Re:Excellent. Now how about High Fructose Corn Syr
on
FDA Bans Trans Fat
·
· Score: 1
One could argue HFCS is worse than transfat and it is used everywhere.
[citation needed]
HFCS is sugar. Sugar is sugar.
The subsidies are bad. People eat too much of it. But (until some proof is provided), it apparently isn't any more unhealthful than any other sugars.. unlike trans fats, which truly were worse than what they replaced.
Most people don't lock their inside garage door and the bad guys know this.
Citation needed.. Really?? I basically always lock all of my doors when I walk in the door, and I only put the "basically" in there for the literally one or two times I've forgotten and freaked out in the morning when I realized I didn't lock it.
Because, as many other people have described, transferring $10K or more often can be indirect evidence of crimes going on (cash based businesses making tons of money, possibly illegally, and not reporting it).
Why are you bringing completely unrelated issues ("drug war") into it?
Plus, how can you have "a tax system that does not require tracking one's every financial transaction"? Rely on people's honesty? HAHAHAHA.. It sure hasn't worked so far. (Yes, even though there are audits and such, I'd say a lot of the tax system is the honor system.. if it weren't, there'd be far more automatic checking of the finances that ARE already tracked.)
IIRC, the original 1980's-era laws were only interested in transactions $10k or greater. The Patriot Act addiction/enhancements were to use semi-regular transactions of under $10k as 'structuring' (that is, to try and close the workaround of, say, withdrawing or depositing substantial amounts under $10k on a semi-regular or regular basis.)
Which seems like a perfectly logical law, since otherwise it's WAY too easy to evade (transfer $9999.99 each time).
I'm not even a huge fan of old movies, but I do think it's very worth seeing. Even if I didn't enjoy it (I did), I would think it's worth seeing for a cultural awareness "take your medicine" reason. (I should take my own advice and see "Citizen Kane" someday.)
Yes, I know, I was simply providing information about what he ACTUALLY said.
(Since I was/am too lazy to look the rest of it up for sure, the full line was something close to "You played it for her, so play it for me. Play it, Sam.")
You don't need a car payment - save up for whatever car you get . Get an old car, for a thousand or two... You can go even cheaper than that, but at that level, you might be spending more on repairs (or replacement heaps) than spending a bit more in the first place.
I use plenty of web sites, and some even mimic desktop apps vaguely well..
But even a native app that *uses HTML* for much of its UI often has a better overall experience -- better drag & drop, keyboard navigation, interaction with other apps..
I always forget that I can't run my microwave and my electric kettle at the same time because they're both on the same circuit and combined it's too much power consumption.
It's good for a long term homeowner, but messed up lots of other things.. As a kid, I remember tons of after school activities and such that _older_ kids had suddenly went away after Prop 13 went in. (Probably more than after school activities, but that's what I remembered at the time...)
(I bought a few years ago, so I have a high purchase price, but will "benefit" from Prop 13 if values go up higher and I thus don't have to pay hugely increased property tax.. But I do think things should be more even across the board.. NOT wealth distribution, but I would do away with subsidies, even ones I benefit from, like mortgage tax deduction -- that would simply get me to pay off my mortgage rather than make more investing the money, like I can do now.)
She should have been happy. There's typically no reason to want your property to increase in value unless you plan to sell it. It just increases your property taxes.
The post you're replying to was in Silicon Valley, obviously in CA. So the property tax is (mostly) based on the purchase price + some small growth allowed each year. That was due to Prop 13. So just because the value goes up, doesn't make the property tax go up... unless something happens to cause it to get reassessed (I think major improvements to the house can do this). But simply living in it doesn't.
(Some transfers, e.g. between some family members, don't cause reassessed value too..)
For a job requiring SO much education, and them likely having huuuuuge college loans to pay back, that really doesn't seem like a *TON* of money. (Plus, they have to spend a lot on medical insurance, due to sue-happy people.)
he's got no excuse for not having his home and cars all paid for
I'd agree about the car, but disagree about the home.
ESPECIALLY with the low rates still available, you can relatively easily (even via dividends, and yes of course dividend paying stocks have risks too) make more than your "effective" mortgage rate, due to deductibility of mortgage interest.
I say this as someone who *hates* debt, and has paid cash for the two new cars I've bought in my life (though as much as I hate leases, some of the lowest end electric cars are now available for lease prices so low that that might have even made more sense).
"Wealth distribution" often is used to describe the "income gap" between the rich and the poor... That is, simply describing the situation as it is now.
"Wealth redistribution" is (mandated) Robin Hood-ing, taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
Pure capitalism optimizes to make money, and thats it. Worse, it tends to only look at what profit can be made in say the next year or so. Doing the kinds of things required to address the water shortage is likely to not be a money maker, at least not that quickly.
(I agree with you a tiny tiny bit regarding needing environmental laws to slightly temper the "pure capitalism" tendencies, if one is to dump their sewage in the river behind the factory.)
Yet Tesla & Space-X are both for profit companies, making big long term gambles on huge industry changing goals.
Also, while it's not the same, recently I've heard of the exact opposite, charity, being done quantitatively. Some people are finally looking at the investment/reward "payback" of various charities.
Slashdot Mirror
[citation needed]
HFCS is sugar. Sugar is sugar.
