Except nobody has proposed any of that. Hyperloop is not supposed to replace long-distance flying, it is supposed to be an alternative for high-speed intercity rail.
A hyperloop within a city makes absolutely no sense at all. At that scale you just have a low-capacity subway. Hyperloop makes sense where the alternative is flying or high-speed rail.
Is this stuff even supposed to be a secret? My company has a link to the employee directory (containing names, titles, email addresses, and phone numbers) right on the home page of their web site.
If there are no 'original ideas' (what an idiotic concept) then there is no point in teaching anyone CS since everything has already been done. And if that is not the case, then why are the new things not worthy of protection? Just because someone else 'could have' done it, but couldn't be bothered to?
I think that no matter if you sell the stock or not, the difference between the stock price (when you exercise the option) and the option strike price is always ordinary income.
A lot of people seem very confused about options, but they aren't that difficult. Let's say you have been granted options for your stock at $100. On the day you exercise your option the price of the stock is $120. You pay $100 for the stock, and have $20 of ordinary income. The cost basis for the stock is now $120. If you later sell the stock for $200 you have $80 of capital gains (long-term or short term, depending on how long you hold it).
The reason for the exercise and sell on the same day is as you said. If you don't have $100 to buy your stock, you exercise the option and sell the stock and walk away with the $20 of ordinary income.
Stock grants are similar. The entire value of the stock on the day of vesting is ordinary income. The cost basis is then that value.
Stock grants and options are not some sort of tax dodge (for the grantee), although that certainly is the rhetoric. The questionable part of them is how the company accounts for them.
The only way the IRS could 'adjust' withholding properly is when there is a single earner with a single source of income and that income is steady throughout the year. Everything else completely screws up withholding.
Your state does not tax refunds as income. What happens is that your state taxes assume as a starting point that your federal taxes are as stated on your W2, and your state AGI is reduced by that amount. However, if you overpaid your federal taxes, some of that money is coming back to you and was not really taxes paid. That money (your refund) should have been taxed by the state, but wasn't, so it gets added in as income. Likewise, if you underpaid your federal taxes you can claim the underpayment as additional taxes paid and that money comes off your state tax, but you don't count that as the state 'rewarding' you for underpaying your federal taxes, do you?
Tax returns are the forms you file with the government, whether you get money back (which is a tax REFUND) or not. If you are going to pretend to be smart, at least have some idea what you are talking about.
Not always. Places with excess generating capacity may charge less as usage goes up to encourage usage. Places with insufficient capacity do the opposite. This is the second case.
The population of the US is 318 million, which,last I looked, was far greater than the 100 million expected viewers of the Super Bowl. Also, the World Series, which happens in October, is baseball, and the Super Bowl, which happens in February, is American football. So, if you are not a troll, you are an idiot.
Hyperloop is a $6B project without considering land rights.
Wrong. It just has very few land rights requirements because most of it is supposed to be built over existing highways, and the remainder just needs rights for a pylon every hundred feet or so.
If you could just have the land for free, you could build high speed rail for far, far cheaper.
Yep, and if you could do it with slave labor it could be even cheaper. But you can't do either one so it is pointless to mention it.
Here is what you said 'the only reason to have such law is to enable capricious enforcement for the purpose of oppression.' See that word 'only'? So yes, you most certainly did say that all complex law was oppression. And I did not create strawman at all, I simply asked you to back up what you said. And you completely failed to do it.
Those are some awful examples, and they were to make a point you have failed miserably.
Phone connecting to Wifi - the law says 'a person who KNOWINGLY...'. That blows your 'phone automatically connects' bullshit out the window. And the example you gave is stupid. That guy did not 'accidentally' connect to the cafe's Wifi, he intentionally did it, every day. As for whether or not people would know that is illegal, 'don't use other peoples stuff without permission' is a pretty good rule to go by.
A userID is not a 'false name'. Furthermore, the CFAA (18 USC 1030) does not contain the words 'false' or 'registration'. So where did that bullshit come from? And the case you linked was about someone creating a false identity for the purpose of befriending someone, then bullying that person into suicide. Hardly something an ordinary person would do by accident.
Sarcasm is not against the law. Don't be stupid (not sarcastic).
Your 'disorderly conduct' case is nothing but a one-sided account of something that supposedly happened. Not taking that at face value.
At last! You provided an actual link to a real law. Too bad it does not say what you claim. For aerosol cans, it says ' carry on their person and in plain view in any posted public facility, park, playground, swimming pool, beach, or recreational area, other than a highway, street, alley, or way'. I guess this could be a problem, as i often buy spray paint, don't put it in a bag, and go home not by streets, alleys, ways, or highways but through the beach. Guess you got me there.
For 'felt tip pens' it specifically says 'with intent to commit grafitti or vandalism'.
