do you know how many people from Trump's list of seven countries are responsible for terror-related deaths of Americans since 1975? Zero. Zip. Nada.
This is false. Christopher Stevens was killed by Libyan terrorists in Benghazi in 2012.
Yes, and several others. You do have a point. I should have qualified what I said: nobody from the list of seven countries is responsible for deaths on American soil.
Well Trump owns it now. He went much further than Obama and a Republican-dominated Congress did (albeit with Democrat support.) Trump is not just restricting visas granted to people from these countries. He's banning them from entering.
You still haven't addressed how Trump's action would have stopped the San Bernadino shooters. Which it wouldn't. The list is a convenient one for Trump. He can use its prior existence as political cover, appear to be tough on Muslims entering the country, and not piss off his friends in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates.
Apparently we've forgotten the folks (San Bernardino, etc) who had "clear evidence of ISIS sympathies" on their Facebook profiles and other public social media that we then asked why hadn't been caught when they were entering the country.
The San Bernadino shooters were from Pakistan. They had travelled to Saudi Arabia years before the attach.
Neither of these countries is on Trump's list of seven. How are these new rules supposed to stop people like the San Bernadino shooters?
While we're on the subject, do you know how many people from Trump's list of seven countries are responsible for terror-related deaths of Americans since 1975? Zero. Zip. Nada. But Saudi Arabia was the point of origin for the 9/11 attackers. And other terror-related deaths in America have been due to people from Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Those three countries are not on the list. But they do have business connections to Trump (hotels, etc.)
There's a another theory about the disappearing hamsters and it involved Richard Gere and a length of PVC pipe.
It was a gerbil, not a hamster, and a cardboard paper-towel tube, not a PVC pipe. And Richard Gere's supposed connection to the episode has been debunked as a myth.
The Frito-Lay-owned brand partnered with Uber and Mothers Against Drunk Driving to pull off the stunt, which was orchestrated by San Francisco ad agency Goodby, Silverstein & Partners.
From TFS, researchers think it's possibly a lack of vitamin B3 (aka Niacin) from a corn-only diet. So yes, it could be due to a monotonous diet, but not the monotony of the diet.
In addition to salary history, Employers in the United States often ask for tax forms or permission to obtain tax transcripts. Sometimes this is to prove who you worked for without contacting them. But other times this is used to see your salary history, and/or prove it is what you said it was.
They can confirm your employment history by contacting previous employers. Asking for W2s or tax returns for that reason is bullshit. Walk away. Better still, report them.
The short US answer seems to be employers can require, and you can voluntarily give. But this information cannot be used to try and determine anything discriminatory (married status, if you have children, etc.) under Federal law.
In addition to Federal law, check the public policy of your State. There are protections for job-seekers in State law as well.
Time crystals may sound dangerously close to a perpetual motion machine, but it is worth emphasizing one key difference: while time crystals would indeed move periodically in an eternal loop, rotation occurs in the ground state, with no work being carried out nor any usable energy being extracted from the system. Finding time crystals would not amount to a violation of well-established principles of thermodynamics.
This. Mod parent up.
Quantum-mechanical systems in their ground state cannot radiate energy, because they are already in their lowest possible energy-state.
While cool i agree, and i can see perhaps some esoteric use beyond basic research, what sort of practical day-to-day use for the common man would there be?
Quite likely, it's too early to tell.
There is a story, perhaps apocryphal or misattributed, of then-prime-minister Benjamin Disraeli visiting Michael Faraday's lab, and asking Faraday "what use is electricity?" Faraday replied: "What use is a new-born baby?"
So if Trump wants to create jobs in America he'd better dump coal and support wind and solar.
I doubt Trump will stand in the way of the solar industry, but he is not going to "dump coal." He carried most of the major coal-producing states including the electoral-college-heavy swing-states of Pennsylvania and Ohio.
He campaigned on bringing back coal-producing jobs. Clinton disappointed coal-voters by campaigning to re-train coal-workers to do other jobs. Whether Trump can deliver is still an open question. The cost of coal compared to other energy-sources, combined with automation, may prevent him from doing so.
There is so much wrong with your post. I am going to try to help you. Really, I am even going to try to do it without being an asshole.
How generous of you. But alas, the rest of your post shows that you are the one who needs help.
The price being passed on to consumers is largely a myth. Prices are already set at what the market will bear. If they could charge more, they would already be doing so.
Then, if the goods made in the country are selling, as opposed to the imports, then there will be increased tax revenue. In other words, if we stopped buying the goods from Mexico and purchased locally manufactured goods it would mean more people are gainfully employed and more money is exchanged locally. When money changes hands, the government taxes it. The increased revenue, by taxation, can be used to pay for things like walls.
