And it still has nothing to do with equivalent. Again, equivalence doesn't require "an exact number" of anything, I don't know why you think that applies at all.
"Saying "these days" doesn't mean he thinks it's a new phenomenon, just that he recognizes it's going on currently."
I never claimed he thought it was a new phenomenon, I pointed out that this story is about something that happened nearly forty years ago, and any attempt to transpose it to current political activity is kind of ridiculous.
WOW you so proved me wrong, after a monumental Supreme Court decision that definitively outlines the rules regarding non-combatant prisoners and their rights, directly contradicting your assertion and proving you irrefutably wrong, your repeated "nu uh, the US is BAD!!" is certainly a powerful argument.
I read that article before I posted, and all you did was demonstrate that I was right, they are equivalent. That a pound equals a certain amount of grams is intended to show what exactly? It always equaled some amount of grams, stating so has nothing to do with my question.
You did not answer my question, and you did not prove your point.
Main Entry:
equivalent Listen to the pronunciation of equivalent "Pronunciation:
\-lnt\ Function:
adjective Etymology:
Middle English, from Middle French or Late Latin; Middle French, from Late Latin aequivalent-, aequivalens, present participle of aequivalre to have equal power, from Latin aequi- + valre to be strong -- more at wield Date:
15th century
1: equal in force, amount, or value; "
Next time, get a dictionary when you try to argue, that way you won't be wrong again.
"Do you honestly think the republicans are the democrats' biggest enemy?"
They are, irrefutably. The only intelligent way to describe one's "biggest enemy" is either by size or influence, and the Republicans are the tops on the list of enemies for the Dems in both categories.
The fact that they won't really stop the Dems (or vice versa) doesn't change the fact that the Republicans are the only ones who have the power to do so.
"I think you are a liar. If you didn't care, you wouldn't have responded."
Well, based on your reasoning, I think you're an imbecile.
Is it possible that I don't care one whit about your opinion while similarly being very concerned about shouting down ignorant fools?
Hey look, I just proved you wrong.
"But you did care enough to respond to make some comment."
Yeah, I cared about making sure people knew you were full of shit, your opinion in that case is irrelevant. You fail.
"Or do you generally go around ranting like a lunatic about things you don't care about?"
I do neither, but I do occasionally point out where people are forwarding stupid attempts at arguments, especially when they're obviously wrong and involve my rights.
I shouted down a fool who has no idea what the significance of the SDupreme's decision on habeas corpus is, pointing out, quite rightly, that his arguments were ridiculous and ignorant, and you modded it "troll".
If someone IS being stupid, then they deserve to be called on it, especially if they dismiss the importance of the recent Supreme Court decision on habeas corpus.
It makes me certain YOU also have no idea how important it is mod, there's simply no way you could make such an idiotic moderation if you did.
Well, after the astounding stupidity of yours, arrogance is probably a welcome change.
I notice you didn't effectively challenge my statement's accuracy. I couldn't care less what you think of its "arrogance".
"Good luck with your life. I have the suspicion you'll need it."
I have the suspicion that you want people like me to feel dependent like you do because we make you feel less effective and actualized as a human being.
I have a suspicion that your fairly worthless as a human being.
I agree, I was right from the start. Thanks for admitting it.
"There is no contradiction."
In this case I agree, there was the admission I was not expecting your pathetic lying ass to make, that there could conceivably be NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER.
"Well, for the gallery: you're completely right - companies always raise their prices to offset the higher costs caused by pollution permits... and then? Oh, right -- consumers will buy less!"
Unless they can't, you know, food (which depends on oil costs by way of transportation) for instance. GOd I bet you feel dumb knowing you're wrong.
So, I'm right, you should have just stopped there.
"Alternatively, companies can keep their prices the same (to stay competitive against their rivals)"
You're a fucking idiot. If the cost increases for them, it doesn't also increase for their rivals? How fucking stupid are you?
Stop discussing economics, you're like a 5 year old discussing nuclear physics.
""Separate entity" does not mean "independently owned," I don't know where you get that idea. "
I never said it did, but it DOES mean "separate from AT&T" no matter how much your ignorant ass wishes otherwise.
