The free market didn't decide that. Congress and the enviro-whackos decided it.
1. Restrictions on drilling in the continental U.S. and off shore. 2. Restrictions on exploration in the same places.
And to make it even more fun restriction on building refineries.
Even now those dumb asses want to restrict efforts to drill. "It won't make a difference for at least X years", they whine. Will better fucking get on it so that in X years we are not even more screwed. Typical bullshit Libs. Can't think six inches in front of their peckers or tits.
No, the market had nothing to do with making the mid-east our masters.
I'm new to the whole object oriented programming methodologies (.net) and they have a lot of cool things going for them. But I find that most times, they are poorly documented and generally a mess.
Take a generic web page that returns a row from a database. To do what should be common things like examine and modify values given conditions, highlight or otherwise format a particular row and/or column, perform server side logic that uses data from other tables in the database etc, requires a mind boggeling number of methods, most of which are used to convert data into a form acceptable to another method. Many times, you just can't get there from here.
And formatting with HTML tables SUCKS!
And the class documentation is mostly something like this:
A: is blah blah of B
then look up B
B: is blah blah of A.
Or try this: "Public Shared Function Find(Of T)(ByVal array() As T, ByVal match As System.Predicate(Of T)) As T
Member of: System.Array Summary: Searches for an element that matches the conditions defined by the specified predicate, and returns the first occurrence within the entire System.Array."
This smells of code documentation generated by code.
WTF? Can't people write complete sentences describing what the freaking code does?
I long for the day of plain and simple client server architecture. Hell, it all practically works the same except they traded the clean, well documented and debugged clients for a myriad of incompatible web browsers using kludges to accomplish what used to be straight forward client functionality.
The ultimate goal of all of this crap is the Holy Grail of easily modifiable systems. But in the pursuit of this goal, development has become a nightmare of competing, half-implmented, half-assed and incompatible languages and frameworks.
AP and Reuters have more to worry about than just photos. Their so-called "journalism" is just as fake and altered as they claim these photos to be. The difference is that the pentagon's photo alteration are the equivelent of correcting grammer and using different, but synonmous words.
In order to rise to the level of fraud AP and Reuters typically exhibit in their journalism, the Pentagon would have had to put a mustache on her and make her a minority of some kind.
Losing is losing. 7 million votes or 7. the Dems were bitter assholes then and evidently still are now. They have no business telling anyone how to behave.
Only seriously disturbed people think the 2K and 2004 elections were stolen. The Democrats RAN the elections that were "contested". They designed the ballots. They ran the polls. They only thing the supremes stopped was the efforts of the dems to invent more votes in selected counties.
Maybe you should take a clue from the morons at moveon.org and move the fuck on.
NutShell: Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas.
The Players: Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn, the TEPCO Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry in MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science.
Actually that is what the Left aspires to: Spread the misery, lowest common denominator, from each according to their ability to each according to their needs.
They don't hide this agenda, but merely dress it up in fake platitudes of "fairness".
They don't understand that Paris Hilton is not keeping anyone from making a living or improving their standing in life. Neither is Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc. In fact, they are actually providing jobs to millions. Just think of all the tabloids Paris keeps in business with her crotch shots and bare tits. Look at the millions Warren Buffet has made for pension funds. Don't even talk about Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. They have created more wealth than all the idiot politicians and "Spread the wealth around" democrats could even dream of.
So all you people who are offended that someone drives a Lexis or Mercedes, get the fuck over it. Except for all the trust fund democrats, most of them earned it.
This doesn't change the fact that the Rich are paying for most of the Beer. And the poor gleefully swill it down because they see it as an entitlement only be be outraged when someone says they should have been paying for their beer all along.
I work for company that manufactures interior fittings for luxury aircraft. We are doing quite well and the company supports nearly 500 employees. All of us buy cars, homes, food, BEER and pay taxes.
If Obama gets his way, the evil company that caters to the evil Rich people will be taxed more, our products will be taxed more, and our customers will have their income taxed more and we could possibly be out of a job. All so that loser son-of-bitchs can have their free beer.
