Most people who buy a house take out a mortgage (their debt equivalent) that is larger than their income (their GDP equivalent) and outside of property bubbles do just fine.
You have a spectacularly bad sense of judgement then, not to mention logic.
Yes most people who drive to work do so alone. Maybe that's the only driving you ever do, but for most of those people they drive with someone else in the car at other times. Amazingly most people don't work with their families and hence can't travel to work together, unlike a lot of their other car uses.
The trivial example would be: most people test drive a car before buying it and that usually sees the car driven with a passenger putting that vehicle out of your "never" class.
So you truly think that the vast majority of large passenger vehicles driven on the road will never have a passenger in them. Not even one passenger just one time?
Both are fine. Though I doubt the US military command was competent enough that particular day to manage with your version.
And we all know that no news company has ever had incorrect garbage entered into their news feed before, so that particular example must have been gospel truth, right?
Which is irrelevant the statement is "no jobs being created", not "not enough new jobs for new workers being created". The unemployment percentage wasn't mentioned because again it is irrelevant to the raw number of jobs.
The economy is screwed, don't get me wrong on that.
But if 88000 new jobs be created is "no new jobs" then 85000 h1-b visas being granted is "no h1-b visas".
Currently -> Ontime Fri Apr 26 23:59
Late Mon Apr 29 09:00
Is this the assignment you wish to submit ? [yn default y] n submit: Submission has been cancelled at your request ;
Hopefully they've made some updates in the last decade since we playing with the submit was a common past time when I was using it as a student (and I assume for my students when I was using it while teaching). When you have a system that takes a programming assignment, builds it, and runs it that's not unsurprisingly easy. "I wonder if I could just do system("(whoami;pwd;ls -l) | mail someaddress"); in my program" being the fist obvious thing. "I wonder if I could fork a child and have it make a tcp connection to X:Y and hook a shell to it" being a quick second when an email arrives...
Yes, everybody thought the battery was powered by magical fairies rather than needing electricity.
If only there was a name for something for which you could take huge amounts of electricity and use it to change the chemical structure of that something. And then you could cause the chemical structure to change back and produce that electricity again (well a large portion of it, 100% efficiency doesn't seem to work often in this universe). Especially if you could control that chemical change so that it happened when you wanted and only as much as you wanted. Even better would be if it could be easily transported and was reasonably stable and could hold a lot of energy per unit of mass.
How about I propose I name for such a thing: "A really good battery" has a nice ring to it.
It's a battery! The *entire idea* is to put energy into something so you can get it out later.
You want to the most energy intensive (per unit weight assuming reasonable density) thing to produce you can find for which the reverse reaction is controllable.
The comparison was between using an electric motor that could use two different types of batteries one for short range and one for long range; and an electric motor and for short range with a combustion engine for long range.
So both have an electric motor and all the support work for using that and hence maintenance on that is irrelevant when comparing the two options.
The crime isn't the breaking of the contract. The crime is the unauthorized access.
Breaking the contract of my lease isn't a crime. Remaining in the home after doing so (let's pretend we are in a jurisdiction without silly tenant rights) possibly is.
Now when the law says "you must do X" and also says "you must not do X" you are in a pickle - but that happens laws are not logically consistent after all.
Breaching a contract is not breaking the law, and the law can make you break a contract whenever it damn well feels like.
That's why you don't often see people being sentenced say, "I'm sorry your Honor but I signed this here contract with Company Inc stating that I must guard their warehouse 8 hours a day 5 days a week. Thus I will not be able to spend the next 25 years in prison as you have just sentenced me to. Also this contract says I must be armed while on the job and hence that ban on me owning or possessing a firearm just won't do either. Sorry about that, but a contract is a contract".
The problem with statistics like that is that it is next to impossible to compare like with like.
Sure people with a bachelor's degree earn more money than those who only graduated high school. However, the bachelor's degree group is going to be composed of smarter and wealthier people - since those help significantly in getting such a degree. So is that lifetime income increase due to the degree, or is it due to being smarter/wealthier to start with?
Being able to complete college probably means the person in question can self motivate enough to do some work and follow instructions and so on - so is it the college degree causing the income jump or is it that qualities that help in getting a degree also help in earning more money and it's those qualities not the degree causing the income difference?
Slashdot Mirror
Most people who buy a house take out a mortgage (their debt equivalent) that is larger than their income (their GDP equivalent) and outside of property bubbles do just fine.
And yet the the world managed to pull off the industrial revolution and deflation at the same time.
So is your made up example and model wrong? Or are the facts of the industrial revolution up for modification to suit your theory?
Given the entire topic is about a potential reason (that isn't the TSA) for the drop, I'm not sure where you got that impression in the first place...
User pays is not typically associated with liberals, they're the ones on the "ability to pay" side of that divide.
let's hope the twitter warning is posted after the "launch missiles back" check is done.
You have a spectacularly bad sense of judgement then, not to mention logic.
Yes most people who drive to work do so alone. Maybe that's the only driving you ever do, but for most of those people they drive with someone else in the car at other times. Amazingly most people don't work with their families and hence can't travel to work together, unlike a lot of their other car uses.
The trivial example would be: most people test drive a car before buying it and that usually sees the car driven with a passenger putting that vehicle out of your "never" class.
So you truly think that the vast majority of large passenger vehicles driven on the road will never have a passenger in them. Not even one passenger just one time?
I took an "in america" is implicit in the statement, mainly due to the TSA reference. Wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong of course.
Both are fine. Though I doubt the US military command was competent enough that particular day to manage with your version.
And we all know that no news company has ever had incorrect garbage entered into their news feed before, so that particular example must have been gospel truth, right?
