The funding has to be related to the command. So they couldn't say "you must make national IDs or lose education funding." So, I'm at a loss trying to figure out what part of funding they could withhold to try to lure the states into participating.
I don't think there's been a national speed limit since 1995. Perhaps you're thinking of drinking age and drunk driving mandates?
it's flamebait troll if you make an obviously loaded statement like "...and actually been able to pass a semi on the interstate."
I wasn't aware that use of hyperbole made one a "flamebait troll." From now on, I will be as boring and unoriginal as possible in my writing in order to please you.
The point was that the Saturn ION has better pick-up than the Toyota Prius. Look at my other reply to your comment, and then go and look at the actual results and see for yourself that it is true.
I don't expect someone who paid a lot more than their car was worth because they thought it would save them money on gas in the long run to accept that they are wrong that easily. It's difficult to convince people that just wasted all that money that they were wrong, because there is nothing they can do about it now.
All of this information was pulled from the manufacturers' websites.
One other thing to comment on:
and the Prius really only costs $5765.47 more.
Does adding the words "really only" make $5,765.47 sounds less to anyone else when it is 1/4th the price of the car?
I'm not saying these technologies aren't important, and that they're negligible advances. I'm just saying that when they're being promoted as "cost-saving" because they use less gas, it's just not true when I can get a faster car with the same options for $5,000 less when factoring in the gas difference over 100,000 miles. Better for the environment? Maybe. But the commercials are clearly focusing on the less gas = less money aspect more than the environmental aspect. That's not to mention what a Prius might cost to get worked on once it is out of warranty.
Oh, by the way, the Prius is a midsize, the ION is a compact
Call it what you want, the actual dimensions are pretty comparable. Actually, the ION is 6/10ths of an inch shorter, 7/10ths of a inch less wide, and 9.5 inches longer.
ION Dimensions: Height: 57.4 Width: 67.2 Length: 184.5
Prius Dimensions: Height: 58.1 Width: 67.9 Length: 175.0
Top speed: 0-60 mph : 10.2 sec. 1/4 mile : 17.7 sec @ 79 mph
Of course, I could just be like you and make baseless claims with no information to back them up. But you go ahead and do what you need to do in order to justify paying more for less.
Over 100,000 miles of driving, in a 30 mpg car (Saturn ION), you'll use 3333 gallons of gas, at $2 a gallon, that's $6666. In a Prius you'll get 55 mpg, so 1818 gallons of gas, at $2 a gallon, that's $3636. (the cars are pretty comparable in size and weight, but the Saturn has twice the HP)
So you saved $3,000 in gas over several years of driving. Too bad you could have bought the Saturn and saved up to $10,000 up front, and actually been able to pass a semi on the interstate.
The bottom line, IMO, is that hey, it's entertainment, not a documentary, and whatever the *thing* is -- whether it's computers or legal procedure or spy technology or whatever -- is supposed to be in service of telling the story and revealing character, not the other way around.
You mean people don't want to watch lawyers sitting in their officers doing research and writing briefs and memos 90% of the time the show is on the air?
I figure that most people consider technology on television they way I do medicine. I don't have a clue if they're doing anything right when I watch ER, but it doesn't really matter. It's good enough to be believable.
You know what's pathetic? Presidential elections are basically determined by only a handful of people. Los Angeles and New York City. Their numbers barely tip the scales for California and New York, who subsequently barely tip the scales for the rest of the country. If you left out LA and NYC, conservatives would have won all the elections back to the 1980s by land slides.
We have a thing called the Senate which protects the rights of the smaller states from being trampled upon by the larger states.
. But in these big cities, you get a bunch of poor people grouping together who want the rest of the country to give them handouts.
The poor have the lowest voter turnouts in the country. So, nice try, but you're theory doesn't float.
If every eligible person in the country voted, the more liberal candidates would win by a landslide. Minorities, poor, and other marginalized groups tend to be very unlikely to vote for a wide variety of reasons. These groups overwhelmingly support liberal candidates.
Regular phone poles are much more dangerous as well - consider the number of people who are hurt or killed when they hit them with cars...