The only sense I can make of your argument is that you think Mexico, in the face of an import tariff, will lower their prices to remain competitive with American-made goods, and thus indirectly "pay" the tariff in order to build the wall for us. I think that's desperately wishful thinking. And even if it happens, it still means manufacturing jobs remain in Mexico, but that they just become even shittier jobs for Mexicans.
As for shifting tax-revenue sources to American workers who make the goods instead of Mexican workers, you defeat your own argument and support that of the GP: American (not Mexican) money would then be paying for the wall.
Note: I have offered no opinion on the effectiveness or validity of the wall. I have offered no opinion on politics. I have offered no opinion on taxation. I am simply ensuring you are given the chance to see how critical thinking applies to more than word problems.
LOL. If you were to have engaged in critical thinking, you would have seen that it is folly to enact policies that are funded by activity you don't want to encourage.
Slashdot Mirror
you banged a mermaid
in the mouth
A mermaid .. unfortunately divided lengthwise.
[apologies to Woody Allen]
Y'know, I'm tempted to tell Larry Ellison to go fuck himself.
But then again, I wouldn't be surprised if he married himself.
do you know how many people from Trump's list of seven countries are responsible for terror-related deaths of Americans since 1975? Zero. Zip. Nada.
This is false. Christopher Stevens was killed by Libyan terrorists in Benghazi in 2012.
Yes, and several others. You do have a point. I should have qualified what I said: nobody from the list of seven countries is responsible for deaths on American soil.
I like how you keep repeating this as "Trump's list of seven"...
It's Obama's list of seven. See: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021
Well Trump owns it now. He went much further than Obama and a Republican-dominated Congress did (albeit with Democrat support.) Trump is not just restricting visas granted to people from these countries. He's banning them from entering.
You still haven't addressed how Trump's action would have stopped the San Bernadino shooters. Which it wouldn't. The list is a convenient one for Trump. He can use its prior existence as political cover, appear to be tough on Muslims entering the country, and not piss off his friends in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates.
Apparently we've forgotten the folks (San Bernardino, etc) who had "clear evidence of ISIS sympathies" on their Facebook profiles and other public social media that we then asked why hadn't been caught when they were entering the country.
The San Bernadino shooters were from Pakistan. They had travelled to Saudi Arabia years before the attach.
Neither of these countries is on Trump's list of seven. How are these new rules supposed to stop people like the San Bernadino shooters?
While we're on the subject, do you know how many people from Trump's list of seven countries are responsible for terror-related deaths of Americans since 1975? Zero. Zip. Nada. But Saudi Arabia was the point of origin for the 9/11 attackers. And other terror-related deaths in America have been due to people from Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Those three countries are not on the list. But they do have business connections to Trump (hotels, etc.)
You mean George Orwell's 1984. That was about a totalitarian society with widespread surveillance.
Brave New World (by Aldous Huxley) was about a bio-engineered caste society. Individuality was discouraged, but the main theme was not surveillance.
There's a another theory about the disappearing hamsters and it involved Richard Gere and a length of PVC pipe.
It was a gerbil, not a hamster, and a cardboard paper-towel tube, not a PVC pipe. And Richard Gere's supposed connection to the episode has been debunked as a myth.
So this is really just a big old ad by Uber right? Various news agencies has fallen for it completely and spread it for free.
From TFA, mis-linked in TFS:
The Frito-Lay-owned brand partnered with Uber and Mothers Against Drunk Driving to pull off the stunt, which was orchestrated by San Francisco ad agency Goodby, Silverstein & Partners.
So, promotions all round, not just for Uber.
I for one welcome our new Tostitos-eating cannibal hamster overlords.
Welcome them with Bud on ice, FTW.
Drunkenness could be defeated better by enacting a muslim registry.
You do know that devout Muslims don't drink, right?
Is this a property of corn or a monotonous diet?
From TFS, researchers think it's possibly a lack of vitamin B3 (aka Niacin) from a corn-only diet. So yes, it could be due to a monotonous diet, but not the monotony of the diet.
let him unilaterally decide whatever he wants.
Me thinks he learned this whole executive order thing from the previous holder of the office...
As far as number of executive orders is concerned, Obama's record was far below average.
Well, he learned from the best: Obama, and Bush, and Clinton, and Bush...
Based on what I have seen over the past eight days, I'd say those men are paragons of statesmanship compared to Trump.
We live in interesting times...