Sure every other hijacked plane that day saw everyone on the plan killed plus people not on the plane killed.
Count the number of US flags in that list prior to 9/11/2001 (you'll need more than than the standard complement of fingers and toes).
Now count the number of US flags in that list post 9/11/2001 (I'll help here, the answer is 0).
Well duh.
If someone has "Honest" in their name, they aren't. Just like if a country has Democratic in its name, it isn't.
Which is irrelevant the statement is "no jobs being created", not "not enough new jobs for new workers being created". The unemployment percentage wasn't mentioned because again it is irrelevant to the raw number of jobs.
The economy is screwed, don't get me wrong on that.
But if 88000 new jobs be created is "no new jobs" then 85000 h1-b visas being granted is "no h1-b visas".
If you call 88,000 jobs "no jobs" the sure. By this metric, in other news there were no H1B visas granted this year.
You didn't have such a submission system? The one we used was, and I'm not kidding, written in the 60s: http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~nr/comp150fp/archive/jb-hext/hext-automatic-grading.pdf
Obviously it's had a bunch of changes since then, but it did basically what you describe. I see it is still being used:
; givelist
Name Sufx Category Until Cse Description
COMP3520_Assignment1_2013 .tar Ontime Fri Apr 26 23:59 Assignment 1 .doc ontime Tue Apr 9 18:00 Article Precis .zip OnTime Thu Apr 18 17:00 Project-Part 1 (COMP5114, Semester 1, 2013) .zip OnTime Thu May 30 17:00 Project-Part 2 (COMP5114, Semester 1, 2013) .zip OnTime Wed Apr 17 17:00 Part 1 of COMP5425 Assignment, 2013S1 .zip OnTime Wed May 29 17:00 Part 2 of COMP5425 Assignment, 2013S1 .tar ontime Fri Apr 19 23:59 COMP5426 Assignment 1 - Parallel Collapse Sets of Integers
INFO5990_AssignmentOne
comp5114.project_p1
comp5114.project_p2
comp5425.part1
comp5425.part2
comp5426_Assignment1_2013
; submit f.tar COMP3520_Assignment1_2013
Name: COMP3520_Assignment1_2013 .tar
File suffix:
Description: Assignment 1
Due dates and their categories are:
Currently -> Ontime Fri Apr 26 23:59
Late Mon Apr 29 09:00
Is this the assignment you wish to submit ? [yn default y] n
submit: Submission has been cancelled at your request
;
Hopefully they've made some updates in the last decade since we playing with the submit was a common past time when I was using it as a student (and I assume for my students when I was using it while teaching). When you have a system that takes a programming assignment, builds it, and runs it that's not unsurprisingly easy. "I wonder if I could just do system("(whoami;pwd;ls -l) | mail someaddress"); in my program" being the fist obvious thing. "I wonder if I could fork a child and have it make a tcp connection to X:Y and hook a shell to it" being a quick second when an email arrives...
It's licensed under the GPL, you have very strange distinctions between "open source" and "freeware".
No one cares what you think.
Yes, everybody thought the battery was powered by magical fairies rather than needing electricity.
If only there was a name for something for which you could take huge amounts of electricity and use it to change the chemical structure of that something. And then you could cause the chemical structure to change back and produce that electricity again (well a large portion of it, 100% efficiency doesn't seem to work often in this universe). Especially if you could control that chemical change so that it happened when you wanted and only as much as you wanted. Even better would be if it could be easily transported and was reasonably stable and could hold a lot of energy per unit of mass.
How about I propose I name for such a thing: "A really good battery" has a nice ring to it.
What makes suicide bombers so much worse than non-suicide bombers?
It's a battery! The *entire idea* is to put energy into something so you can get it out later.
You want to the most energy intensive (per unit weight assuming reasonable density) thing to produce you can find for which the reverse reaction is controllable.
The comparison was between using an electric motor that could use two different types of batteries one for short range and one for long range; and an electric motor and for short range with a combustion engine for long range.
So both have an electric motor and all the support work for using that and hence maintenance on that is irrelevant when comparing the two options.
The crime isn't the breaking of the contract. The crime is the unauthorized access.
Breaking the contract of my lease isn't a crime. Remaining in the home after doing so (let's pretend we are in a jurisdiction without silly tenant rights) possibly is.
Now when the law says "you must do X" and also says "you must not do X" you are in a pickle - but that happens laws are not logically consistent after all.
Breaching a contract is not breaking the law, and the law can make you break a contract whenever it damn well feels like.
That's why you don't often see people being sentenced say, "I'm sorry your Honor but I signed this here contract with Company Inc stating that I must guard their warehouse 8 hours a day 5 days a week. Thus I will not be able to spend the next 25 years in prison as you have just sentenced me to. Also this contract says I must be armed while on the job and hence that ban on me owning or possessing a firearm just won't do either. Sorry about that, but a contract is a contract".
Who is going to buy second hand from you at 90% when they could buy it new and get the $7500-$15000 government incentives for buying a new one?
And of course those government incentives you are using don't apply to vehicles bought for resale - good luck with the IRS audits.
The problem with statistics like that is that it is next to impossible to compare like with like.
Sure people with a bachelor's degree earn more money than those who only graduated high school. However, the bachelor's degree group is going to be composed of smarter and wealthier people - since those help significantly in getting such a degree. So is that lifetime income increase due to the degree, or is it due to being smarter/wealthier to start with?
Being able to complete college probably means the person in question can self motivate enough to do some work and follow instructions and so on - so is it the college degree causing the income jump or is it that qualities that help in getting a degree also help in earning more money and it's those qualities not the degree causing the income difference?