Only because they hit telephone pole instead of the tree right behind it. If you were going fast enough to die hitting a telephone pole, chances are you weren't going to make it no matter what you hit going off of the road.
Furthermore, all the above relationship stem from the need to have near absolute trust. I believe the same holds true for school/students.
A physician/patient privilege exists to encourage people to be open with their physicians so that they will seek medical assistance when needed. The legislatures decided that this was more important than allowing certain information to be obtainable in a lawsuit.
Likewise, an attorney/client privilege exists to encourage people to be open with their lawyers so that justice can be served fully and effectively.
I fail to see how a school/student privilege would serve to protect any interest of the student that outweighs the need for information to be available in our legal system for the just completion of lawsuits.
Also, don't get your hopes. There wasn't a patient/psychotherapist privilege in the federal courts until 1996.
Copyright infringement is only a criminal offense if it is done for profit, or the work which is copied has a retail value over $1,000.
Law enforcement does not investigate civil cases.
So, it's more like:
1. The RIAA suspects someone has infringed on their IP and files a John Doe lawsuit in federal court. 2. The RIAA has to figure out who this person is before they can go much further in court. 3. The RIAA requests the court to issue a subpoena on the ISP to identify the infringer pursuant to 17 USC 512(h). 4. The ISP responds to the subpoena, and the RIAA now knows who the infringer is. 5. The RIAA amends their complaint to include the infringer as the defendant. 6. The lawsuit proceeds.
None of this has anything to do with warrants or the criminal system.
Bush can call himself a Methodist all he wants, but he sure doesn't act like one to me. His beliefs on the subjects above are much closer to that of Southern Baptists.
In fact, most "mainline" Protestant denominations tend to hold social beliefs that would be considered moderately liberal. American Catholic beliefs follow similar lines. Which makes me wonder why the Administration speaks as if all Christians are on their side.
Physics majors consistently score the highest on the LSAT. In fact, most hard science and mathematical degrees do so. To learn the law you have to know logic and reason, something that a lot of liberal arts degrees lack in their curriculum.
Anyway, my point is that your undergraduate degree is mostly insignificant for law school, so long as you have one, you know how to write, and you know how to reason, you'll probably do okay.
To go on to medical school you need so many hours of biology, chemistry and physics in most cases, so a lot of physics majors might not be that far off from the basic medical school admission requirements.
We shouldn't need this provisions if some people in the government stopped trying to stop "big money" in campaigns, when it's really just another way for the incombents to stay in power and keep others from entering politics.
So what do you propose? Allowing large corporations and businesses to contribute as much as they want to whatever politician they want to buy today? Yeah, that'll solve the problem of incumbents or whoever has the most money winning elections all the time, won't it?
The problem is the political speech of individuals as much as it is the "political speech" of corporations that have much more money and power than any individual.
I fail to see how a lack of controls on campaign spending would be a better solution.
The problem is that this type of "freedom of speech," makes it very easy for those with the most money to win elections. So, the more that companies and other large groups are allowed to donate to PACs, the easier it is to "buy" an election.
It's a difficult balancing act between freedom of speech and the integrity of our elections. Both are very important to our democracy, so perhaps you need to consider both sides of this issue before you pick freedom of speech over election integrity.
Slashdot Mirror
The funding has to be related to the command. So they couldn't say "you must make national IDs or lose education funding." So, I'm at a loss trying to figure out what part of funding they could withhold to try to lure the states into participating.
I don't think there's been a national speed limit since 1995. Perhaps you're thinking of drinking age and drunk driving mandates?
GM sales last year: 200 billion
GM healthcare costs last year: 5 billion
So about 2.5% of the cost of your car went to healthcare. The salesman probably took a bigger commission.
it's flamebait troll if you make an obviously loaded statement like "...and actually been able to pass a semi on the interstate."
I wasn't aware that use of hyperbole made one a "flamebait troll." From now on, I will be as boring and unoriginal as possible in my writing in order to please you.
The point was that the Saturn ION has better pick-up than the Toyota Prius. Look at my other reply to your comment, and then go and look at the actual results and see for yourself that it is true.