Just look at what happened to the U.S. luxury boat industry. When congress decided to tax these evil luxuries, the manufactures all went out of business, put people out of work and reduced revenues to the U.S. government all because the fuckers in Washington didn't think it was fair that rich people could buy big boats so easily.
This notion of "fairness" as embodied by the progressive tax is really nothing more than Envy institutionalized by the government.
As for you little story, the bar tender wasn't accumulating debt to make the bar better, he was actually giving away more free beer to more losers. Just like the majority of our debt is being accumulated through entitlements.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so - the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free.
But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!" "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier."
This was the subject of some controvery in the aviation community.
Moffett Field is a Naval installation and as such civilians cannot use it unless it's a emergency and even then you can expect to spend some time answering questions posed by the Military Police.
I understand the nearest civilian airport that can accept jets is quite a ways away.
So how did the google guys obtain rights to use Moffet field when no other civilians can?
Slashdot Mirror
Drill everywhere, including here. Increase supply, prices go down. Econ 101.
The free market didn't decide that. Congress and the enviro-whackos decided it.
1. Restrictions on drilling in the continental U.S. and off shore.
2. Restrictions on exploration in the same places.
And to make it even more fun restriction on building refineries.
Even now those dumb asses want to restrict efforts to drill. "It won't make a difference for at least X years", they whine. Will better fucking get on it so that in X years we are not even more screwed. Typical bullshit Libs. Can't think six inches in front of their peckers or tits.
No, the market had nothing to do with making the mid-east our masters.
Even more accurately called the Franks, Dodd, Reid recession.
Just to add to this:
I'm new to the whole object oriented programming methodologies (.net) and they have a lot of cool things going for them. But I find that most times, they are poorly documented and generally a mess.
Take a generic web page that returns a row from a database. To do what should be common things like examine and modify values given conditions, highlight or otherwise format a particular row and/or column, perform server side logic that uses data from other tables in the database etc, requires a mind boggeling number of methods, most of which are used to convert data into a form acceptable to another method. Many times, you just can't get there from here.
And formatting with HTML tables SUCKS!
And the class documentation is mostly something like this:
A: is blah blah of B
then look up B
B: is blah blah of A.
Or try this:
"Public Shared Function Find(Of T)(ByVal array() As T, ByVal match As System.Predicate(Of T)) As T
Member of: System.Array
Summary:
Searches for an element that matches the conditions defined by the specified predicate, and returns the first occurrence within the entire System.Array."
This smells of code documentation generated by code.
WTF? Can't people write complete sentences describing what the freaking code does?
I long for the day of plain and simple client server architecture. Hell, it all practically works the same except they traded the clean, well documented and debugged clients for a myriad of incompatible web browsers using kludges to accomplish what used to be straight forward client functionality.
The ultimate goal of all of this crap is the Holy Grail of easily modifiable systems. But in the pursuit of this goal, development has become a nightmare of competing, half-implmented, half-assed and incompatible languages and frameworks.
Can't fire them, can't kill them.
FAA see the light?
They are as blind to common sense as their radar systems are.
AP and Reuters have more to worry about than just photos. Their so-called "journalism" is just as fake and altered as they claim these photos to be. The difference is that the pentagon's photo alteration are the equivelent of correcting grammer and using different, but synonmous words.
In order to rise to the level of fraud AP and Reuters typically exhibit in their journalism, the Pentagon would have had to put a mustache on her and make her a minority of some kind.
So already, refusing to participate in the Obama's Grand Plan is equivilent to cheating on your taxes.
I think I'll reserve my spot at the re-education camp early.
>There is no necessity that such a freedom should exist in a free society
To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary - Che Guevara
I think you two would get along.
Depends on what "service" you have to do and who gets to choose what service you do.
I can see any number of groups and/or public figures objecting to someone doing their public service at a religous institution.
It's simply a way to keep everyone distracted while they implment entirely different laws.
I can already see people on slashdot citing this website to refute arguments against pending legislation.
Losing is losing. 7 million votes or 7. the Dems were bitter assholes then and evidently still are now. They have no business telling anyone how to behave.
