I am single. I am also on the autistic spectrum, but not enough to merit public assistance. As for me, I would rather not try to disprove that marriage causes terminal illnesses in females. Gold-diggers need not apply, may they all be raped and die from various opportunistic infections. For all intents and purposes, I will remain single. If you have a sick imagination, sorry, a +1 415 NXX XXXX lifestyle is out of the question.
I had done work on the side, but not enough to justify incorporating and filing five times per year. Unfortunately, I don't live in a jurisdiction that allows single-human corporate entities and I have a hard time trusting people after getting screwed more than once. There is a bright side to being a W2 loser. The law in my jurisdiction is that when one is bought wholesale and sold retail, a shield from personal liability leaps into existence...and I do not have to file five times per year for the privilege. As a last note for comparison. Unemployment may put one on the street, but a tax audit can put one in the slammer.
I guess I can scratch off Texas in my 'state shopping' list. So much for that part of the Sun Belt.
Show me a state that:
1. Does not make one cut out silly opera windows in cargo vans to qualify for noncommercial tags.
2. Does not engage in periodic written driver exams designed to 'confuse as many people off the road as possible'.
3. Does not forward horsepower data gathered from enhanced emissions tests to insurance companies.
4. is shall-issue for handgun carry permits.
5. Permits purchase, possession and use of fireworks by residents.
6. Politicians that won't bow to racial extortionists and stay out of my pocket and life.
Invariably someone here will say "State of Anarchy" or "State of Nonexistence". For such as these, a little Afrikaans will do: Gaan fok jouself.
What this decision does is to make the Constitution follow the flag. This may be the death knell for rulings arising from the Insular Cases, especially Downes v. Bidwell.
For those who have trouble with the concept of judicial supremacy (a.k.a strong judiciary), one should beware the alternative to the common-law system that we received from England would be the legislative supremacy (or 'weak' judiciary) of the civil code system. This usually results in a 'conveyor belt' or 'Moebius loop' process of legislative enactment and judicial invalidation followed by more legislation enactment followed by subsequent judicial invalidation, etc. The reason for adopting the strong model was to keep rights secured from being repealed by Congress. An excellent example is the relationship between the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment which was enacted to keep subsequent Congresses from repealing said Act. Twenty-seven patches (amendments) in two hundred and seventeen years is not so problematic.
Slashdot Mirror
I am single. I am also on the autistic spectrum, but not enough to merit public assistance. As for me, I would rather not try to disprove that marriage causes terminal illnesses in females. Gold-diggers need not apply, may they all be raped and die from various opportunistic infections. For all intents and purposes, I will remain single. If you have a sick imagination, sorry, a +1 415 NXX XXXX lifestyle is out of the question.
I had done work on the side, but not enough to justify incorporating and filing five times per year. Unfortunately, I don't live in a jurisdiction that allows single-human corporate entities and I have a hard time trusting people after getting screwed more than once. There is a bright side to being a W2 loser. The law in my jurisdiction is that when one is bought wholesale and sold retail, a shield from personal liability leaps into existence...and I do not have to file five times per year for the privilege. As a last note for comparison. Unemployment may put one on the street, but a tax audit can put one in the slammer.
All this dream chasing is what is killing us.
I guess I can scratch off Texas in my 'state shopping' list. So much for that part of the Sun Belt.
Show me a state that:
1. Does not make one cut out silly opera windows in cargo vans to qualify for noncommercial tags.
2. Does not engage in periodic written driver exams designed to 'confuse as many people off the road as possible'.
3. Does not forward horsepower data gathered from enhanced emissions tests to insurance companies.
4. is shall-issue for handgun carry permits.
5. Permits purchase, possession and use of fireworks by residents.
6. Politicians that won't bow to racial extortionists and stay out of my pocket and life.
Invariably someone here will say "State of Anarchy" or "State of Nonexistence". For such as these, a little Afrikaans will do: Gaan fok jouself.
What this decision does is to make the Constitution follow the flag. This may be the death knell for rulings arising from the Insular Cases, especially Downes v. Bidwell.
For those who have trouble with the concept of judicial supremacy (a.k.a strong judiciary), one should beware the alternative to the common-law system that we received from England would be the legislative supremacy (or 'weak' judiciary) of the civil code system. This usually results in a 'conveyor belt' or 'Moebius loop' process of legislative enactment and judicial invalidation followed by more legislation enactment followed by subsequent judicial invalidation, etc. The reason for adopting the strong model was to keep rights secured from being repealed by Congress. An excellent example is the relationship between the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment which was enacted to keep subsequent Congresses from repealing said Act. Twenty-seven patches (amendments) in two hundred and seventeen years is not so problematic.
You mean the ones who are not hung up on careers, properties and toys?