I don't expect someone who paid a lot more than their car was worth because they thought it would save them money on gas in the long run to accept that they are wrong that easily. It's difficult to convince people that just wasted all that money that they were wrong, because there is nothing they can do about it now.
All of this information was pulled from the manufacturers' websites.
One other thing to comment on:
and the Prius really only costs $5765.47 more.
Does adding the words "really only" make $5,765.47 sounds less to anyone else when it is 1/4th the price of the car?
I'm not saying these technologies aren't important, and that they're negligible advances. I'm just saying that when they're being promoted as "cost-saving" because they use less gas, it's just not true when I can get a faster car with the same options for $5,000 less when factoring in the gas difference over 100,000 miles. Better for the environment? Maybe. But the commercials are clearly focusing on the less gas = less money aspect more than the environmental aspect. That's not to mention what a Prius might cost to get worked on once it is out of warranty.
Oh, by the way, the Prius is a midsize, the ION is a compact
Call it what you want, the actual dimensions are pretty comparable. Actually, the ION is 6/10ths of an inch shorter, 7/10ths of a inch less wide, and 9.5 inches longer.
ION Dimensions:
Height: 57.4
Width: 67.2
Length: 184.5
Prius Dimensions:
Height: 58.1
Width: 67.9
Length: 175.0
ION Interior Dimensions: (front/back)
Legroom: 42.2/33.3
Headroom: 40.0/37.0
Shoulderroom: 53.7/52.8
Hiproom: 49.5/49.6
Prius Interior Dimensions: (front/back)
Legroom: 41.9/38.6
Headroom: 39.1/37.1
Shoulderroom: 55.3/53.0
Hiproom: 51.0/51.6
better 0-60, better 1/4 mile
Saturn ION:
0-60 mph : 8.0 sec
1/4 mile : 16.2 sec @ 85 mph
Toyota Prius:
Top speed:
0-60 mph : 10.2 sec.
1/4 mile : 17.7 sec @ 79 mph
Of course, I could just be like you and make baseless claims with no information to back them up. But you go ahead and do what you need to do in order to justify paying more for less.
This number here has been known to have the best mpg available on the road. I hear it has about the same horsepower as the Prius.
Over 100,000 miles of driving, in a 30 mpg car (Saturn ION), you'll use 3333 gallons of gas, at $2 a gallon, that's $6666. In a Prius you'll get 55 mpg, so 1818 gallons of gas, at $2 a gallon, that's $3636. (the cars are pretty comparable in size and weight, but the Saturn has twice the HP)
So you saved $3,000 in gas over several years of driving. Too bad you could have bought the Saturn and saved up to $10,000 up front, and actually been able to pass a semi on the interstate.
The bottom line, IMO, is that hey, it's entertainment, not a documentary, and whatever the *thing* is -- whether it's computers or legal procedure or spy technology or whatever -- is supposed to be in service of telling the story and revealing character, not the other way around.
You mean people don't want to watch lawyers sitting in their officers doing research and writing briefs and memos 90% of the time the show is on the air?
I figure that most people consider technology on television they way I do medicine. I don't have a clue if they're doing anything right when I watch ER, but it doesn't really matter. It's good enough to be believable.
You know what's pathetic? Presidential elections are basically determined by only a handful of people. Los Angeles and New York City. Their numbers barely tip the scales for California and New York, who subsequently barely tip the scales for the rest of the country. If you left out LA and NYC, conservatives would have won all the elections back to the 1980s by land slides.
We have a thing called the Senate which protects the rights of the smaller states from being trampled upon by the larger states.
. But in these big cities, you get a bunch of poor people grouping together who want the rest of the country to give them handouts.
The poor have the lowest voter turnouts in the country. So, nice try, but you're theory doesn't float.
If every eligible person in the country voted, the more liberal candidates would win by a landslide. Minorities, poor, and other marginalized groups tend to be very unlikely to vote for a wide variety of reasons. These groups overwhelmingly support liberal candidates.
Regular phone poles are much more dangerous as well - consider the number of people who are hurt or killed when they hit them with cars...