"Now, if AT&T owned 50% of Bell Labs, and Western Electric owned the other 50%, and AT&T bought out Western Electric, where does that leave the ownership?? "
What does it matter idiot? Ownership doesn't mean a fucking thing when it comes to the connectedness of the companies.
Which you know, and hate, and can't in any way refute.
"It's no big deal to be wrong - we're all wrong sometimes"
Like you are now.
They were separate. It doesn't mean a fucking thing that part of the company was owned by AT&T, they were separate.
"It just must be really depressing to be as spectacularly wrong as you and still be such an arrogant prick about it!"
"So the people who have been sitting in their cell for 5 years without trial are vindicated now, and justice has been restored?"
Yes.
"I don't think so."
Doesn't matter, and frankly, I doubt anyone cares.
"Do their family even know if they are alive or dead yet?"
They can find out now if they don't know, so for practical purposes, YES.
"Can they even afford to sue the government in U.S. courts?"
They don't need to "afford" it, your grasp of civil rights litigation is terrible.
"It wouldn't even matter if they could, the U.S. government lost several court cases involving softwood lumber from Canada, and they just completely ignored the ruling and went on imposing their tariff."
I think your understanding of that issue and its outcome are underwhelming, and comparing that to a civil rights issue is both legally ridiculous and intellectually dishonest.
"Being given the right to sue the government is supposed to make up for this gross hypocrisy?"
ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID? YES, it's the right to sue for habeas corpus which you don't even need a fucking attorney to do. Do you even understand what habeas corpus IS? Or why it's important? If you did you'd realize how off your thinking is.
"It applies more and more to the behaviour of Western Governments these days. "
This story is about something that happened in 1969.
I don't know what's worse, your post or the fools who modded it interesting when what they meant was "YEAH FUCK AMERICA! I'LL OBVIOUSLY MOD ANYTHING DENOUNCING THE "WEST" (a trollish euphemism for America) UP!"
"When you look at the tax credits Exxon and Moble"
No, I won't, I made it clear that I had no desire to hear you reiterate your reasoning on this subject. I even asked nicely.
"Do you not admit that there is the responsibility of a society to care for those who can not care for themselves?"
Let's say i do agreee, so what? I',m not talking about "those who can't help themselves" I'm talking about those who DO NOT help themselves, by their own choice. Please don't pretend they are the same.
"If you disagree, then I hope you never lose your job because of downsizing or outsourcing."
I have and I got another one. I helped myself. I CHOSE to, I didn't wait for emotional do-gooders like you to force others to take care of me, I took care of myself.
"We owe something for our position in life."
You might, I earned everything I have by my own hard work. I don't owe you or anyone else a fucking thing because of my "position in life".
THAT, by the way, is ultimately my problem with people like you. You think that you have some moral authority to take from me. What the fuck gives you the right?
Answer: Not a god damned thing.
Lastly, if your argument boils down to tear-jerking anecdotes, save it. I don't give much credibility to does that, and neither does anyone else.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that was, and thank you. Also, someone else pointed me to the exact part of the text that applies.
And it still has nothing to do with equivalent. Again, equivalence doesn't require "an exact number" of anything, I don't know why you think that applies at all.
Have a nice day.
"Saying "these days" doesn't mean he thinks it's a new phenomenon, just that he recognizes it's going on currently."
I never claimed he thought it was a new phenomenon, I pointed out that this story is about something that happened nearly forty years ago, and any attempt to transpose it to current political activity is kind of ridiculous.
"Also, calm the fuck down, geez."
Fuck you (in my calmest voice).
That is exactly what I was looking for.
Too many people think that defining equivalence is the same as basing the number on the kilo.
"You can't take a pound and get an exact number of kilograms (especially from a legal perspective)."
Which has nothing to do with equivalent. More to point, equivalence doesn't rquire "an exact number" of anything.
Have a nice day.
"Easy. At some point in time some people decided to base the US system on the metric system."
You said that already, restating it doesn't answer my question.