Trump has to follow either the US Constitution, or whatever Congress decides he's allowed to do.
What happens if he doesn't adhere to the above? I get the feeling we're about to find out.
In addition to salary history, Employers in the United States often ask for tax forms or permission to obtain tax transcripts. Sometimes this is to prove who you worked for without contacting them. But other times this is used to see your salary history, and/or prove it is what you said it was.
They can confirm your employment history by contacting previous employers. Asking for W2s or tax returns for that reason is bullshit. Walk away. Better still, report them.
The short US answer seems to be employers can require, and you can voluntarily give. But this information cannot be used to try and determine anything discriminatory (married status, if you have children, etc.) under Federal law.
In addition to Federal law, check the public policy of your State. There are protections for job-seekers in State law as well.
that would violate Heisenber's Uncertainty Principle because then you would know the atoms exact momentum and location.
FTFY. But you're right.
Fair points. Thanks. One thing:
Trump got votes by telling coal-country voters he's bring back jobs, but it ain't happening.
You're right. I was being generous when I said it was an "open question." Really it isn't.
Yeah, I heard that one too. Thanks for adding it.
Coal is still an important component of steel-manufacturing, although competing technologies are in use and may eventually take over.
IMHO, what we can and should stop doing ASAP is burning coal to make electricity.
Smarter people than you say otherwise:
This. Mod parent up.
Quantum-mechanical systems in their ground state cannot radiate energy, because they are already in their lowest possible energy-state.
While cool i agree, and i can see perhaps some esoteric use beyond basic research, what sort of practical day-to-day use for the common man would there be?
Quite likely, it's too early to tell.
There is a story, perhaps apocryphal or misattributed, of then-prime-minister Benjamin Disraeli visiting Michael Faraday's lab, and asking Faraday "what use is electricity?" Faraday replied: "What use is a new-born baby?"
So if Trump wants to create jobs in America he'd better dump coal and support wind and solar.
I doubt Trump will stand in the way of the solar industry, but he is not going to "dump coal." He carried most of the major coal-producing states including the electoral-college-heavy swing-states of Pennsylvania and Ohio.
He campaigned on bringing back coal-producing jobs. Clinton disappointed coal-voters by campaigning to re-train coal-workers to do other jobs. Whether Trump can deliver is still an open question. The cost of coal compared to other energy-sources, combined with automation, may prevent him from doing so.
because of obscene government regulations and now that coal companies can't dump mercury in rivers
I can't tell if you're parodying right wing or are actual right wing.
Yeah, there's a name for that. Shout-out to an AC above, who already mentioned it.
I have seen people on slashdot accuse you of rape too. Does that make it a fact? Watch, I'll add another: PopeRatzo raped me. Boom! Fact.
Funny thing about the internet. You can check whether stuff has been reported before.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...
http://fusion.net/story/328522...
http://gawker.com/the-time-don...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.newyorker.com/magaz...
http://www.inquisitr.com/36114...
http://time.com/4572925/megyn-...
http://www.rollingstone.com/po...
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/1...
There. That oughtta do it.
Now, where is the evidence that PopeRatzo raped you?
There is so much wrong with your post. I am going to try to help you. Really, I am even going to try to do it without being an asshole.
How generous of you. But alas, the rest of your post shows that you are the one who needs help.
The price being passed on to consumers is largely a myth. Prices are already set at what the market will bear. If they could charge more, they would already be doing so.
Then, if the goods made in the country are selling, as opposed to the imports, then there will be increased tax revenue. In other words, if we stopped buying the goods from Mexico and purchased locally manufactured goods it would mean more people are gainfully employed and more money is exchanged locally. When money changes hands, the government taxes it. The increased revenue, by taxation, can be used to pay for things like walls.
The only sense I can make of your argument is that you think Mexico, in the face of an import tariff, will lower their prices to remain competitive with American-made goods, and thus indirectly "pay" the tariff in order to build the wall for us. I think that's desperately wishful thinking. And even if it happens, it still means manufacturing jobs remain in Mexico, but that they just become even shittier jobs for Mexicans.
As for shifting tax-revenue sources to American workers who make the goods instead of Mexican workers, you defeat your own argument and support that of the GP: American (not Mexican) money would then be paying for the wall.
Note: I have offered no opinion on the effectiveness or validity of the wall. I have offered no opinion on politics. I have offered no opinion on taxation. I am simply ensuring you are given the chance to see how critical thinking applies to more than word problems.
LOL. If you were to have engaged in critical thinking, you would have seen that it is folly to enact policies that are funded by activity you don't want to encourage.