any of these places but I don't and I don't live close to or work close to them either. Add to that the limited schedules and it falls down pretty quickly. I have no problem with rail when it is done well like in Paris. I don't mind walking a few blocks to and from the stations while I lived there but it was a complete system and it seems no one here really wants a system like that.
Since we have already gone that far why not have people live there as well. We could call them Arcologies and consolidate everything into one large structure. Now people can live, work, shop, and play all in one location.
So are you saying maybe it is time to refresh the tree of liberty?
Why not keep arrest lists private until convection. It would prevent people from being convicted in the court of public opinion and possibly ruining their lives. Lets say you were arrested for child molestation (wrongly), now do you think having everyone and their brother know you were "Jah-Wren Ryel Arrested for child molestation" even if later charge were dropped. Unfortunately people hear "Jah-Wren Ryel Arrested child molester" and your life become hell unless you leave town. Now this is an extreme example but is not absurd by any measure. Now add in any other heinous crimes people dislike, rape, murder, child porn, drug dealer, and even though they may not illicit as strong of a public response it will still be there and could still have disastrous effects.
Hey I don't deserve this but I am stuck with it. I have voted in every election since I was old enough to including primaries, unfortunately every candidate I have voted for has lost. I write all of my elected officials regularly (both e-mail and regular post) show up at their town hall meetings, and go down to their local offices. Unfortunately most of the time I am doing well if they pay lip service to what I have to say about the only elected official that I have had any luck with is my state senator in the Minnesota Senate as even when I disagree I get a response back addressing the specific issues I mentioned. I suppose if more people were like me then we would probably have a more responsive government.
It doesn't even have to be a nuclear device in a shipping container. Take a 40' container and pack it full of high explosives or make it into a fuel air bomb (for even more effective use of your given volume and cargo capacity) and you can easily have an explosive yield over 50,000 pounds.
if anything it made it easier for government to abuse the citizens.
From the statist perspective this does make the country safer.
He was probably watched by one and since they all share info so he ended up getting flagged by all since East Germany, and Romania were just puppets of the USSR, much like the UK is with the US.
You know you do have a say as to who runs in the primaries, but you probably don't want to do that as it requires some effort to register with one of the parties, become involved at your local precinct caucus, and then get to decide who the candidates are who are on the primary ballot. Also most people don't show up at the primaries so you can make a difference there as well but in closed primary states you need to registered with one of the parties. Also there is the option of going out on your own registering as a candidate, and getting enough signatures to get on the general election ballot but again that requires time and effort.
Depends on the arresting officer but as a general rule I probably wouldn't want to either.
I didn't know some states required finger prints be submitted for purchasing a firearm, although if it is California it shouldn't surprise me. Don't let Minnesota know since they will probably add that to the requirements for purchasing Sudafed since the requirements for purchasing that are about the same as purchasing a long gun.
Well to be honest they accused is usually already convicted in the court of public opinion by the time they go trial any way. So the rest is just a formality.
The reason for the search that police can do when arresting you is to ensure that you aren't carrying dangerous items that could endanger them like a weapon, or bomb. Stolen property is some what questionable since how would they know it is stolen but drugs very often fall under what the law considers reasonable suspension. Whether you agree or not is different, but even by the most liberal interpretation of reasonable most DNA sampling seems to fall afoul of the law. About the only time I think it might be acceptable is if someone was arrested for some major crime (rape, murder, or other violent offense) and a DNA sample was taken to rule them out or not. Even then it seems this can be easily abused unless the sample is immediately destroyed after being used to rule out a suspect or not.
Personally this sounds more like what we should have spent money on instead of the space shuttle since it doesn't seem too far away from being like the old space planes that were being developed. Most of those were rocket assisted and/or dropped from a B52.
I thought the shuttle's orbital velocity was about mach 25 or so it wouldn't even be half-again.
I would propose that we add a law that states that pointing a firearm at someone is the same as attempted murder. Everything I have ever learned about proper handling of firearms supports this as you know to never point it as something you don't intend to shoot. So logically, according to all the firearm training I have had, if someone is point a firearm at me they intend to shoot me. Personally I think too many people think that firearms are an extension of the penis and we are far to lenient on people who basically treat them as toys (yes I know they are fun as hell to shoot) and don't have the proper respect for them.
Also I do feel that there is a need for training with a firearm as there are an awful lot of people who I would never want to own a firearm as they would be a danger to themselves and others. I have had a fair amount of firearms training since I was about 8 starting with the grandpa's intro to shooting and firearms out on the farm (my grandpa was a WWII marine), hunter safety (age 12), Boy Scouts shotgun and rifle merit badges, and the Minnesota carry permit training. By far the most intensive, detailed and complete was the rifle or shotgun merit badge in Boy Scouts, they each covered the same detailed safety training, specifics on effectively shooting the specific type of weapon, and had a real proficiency requirement.
Not quite, you missed the first few steps. First you need to vilify the weapon usually calling it something like an AK style assault weapon not a real class of weapon but a really scary sounding description. Now you also need to make the individual out to be a really scary person who had severe mental illness (probably did in reality) to make it seem like only crazies own these. Step 3 is to convince people that these types of weapons have no hunting or sporting purpose (even though a SKS makes a good entry level deer rifle especially if you are hunting in heavy woods) usually by further obfuscating the issue by claiming that no one needs to hunt with a fully automatic rifle even though the weapon used by the shooter was only a semi auto rifle. Now at this point you can push through various laws that further expand government all in the name of keeping people safe.
But you don't understand we as the western world liked those Arab rioters, these ones in London must be mentally disturbed individuals who are bent on bringing down western civilization. If left to their own devices dogs and cats might start getting along. In a free country one should not be able to freely assemble and petition their government.
Now that I have that out of the way this seems like the perfect reason to crack down and expand police powers. While there is a difference between protesters and rioters it isn't hard to turn the former into the latter if the situation is already charged. As I haven't been following the story very closely I don't know how these riots have been playing. Buy hey government perspective why let a good crisis go to waste.
We also will need to figure out how to replace that income to the general fund, but I would lump the bonds that are held by the Social Security administration in with the retirement plan since that is basically what it is. I have on numerous occasions mentioned the issues with the trust fund and people either think I am a nut job or some political hack even though the Social Security Trustees Annual Report says the exact same thing.
and yet people still swim in public pools full of piss.
You might want to further clarify that as being shipping lanes.
The biggest difference is that individuals debt should be going down.
So you want to compare the total take of the entire citizenry to the debt of just the federal government. Ok I raise you the total debt held by the Fed, states, businesses, local governments, and individuals to the GDP, hint it is the red number in the middle that is about $54.9 trillion. That seems like a better comparison, our GDP is only $14.8 trillion so as a total nation we have a debt to GDP ration of about 4:1.