WOW you so proved me wrong, after a monumental Supreme Court decision that definitively outlines the rules regarding non-combatant prisoners and their rights, directly contradicting your assertion and proving you irrefutably wrong, your repeated "nu uh, the US is BAD!!" is certainly a powerful argument.
I agree, that two mods admired that fool enough to mod me down says a lot about how habeas corpus was lost in the first place.
I read that article before I posted, and all you did was demonstrate that I was right, they are equivalent. That a pound equals a certain amount of grams is intended to show what exactly? It always equaled some amount of grams, stating so has nothing to do with my question.
You did not answer my question, and you did not prove your point.
Main Entry:
equivalent Listen to the pronunciation of equivalent
"Pronunciation:
\-lnt\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Middle English, from Middle French or Late Latin; Middle French, from Late Latin aequivalent-, aequivalens, present participle of aequivalre to have equal power, from Latin aequi- + valre to be strong -- more at wield
Date:
15th century
1: equal in force, amount, or value; "
Next time, get a dictionary when you try to argue, that way you won't be wrong again.
"Do you honestly think the republicans are the democrats' biggest enemy?"
They are, irrefutably. The only intelligent way to describe one's "biggest enemy" is either by size or influence, and the Republicans are the tops on the list of enemies for the Dems in both categories.
The fact that they won't really stop the Dems (or vice versa) doesn't change the fact that the Republicans are the only ones who have the power to do so.
Would you care to explain how a system that was in existence BEFORE the metric system was devised is "based on"it?
You and the post above yours seem to be confusing "is equivalent to" with "based on".
"I think you are a liar. If you didn't care, you wouldn't have responded."
Well, based on your reasoning, I think you're an imbecile.
Is it possible that I don't care one whit about your opinion while similarly being very concerned about shouting down ignorant fools?
Hey look, I just proved you wrong.
"But you did care enough to respond to make some comment."
Yeah, I cared about making sure people knew you were full of shit, your opinion in that case is irrelevant. You fail.
"Or do you generally go around ranting like a lunatic about things you don't care about?"
I do neither, but I do occasionally point out where people are forwarding stupid attempts at arguments, especially when they're obviously wrong and involve my rights.
Like yours.
I shouted down a fool who has no idea what the significance of the SDupreme's decision on habeas corpus is, pointing out, quite rightly, that his arguments were ridiculous and ignorant, and you modded it "troll".
If someone IS being stupid, then they deserve to be called on it, especially if they dismiss the importance of the recent Supreme Court decision on habeas corpus.
It makes me certain YOU also have no idea how important it is mod, there's simply no way you could make such an idiotic moderation if you did.
"The arrogance of this statement is astounding."
Well, after the astounding stupidity of yours, arrogance is probably a welcome change.
I notice you didn't effectively challenge my statement's accuracy. I couldn't care less what you think of its "arrogance".
"Good luck with your life. I have the suspicion you'll need it."
I have the suspicion that you want people like me to feel dependent like you do because we make you feel less effective and actualized as a human being.
I have a suspicion that your fairly worthless as a human being.
"I cannot predict the magnitude of the change"
So, it could be zero then.
I agree, I was right from the start. Thanks for admitting it.
"There is no contradiction."
In this case I agree, there was the admission I was not expecting your pathetic lying ass to make, that there could conceivably be NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER.
Thanks for admitting I was right.
"Well, for the gallery: you're completely right - companies always raise their prices to offset the higher costs caused by pollution permits... and then? Oh, right -- consumers will buy less!"
Unless they can't, you know, food (which depends on oil costs by way of transportation) for instance. GOd I bet you feel dumb knowing you're wrong.
So, I'm right, you should have just stopped there.
"Alternatively, companies can keep their prices the same (to stay competitive against their rivals)"
You're a fucking idiot. If the cost increases for them, it doesn't also increase for their rivals? How fucking stupid are you?
Stop discussing economics, you're like a 5 year old discussing nuclear physics.
""Separate entity" does not mean "independently owned," I don't know where you get that idea. "
I never said it did, but it DOES mean "separate from AT&T" no matter how much your ignorant ass wishes otherwise.
