As much as all the British blood that was shed, bloodshed that is insultingly belittled every time you or one of your compatriots says something like "if it wasn't for us y'all be speaking German right now" as if the Europeans just sat around doing nothing while the brave Americans did all the fighting. So if you don't like what I say tell your compatriots that it's not right to insult my ancestors who died to defeat fascism every bit as bravely as the US troops did.
Who are the US troops protecting us from? The 9,000 or so that are based in the UK are not needed for any defence as we have nearly 200,000 of our own, not to mention a navy and an air force, and, despite what 14 year old American zitbags think, we have nuclear weapons. Now if we were living in 1971 you might have a point, but it was as much in the interests of the USA to keep its major export market out of enemy hands as it was for us to be kept out of the Warsaw Pact.
You could also mention WW2 but we paid you back for that in 2006, so thanks for the loan but it doesn't mean we have to kiss your 1%'s asses for all eternity.
Airlines whose planes crash regularly tend not to last long.
Which would be a huge comfort to those killed at the hands of incompetent but cheap airlines. You think low-cost airlines wouldn't skimp on safety if they could? It's not like any of the senior managers would be punished with anything worse than short-term unemployment.
Planes wouldn't have to fall out of the sky every day for deregulation to be wrong. One preventable accident would be one too many.
I'm all for getting rid of unnecessary regulation. Identifying what is unnecessary is the hard part. A quick look at a history book in times where there was little to no regulation would show you that things were not better, they were a great deal worse.
They could always do what the server application vendors do and only support certain versions. I doubt very much whether Larry Ellison gives a shit about what RMS thinks, so why would a desktop app vendor give a damn.
So you would sack millions of people and then set armed troops on them when they not unreasonably protest about that. That doesn't sound any less fascistic or extreme. You do realise as well that productive people will lose their jobs as the spending power of 30 million people disappears. In 1921 jobs weren't heading to low wage economies like they are now. I'd be interested to know which government employees you consider to be productive. So far we have the National Guard. Who else?
Answer the question. How would YOU deal with several million unemployed federal workers rioting because YOU put them out of a job? Especially since you would have no staff to deal with those rioters.
A lot of people will go hungry and will riot. How do you intend to deal with such a situation. If only there was some kind of emergency response team available.
Hopefully you won't suffer the moral or actual hazard of discovering the difference between the government spending money to save a bunch of greedy fools from themselves and the government providing aid to people in dire need.
Who was feudalism good for? Not the vast majority of men who had to fight in the endless aristocratic wars, or the women who were treated pretty much as slaves and sexual playthings.
I haven't worked at any giant corporations where they would use Excel for mission critical databases. They wouldn't use PHP either but that's because they mistrust free stuff unless it comes from a corporation like Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
Libya isn't in Europe you retard. And given that British and French pilots did a lot of the work I'm not quite sure what your point is.
I'm not blaming anyone I'm simply responding to a post that claims that the UK needs the US to defend it. That isn't the case.
As much as all the British blood that was shed, bloodshed that is insultingly belittled every time you or one of your compatriots says something like "if it wasn't for us y'all be speaking German right now" as if the Europeans just sat around doing nothing while the brave Americans did all the fighting. So if you don't like what I say tell your compatriots that it's not right to insult my ancestors who died to defeat fascism every bit as bravely as the US troops did.
Who are the US troops protecting us from? The 9,000 or so that are based in the UK are not needed for any defence as we have nearly 200,000 of our own, not to mention a navy and an air force, and, despite what 14 year old American zitbags think, we have nuclear weapons. Now if we were living in 1971 you might have a point, but it was as much in the interests of the USA to keep its major export market out of enemy hands as it was for us to be kept out of the Warsaw Pact.
You could also mention WW2 but we paid you back for that in 2006, so thanks for the loan but it doesn't mean we have to kiss your 1%'s asses for all eternity.
Prickocracy?
Which would be a huge comfort to those killed at the hands of incompetent but cheap airlines. You think low-cost airlines wouldn't skimp on safety if they could? It's not like any of the senior managers would be punished with anything worse than short-term unemployment.
Planes wouldn't have to fall out of the sky every day for deregulation to be wrong. One preventable accident would be one too many.
I'm all for getting rid of unnecessary regulation. Identifying what is unnecessary is the hard part. A quick look at a history book in times where there was little to no regulation would show you that things were not better, they were a great deal worse.
More sense than your post did. There are a lot of really good applications created using Visual Studio. Stack Overflow is one of them.
They could always do what the server application vendors do and only support certain versions. I doubt very much whether Larry Ellison gives a shit about what RMS thinks, so why would a desktop app vendor give a damn.
All the people that use ASP.NET websites like, for example, this.
Which is shit if you want to replace some text, e.g. a url in a browser.
Is there a command line in Windows?
Pah you and your facts and common sense. What are ya? Some kinda commie?
So you would sack millions of people and then set armed troops on them when they not unreasonably protest about that. That doesn't sound any less fascistic or extreme. You do realise as well that productive people will lose their jobs as the spending power of 30 million people disappears. In 1921 jobs weren't heading to low wage economies like they are now. I'd be interested to know which government employees you consider to be productive. So far we have the National Guard. Who else?
Answer the question. How would YOU deal with several million unemployed federal workers rioting because YOU put them out of a job? Especially since you would have no staff to deal with those rioters.
This is why I come to this site :)
A lot of people will go hungry and will riot. How do you intend to deal with such a situation. If only there was some kind of emergency response team available.
Hopefully you won't suffer the moral or actual hazard of discovering the difference between the government spending money to save a bunch of greedy fools from themselves and the government providing aid to people in dire need.
Chimneys can get a virus?
Because the world market for phones doesn't just include the USA.
I don't remember Orange going into receivership.
I hope it happens to you and then you'll see exactly how easy and cheap it is to completely change your career path.
IE 9 is not excellent, it's slow and its developer tools are pathetic compared to Chrome's and Firefox's.
Who was feudalism good for? Not the vast majority of men who had to fight in the endless aristocratic wars, or the women who were treated pretty much as slaves and sexual playthings.
I haven't worked at any giant corporations where they would use Excel for mission critical databases. They wouldn't use PHP either but that's because they mistrust free stuff unless it comes from a corporation like Microsoft.
We're not under Brussels - that's largely a delusion fostered by right wing tabloids