Only seriously disturbed people think the 2K and 2004 elections were stolen. The Democrats RAN the elections that were "contested". They designed the ballots. They ran the polls. They only thing the supremes stopped was the efforts of the dems to invent more votes in selected counties.
Maybe you should take a clue from the morons at moveon.org and move the fuck on.
>Quit being so damned bitter and actually start helping your fellow countrymen instead of being an asshole because your guy didn't win
You mean like the Democrats did in 2000 and 2004?
You need to have a chat with the MIT guys...
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39973/113/
NutShell:
Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas.
The Players: Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn, the TEPCO Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry in MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science.
Sound's like a good argument for the flat tax.
I hold no grudge for anyone working within the rules to screw the government out of money.
Are you really surprised that the economy grew so much faster after bottoming out during the Depression?
It grew because it had no where to go but up.
Hmm..then I think you should pay $20k more in taxes. Why? well, you can afford it. Besides, it's only fair.
Hell, I'm driving a Chevy, so I tell you what, we will increase you taxes even more so that I can move up to a Volvo.
And what is left over after taxes is used to pay the owners of the corporation...Pension Funds, 401k funds, mom and pop investors.
You kill corporate taxes, you kill dividends, you transfer wealth to the government.
Sorry, but you people are so fucking wrong headed on this.
Actually that is what the Left aspires to: Spread the misery, lowest common denominator, from each according to their ability to each according to their needs.
They don't hide this agenda, but merely dress it up in fake platitudes of "fairness".
They don't understand that Paris Hilton is not keeping anyone from making a living or improving their standing in life. Neither is Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, etc. In fact, they are actually providing jobs to millions. Just think of all the tabloids Paris keeps in business with her crotch shots and bare tits. Look at the millions Warren Buffet has made for pension funds. Don't even talk about Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. They have created more wealth than all the idiot politicians and "Spread the wealth around" democrats could even dream of.
So all you people who are offended that someone drives a Lexis or Mercedes, get the fuck over it. Except for all the trust fund democrats, most of them earned it.
This doesn't change the fact that the Rich are paying for most of the Beer. And the poor gleefully swill it down because they see it as an entitlement only be be outraged when someone says they should have been paying for their beer all along.
I work for company that manufactures interior fittings for luxury aircraft. We are doing quite well and the company supports nearly 500 employees. All of us buy cars, homes, food, BEER and pay taxes.
If Obama gets his way, the evil company that caters to the evil Rich people will be taxed more, our products will be taxed more, and our customers will have their income taxed more and we could possibly be out of a job. All so that loser son-of-bitchs can have their free beer.
Just look at what happened to the U.S. luxury boat industry. When congress decided to tax these evil luxuries, the manufactures all went out of business, put people out of work and reduced revenues to the U.S. government all because the fuckers in Washington didn't think it was fair that rich people could buy big boats so easily.
This notion of "fairness" as embodied by the progressive tax is really nothing more than Envy institutionalized by the government.
As for you little story, the bar tender wasn't accumulating debt to make the bar better, he was actually giving away more free beer to more losers. Just like the majority of our debt is being accumulated through entitlements.
Deciding to take less money from your victim at gun point is not welfare.
I'm sure you have all read this before:
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so - the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free.
But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!" "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier."
A Crook is not practicing Welfare when he puts a gun in your face and says, give me only 33% of the cash in your wallet.
The government is not giving a company Welfare through "tax breaks". It is merely confiscating less.
People who pay no taxes and get a check back in excess of the SSI taxes from the government ARE getting Welfare.
------
Reporters are Idiots
No such thing on Slashdot.
Great.
Another buzzword that idiot journalists will write pages and pages of gibberish about.
And idiot HR people will want someone having 10 years of" in depth experience" in it.
This was the subject of some controvery in the aviation community.
Moffett Field is a Naval installation and as such civilians cannot use it unless it's a emergency and even then you can expect to spend some time answering questions posed by the Military Police.
I understand the nearest civilian airport that can accept jets is quite a ways away.
So how did the google guys obtain rights to use Moffet field when no other civilians can?