Singing Happy Birthday (or any other song) is not, and has never been, a copyright violation. Public performance for profit is a copyright violation.
Every one of your examples completely fails. You have not provided a single example of something an ordinary person would do without having a clue it is illegal.
Since you are the one making the claim that all these oppressive laws are out there, why don't you provide an example of a law that an ordinary citizen risks getting arrested for without knowing such a law existed?
This is complete bullshit. Laws are not complicated just so they can be used for oppression, they are complicated because they deal strictly with human beings, and humans are complicated.
Here's a simple law - if you kill another human you are put to death. Easy to understand, right? Now don't go complicating it up by adding conditions like accidental, or self defense, or unable to know right from wrong, or heat of the moment, or anything else. You really think that is better?
Some of the very worst laws are the simplest. Things like zero tolerance and mandatory sentencing.
And that doesn't even get into the whole area of civil law.
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The headline is WRONG. The ruling does NOT say your employer can not prohibit you from recording. The ruling says your employer can't issue a recording ban in such a way that would interfere with things protected by section 7 of the NLRA (unionization). It does NOT say they can't prevent you from recording ANYTHING ELSE.
The very headline implies just such a thing. The specific thing at issue in this case was the WF handbook banned recording of 'Team Meetings'. The NLRB found that PARTICULAR thing illegal, because 'team meetings' could include union organizing activities, and by law, the company can not interfere with those. This ruling in NO WAY bans ALL company prohibitions on recording, only ones that interfere with origanization activities. And that has nothing to do with any local laws.
It seems your school did a crappy job. The LEGISLATIVE branch (Congress) makes laws. These people are elected. One of the LAWS they made was the National Labor Relations Act (1935). This Act created the NLRB. The Act was ruled Constitutional by the SCOTUS in 1937.
The 'skipping' study had nothing to do with how others percieve you. It was a study on how body posture affects low energy levels caused by depression.
Do you believe every stupid thing you read? The House passed the Federal Reserve Act 298 to 60 and the Senate passed it 43 to 25. And President Wilson signed it.
Port and starboard are no less ambiguous in this situation.m Are you looking in the direction of the front of the ship, or is the dancer? Stage left is the proper way to say it.
Slashdot Mirror
Except nobody has proposed any of that. Hyperloop is not supposed to replace long-distance flying, it is supposed to be an alternative for high-speed intercity rail.
A hyperloop within a city makes absolutely no sense at all. At that scale you just have a low-capacity subway. Hyperloop makes sense where the alternative is flying or high-speed rail.
Because airplanes (and runways) don't wear out?
Is this stuff even supposed to be a secret? My company has a link to the employee directory (containing names, titles, email addresses, and phone numbers) right on the home page of their web site.
If there are no 'original ideas' (what an idiotic concept) then there is no point in teaching anyone CS since everything has already been done. And if that is not the case, then why are the new things not worthy of protection? Just because someone else 'could have' done it, but couldn't be bothered to?
I think that no matter if you sell the stock or not, the difference between the stock price (when you exercise the option) and the option strike price is always ordinary income.
A lot of people seem very confused about options, but they aren't that difficult. Let's say you have been granted options for your stock at $100. On the day you exercise your option the price of the stock is $120. You pay $100 for the stock, and have $20 of ordinary income. The cost basis for the stock is now $120. If you later sell the stock for $200 you have $80 of capital gains (long-term or short term, depending on how long you hold it).
The reason for the exercise and sell on the same day is as you said. If you don't have $100 to buy your stock, you exercise the option and sell the stock and walk away with the $20 of ordinary income.
Stock grants are similar. The entire value of the stock on the day of vesting is ordinary income. The cost basis is then that value.
Stock grants and options are not some sort of tax dodge (for the grantee), although that certainly is the rhetoric. The questionable part of them is how the company accounts for them.
The only way the IRS could 'adjust' withholding properly is when there is a single earner with a single source of income and that income is steady throughout the year. Everything else completely screws up withholding.
Your state does not tax refunds as income. What happens is that your state taxes assume as a starting point that your federal taxes are as stated on your W2, and your state AGI is reduced by that amount. However, if you overpaid your federal taxes, some of that money is coming back to you and was not really taxes paid. That money (your refund) should have been taxed by the state, but wasn't, so it gets added in as income. Likewise, if you underpaid your federal taxes you can claim the underpayment as additional taxes paid and that money comes off your state tax, but you don't count that as the state 'rewarding' you for underpaying your federal taxes, do you?
Tax returns are the forms you file with the government, whether you get money back (which is a tax REFUND) or not. If you are going to pretend to be smart, at least have some idea what you are talking about.
Not always. Places with excess generating capacity may charge less as usage goes up to encourage usage. Places with insufficient capacity do the opposite. This is the second case.