The subsidies are bad. People eat too much of it. But (until some proof is provided), it apparently isn't any more unhealthful than any other sugars.. unlike trans fats, which truly were worse than what they replaced.
Citation needed.. Really?? I basically always lock all of my doors when I walk in the door, and I only put the "basically" in there for the literally one or two times I've forgotten and freaked out in the morning when I realized I didn't lock it.
Because, as many other people have described, transferring $10K or more often can be indirect evidence of crimes going on (cash based businesses making tons of money, possibly illegally, and not reporting it).
Apple's earnings didn't "leave" the USA. They were earned outside the USA, and just haven't been brought into the USA.
Why are you bringing completely unrelated issues ("drug war") into it?
Plus, how can you have "a tax system that does not require tracking one's every financial transaction"? Rely on people's honesty? HAHAHAHA.. It sure hasn't worked so far. (Yes, even though there are audits and such, I'd say a lot of the tax system is the honor system.. if it weren't, there'd be far more automatic checking of the finances that ARE already tracked.)
Which seems like a perfectly logical law, since otherwise it's WAY too easy to evade (transfer $9999.99 each time).
("Like" above is used as "for example".)
I like Khosla, but some people, including a judge, didn't agree with him doing what he wanted with his property:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinod_Khosla#Martin.27s_Beach_dispute
Wait, what do you mean? The government simply buying a product at an agreed upon price (e.g. weapons) is not a subsidy.
Remember Bush choking on a pretzel?
That was supposedly due to vagus nerve stimulation.
http://articles.latimes.com/20...
I'm not even a huge fan of old movies, but I do think it's very worth seeing. Even if I didn't enjoy it (I did), I would think it's worth seeing for a cultural awareness "take your medicine" reason. (I should take my own advice and see "Citizen Kane" someday.)
Yes, I know, I was simply providing information about what he ACTUALLY said.
(Since I was/am too lazy to look the rest of it up for sure, the full line was something close to "You played it for her, so play it for me. Play it, Sam.")
Bogart's character said "Play it, Sam".
Your same question applies to ANY union.
(Yes, you could call me a union buster.)
You don't need a car payment - save up for whatever car you get . Get an old car, for a thousand or two... You can go even cheaper than that, but at that level, you might be spending more on repairs (or replacement heaps) than spending a bit more in the first place.
I use plenty of web sites, and some even mimic desktop apps vaguely well..
But even a native app that *uses HTML* for much of its UI often has a better overall experience -- better drag & drop, keyboard navigation, interaction with other apps..
What specific "rights"?
They have a right to make their machine work the way they want, you have the right to not buy it.
BTW, the video at keurighack is hilarious, mostly because of the music.
Lisa Douglas, is that you?
(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058808/combined)
It's good for a long term homeowner, but messed up lots of other things.. As a kid, I remember tons of after school activities and such that _older_ kids had suddenly went away after Prop 13 went in. (Probably more than after school activities, but that's what I remembered at the time...)
(I bought a few years ago, so I have a high purchase price, but will "benefit" from Prop 13 if values go up higher and I thus don't have to pay hugely increased property tax.. But I do think things should be more even across the board.. NOT wealth distribution, but I would do away with subsidies, even ones I benefit from, like mortgage tax deduction -- that would simply get me to pay off my mortgage rather than make more investing the money, like I can do now.)
The post you're replying to was in Silicon Valley, obviously in CA. So the property tax is (mostly) based on the purchase price + some small growth allowed each year. That was due to Prop 13. So just because the value goes up, doesn't make the property tax go up... unless something happens to cause it to get reassessed (I think major improvements to the house can do this). But simply living in it doesn't.
(Some transfers, e.g. between some family members, don't cause reassessed value too..)
The national data at
http://www1.salary.com/Physici... gives $185,194 as the median.
For a job requiring SO much education, and them likely having huuuuuge college loans to pay back, that really doesn't seem like a *TON* of money. (Plus, they have to spend a lot on medical insurance, due to sue-happy people.)
Unless your app is MUCH MUCH cheaper than the other one, I'll choose the one with the better UI, which almost always would mean the native UI one.
I'd agree about the car, but disagree about the home.
ESPECIALLY with the low rates still available, you can relatively easily (even via dividends, and yes of course dividend paying stocks have risks too) make more than your "effective" mortgage rate, due to deductibility of mortgage interest.
I say this as someone who *hates* debt, and has paid cash for the two new cars I've bought in my life (though as much as I hate leases, some of the lowest end electric cars are now available for lease prices so low that that might have even made more sense).
Not tonight dear, I had a Tylenol.
(and you could go further down the rabbit hole and bring in the product tampering case.)
No, it's not the same thing.
"Wealth distribution" often is used to describe the "income gap" between the rich and the poor... That is, simply describing the situation as it is now.
"Wealth redistribution" is (mandated) Robin Hood-ing, taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
(I agree with you a tiny tiny bit regarding needing environmental laws to slightly temper the "pure capitalism" tendencies, if one is to dump their sewage in the river behind the factory.)
Yet Tesla & Space-X are both for profit companies, making big long term gambles on huge industry changing goals.
Also, while it's not the same, recently I've heard of the exact opposite, charity, being done quantitatively. Some people are finally looking at the investment/reward "payback" of various charities.