Only because they hit telephone pole instead of the tree right behind it. If you were going fast enough to die hitting a telephone pole, chances are you weren't going to make it no matter what you hit going off of the road.
Furthermore, all the above relationship stem from the need to have near absolute trust. I believe the same holds true for school/students.
A physician/patient privilege exists to encourage people to be open with their physicians so that they will seek medical assistance when needed. The legislatures decided that this was more important than allowing certain information to be obtainable in a lawsuit.
Likewise, an attorney/client privilege exists to encourage people to be open with their lawyers so that justice can be served fully and effectively.
I fail to see how a school/student privilege would serve to protect any interest of the student that outweighs the need for information to be available in our legal system for the just completion of lawsuits.
Also, don't get your hopes. There wasn't a patient/psychotherapist privilege in the federal courts until 1996.
Copyright infringement is only a criminal offense if it is done for profit, or the work which is copied has a retail value over $1,000.
Law enforcement does not investigate civil cases.
So, it's more like:
1. The RIAA suspects someone has infringed on their IP and files a John Doe lawsuit in federal court.
2. The RIAA has to figure out who this person is before they can go much further in court.
3. The RIAA requests the court to issue a subpoena on the ISP to identify the infringer pursuant to 17 USC 512(h).
4. The ISP responds to the subpoena, and the RIAA now knows who the infringer is.
5. The RIAA amends their complaint to include the infringer as the defendant.
6. The lawsuit proceeds.
None of this has anything to do with warrants or the criminal system.
The Fifth Amendment only applies to criminal cases.
GoDaddy usurped NS' position as the top domain registrar. Does that make more sense?
Fixed link for UMC's views on the environment.
Bush might go to a Methodist church, but his beliefs are much more in line with the Southern Baptist church than the Methodist church.
UMC on:
Environment
Abortion
End of life care
Gay rights
Healthcare and contraception
Unions
Separation of Church and State
Freedom of Information
The Death Penalty
Bush can call himself a Methodist all he wants, but he sure doesn't act like one to me. His beliefs on the subjects above are much closer to that of Southern Baptists.
In fact, most "mainline" Protestant denominations tend to hold social beliefs that would be considered moderately liberal. American Catholic beliefs follow similar lines. Which makes me wonder why the Administration speaks as if all Christians are on their side.
Of course, as your post demonstrates, English is definitely not on the top of Slashdotters' list.
Physics majors consistently score the highest on the LSAT. In fact, most hard science and mathematical degrees do so. To learn the law you have to know logic and reason, something that a lot of liberal arts degrees lack in their curriculum.
Anyway, my point is that your undergraduate degree is mostly insignificant for law school, so long as you have one, you know how to write, and you know how to reason, you'll probably do okay.
To go on to medical school you need so many hours of biology, chemistry and physics in most cases, so a lot of physics majors might not be that far off from the basic medical school admission requirements.
Wouldn't it make more sense to pull the air away from the drive? You don't point your CPU fan at your CPU/Heatsink.
He did commit suicide
Looks to me like you just demonstrated that he may or may not have committed suicide. Where do you come to this conclusion all of a sudden?
He was referring to the "gub'mit," not "the government."
We shouldn't need this provisions if some people in the government stopped trying to stop "big money" in campaigns, when it's really just another way for the incombents to stay in power and keep others from entering politics.
So what do you propose? Allowing large corporations and businesses to contribute as much as they want to whatever politician they want to buy today? Yeah, that'll solve the problem of incumbents or whoever has the most money winning elections all the time, won't it?
The problem is the political speech of individuals as much as it is the "political speech" of corporations that have much more money and power than any individual.
I fail to see how a lack of controls on campaign spending would be a better solution.
The problem is that this type of "freedom of speech," makes it very easy for those with the most money to win elections. So, the more that companies and other large groups are allowed to donate to PACs, the easier it is to "buy" an election.
It's a difficult balancing act between freedom of speech and the integrity of our elections. Both are very important to our democracy, so perhaps you need to consider both sides of this issue before you pick freedom of speech over election integrity.
There is a middle ground somewhere.