Tiered pricing is already being done. For instance, by PG&E.
Bitcoin businesses say the rate hike is discriminatory
So what? There are only a very few things (race, ethnicity, etc) that you can't legally use to discriminate. Being a bitcoin miner is not one of them.
The population of the US is 318 million, which,last I looked, was far greater than the 100 million expected viewers of the Super Bowl. Also, the World Series, which happens in October, is baseball, and the Super Bowl, which happens in February, is American football. So, if you are not a troll, you are an idiot.
Hyperloop is a $6B project without considering land rights.
Wrong. It just has very few land rights requirements because most of it is supposed to be built over existing highways, and the remainder just needs rights for a pylon every hundred feet or so.
If you could just have the land for free, you could build high speed rail for far, far cheaper.
Yep, and if you could do it with slave labor it could be even cheaper. But you can't do either one so it is pointless to mention it.
Here is what you said 'the only reason to have such law is to enable capricious enforcement for the purpose of oppression.' See that word 'only'? So yes, you most certainly did say that all complex law was oppression. And I did not create strawman at all, I simply asked you to back up what you said. And you completely failed to do it.
Those are some awful examples, and they were to make a point you have failed miserably.
Phone connecting to Wifi - the law says 'a person who KNOWINGLY ...'. That blows your 'phone automatically connects' bullshit out the window. And the example you gave is stupid. That guy did not 'accidentally' connect to the cafe's Wifi, he intentionally did it, every day. As for whether or not people would know that is illegal, 'don't use other peoples stuff without permission' is a pretty good rule to go by.
A userID is not a 'false name'. Furthermore, the CFAA (18 USC 1030) does not contain the words 'false' or 'registration'. So where did that bullshit come from? And the case you linked was about someone creating a false identity for the purpose of befriending someone, then bullying that person into suicide. Hardly something an ordinary person would do by accident.
Sarcasm is not against the law. Don't be stupid (not sarcastic).
Your 'disorderly conduct' case is nothing but a one-sided account of something that supposedly happened. Not taking that at face value.
At last! You provided an actual link to a real law. Too bad it does not say what you claim. For aerosol cans, it says ' carry on their person and in plain view in any posted public facility, park, playground, swimming pool, beach, or recreational area, other than a highway, street, alley, or way'. I guess this could be a problem, as i often buy spray paint, don't put it in a bag, and go home not by streets, alleys, ways, or highways but through the beach. Guess you got me there.
For 'felt tip pens' it specifically says 'with intent to commit grafitti or vandalism'.
Singing Happy Birthday (or any other song) is not, and has never been, a copyright violation. Public performance for profit is a copyright violation.
Every one of your examples completely fails. You have not provided a single example of something an ordinary person would do without having a clue it is illegal.
Since you are the one making the claim that all these oppressive laws are out there, why don't you provide an example of a law that an ordinary citizen risks getting arrested for without knowing such a law existed?
This is complete bullshit. Laws are not complicated just so they can be used for oppression, they are complicated because they deal strictly with human beings, and humans are complicated.
Here's a simple law - if you kill another human you are put to death. Easy to understand, right? Now don't go complicating it up by adding conditions like accidental, or self defense, or unable to know right from wrong, or heat of the moment, or anything else. You really think that is better?
Some of the very worst laws are the simplest. Things like zero tolerance and mandatory sentencing.
And that doesn't even get into the whole area of civil law.
Wrong again. The NLRB specifically only has jurisdiction over PRIVATE business and the USPS.
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The headline is WRONG. The ruling does NOT say your employer can not prohibit you from recording. The ruling says your employer can't issue a recording ban in such a way that would interfere with things protected by section 7 of the NLRA (unionization). It does NOT say they can't prevent you from recording ANYTHING ELSE.
The very headline implies just such a thing. The specific thing at issue in this case was the WF handbook banned recording of 'Team Meetings'. The NLRB found that PARTICULAR thing illegal, because 'team meetings' could include union organizing activities, and by law, the company can not interfere with those. This ruling in NO WAY bans ALL company prohibitions on recording, only ones that interfere with origanization activities. And that has nothing to do with any local laws.
It seems your school did a crappy job. The LEGISLATIVE branch (Congress) makes laws. These people are elected. One of the LAWS they made was the National Labor Relations Act (1935). This Act created the NLRB. The Act was ruled Constitutional by the SCOTUS in 1937.
The 'skipping' study had nothing to do with how others percieve you. It was a study on how body posture affects low energy levels caused by depression.
Do you believe every stupid thing you read? The House passed the Federal Reserve Act 298 to 60 and the Senate passed it 43 to 25. And President Wilson signed it.
Port and starboard are no less ambiguous in this situation.m Are you looking in the direction of the front of the ship, or is the dancer? Stage left is the proper way to say it.