"Now, if AT&T owned 50% of Bell Labs, and Western Electric owned the other 50%, and AT&T bought out Western Electric, where does that leave the ownership?? "
What does it matter idiot? Ownership doesn't mean a fucking thing when it comes to the connectedness of the companies.
Which you know, and hate, and can't in any way refute.
"It's no big deal to be wrong - we're all wrong sometimes"
Like you are now.
They were separate. It doesn't mean a fucking thing that part of the company was owned by AT&T, they were separate.
"It just must be really depressing to be as spectacularly wrong as you and still be such an arrogant prick about it!"
Were the separate or not? YES OR NO?
Exactly. Fuck of now.
"Moot?"
Yes.
"So the people who have been sitting in their cell for 5 years without trial are vindicated now, and justice has been restored?"
Yes.
"I don't think so."
Doesn't matter, and frankly, I doubt anyone cares.
"Do their family even know if they are alive or dead yet?"
They can find out now if they don't know, so for practical purposes, YES.
"Can they even afford to sue the government in U.S. courts?"
They don't need to "afford" it, your grasp of civil rights litigation is terrible.
"It wouldn't even matter if they could, the U.S. government lost several court cases involving softwood lumber from Canada, and they just completely ignored the ruling and went on imposing their tariff."
I think your understanding of that issue and its outcome are underwhelming, and comparing that to a civil rights issue is both legally ridiculous and intellectually dishonest.
"Being given the right to sue the government is supposed to make up for this gross hypocrisy?"
ARE YOU FUCKING STUPID? YES, it's the right to sue for habeas corpus which you don't even need a fucking attorney to do. Do you even understand what habeas corpus IS? Or why it's important? If you did you'd realize how off your thinking is.
You clearly have no idea what you're debating.
"and I feel disgusted that Hollywood tried to make me feel like a genius
So do I, luckily you proved them wrong with that post.
Nice job.
"It applies more and more to the behaviour of Western Governments these days. "
This story is about something that happened in 1969.
I don't know what's worse, your post or the fools who modded it interesting when what they meant was "YEAH FUCK AMERICA! I'LL OBVIOUSLY MOD ANYTHING DENOUNCING THE "WEST" (a trollish euphemism for America) UP!"
"Absurd and ironic come to mind, but the word which I think best describes this blighted mindset is 'disappointing.'"
When you say "absurd, ironic, and disappointing" are you talking bout your grasp of US history?
Immigration here has never been "free" in any form. Ignoring that to further your talking points destroys what little credibility you might have had.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080612/ts_nm/guantanamo_court_dc_8
I guess you and whoever wasted a mod point on your post haven't been listening, but your "indefinite detention" screed is moot now.
At least in the USA.
"Your are the one that read some and yet insisted that I really meant ALL just so you could argue"
BZZZZT WRONG.
Reread the thread, if you're not an imbecile, you'll see why you're wrong with this statement.
Hint: perhaps I was referring to the ORIGINAL comment?
God damn I bet you feel dumb.
"Reply if you like, but you'll be talking to yourself in an empty room, I suspect."
In other words, you know I'm right, you're a liar.
Your excuses are worse than your posts.
"When you look at the tax credits Exxon and Moble"
No, I won't, I made it clear that I had no desire to hear you reiterate your reasoning on this subject. I even asked nicely.
"Do you not admit that there is the responsibility of a society to care for those who can not care for themselves?"
Let's say i do agreee, so what? I',m not talking about "those who can't help themselves" I'm talking about those who DO NOT help themselves, by their own choice. Please don't pretend they are the same.
"If you disagree, then I hope you never lose your job because of downsizing or outsourcing."
I have and I got another one. I helped myself. I CHOSE to, I didn't wait for emotional do-gooders like you to force others to take care of me, I took care of myself.
"We owe something for our position in life."
You might, I earned everything I have by my own hard work. I don't owe you or anyone else a fucking thing because of my "position in life".
THAT, by the way, is ultimately my problem with people like you. You think that you have some moral authority to take from me. What the fuck gives you the right?
Answer: Not a god damned thing.
Lastly, if your argument boils down to tear-jerking anecdotes, save it. I don't give much credibility to does that, and neither does anyone else.