So basically you're saying that as long as the police tell everyone to stop being witness to their criminal and unlawful acts, they are within their legal rights to detain those witnesses and destroy any evidence they may have collected.
I dont fault the energy companies. I dont even fault the pursuit of clean energy or some level of assistance by the federal govt to do so.I fault the Obama administration's role in encouraging the DOE to disregard questionable qualifications of those companies to recieve loans and providing the loans anyway. I get flat out pissed when I learn about companies treated in this way coinciding with political contributions.
Here's a list of 5 green energy companies that recieved gauranteed loans through the DOE, and have since filed for bankruptcy :
Solyndra
Beacon Power
SpectraWatt
Evergreen Solar
AES - Eastern Energy
Here are more that got loans are having notable difficulties:
A123
Fisker Automotive
Nevada Geothermal
Sun Power
First Solar
These alone are putting the taxpayers on the hook for $6billion. It's not that there was a company that failed. It's that there is a laundry list of companys that have and continue to fail. They were given financial ratings as low as CCC+, which would prevent me from getting a used car loan, and yet the Obama administration "encouraged" the DOE to fast track loans. Any one of these loans were bad investments by anyone's defintion, but we dont have 1 or 2. We have a list, and the predictions from economists and business analysts suggest that the list will continue to grow. And THEN if you cross-reference these failed or struggling companies with the list of Obama and Democratic party contributions it's enough to make your blood start to boil.
http://www.popmodal.com/video/11918/Obama-does-it-again-11-green-energy-failures-costing-Billions-of-your-money
I think you could argue that it was a mistake to break the law to begin with... On the part of the CEO, and Democrat party reps, and the Obama administration....
Riiiight. That's why you're seeing so many reports and articles in the last few days about the LightSquared CEO resigning due to alleged bribery and pay-to-play actions with the Obama administration and the Democratic party. This has been out there for plenty of time now, and the only people really pursuing it are the right-wing activists. It's not a little thing. The allegations are substantiated and suggest outright corruption.
ABC, NBC, CBS, even Fox News.... Nothing.
They are all making damn sure that we get out of context quotes and every nugget of dirt that can be scraped about the Rebuplican primaries. But there's no way that we're going to let these LightSquared allegations get close enough to Obama to raise any eyebrows. Not in an election year, and not when the polls show that a Republican candidate could very well unseat this President.
But by God we can spend :
$120 million in retirement and disability benefits to federal employees who have died
$30 million to help Pakistani Mango farmers
$550,000 for a documentary about how rock music contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union
$10 million for a remake of “Sesame Street” for Pakistan
$764,825 to examine how college students use mobile devices for social networking.
$113,227 for a video game preservation center in New York
$765,828 to subsidize a “pancakes for yuppies” program in Washington, D.C.
$100,000 for a celebrity chef show in Indonesia
$175,587 for a study on the link between cocaine and the mating habits of quail
$606,000 for a study about online dating$17.80 Million in Foreign Aid to China – (Department of State & U.S. Agency for International Development)
The Super-Bridge to Nowhere – (Alaska) $15.3 Million
This is of course just a fraction of the stupidity.
Personally, I'd rather send an unmanned mission to Mars.
Investigative journalists investigate and actually do hard work before shitting out useless waste.
This is what they used to do. They've failed to do it for about a decade however. They instead ignore the information that is not condusive to their polictal leanings, and fabricate trash against their politiclal antithesis.
If the "journalists" wont do their job I'm more and more ok with the rookies taking a stab at it. No matter how juvenile their results may be at least it's less likely to be willfully deceptive.
That's a nice piece of writing. But it still doesn't address the basic point. It suggest that if pay is inequal while profite remains equal, the difference must be the presence or absence of unions. It couldn't possibly be regulation, taxation, or cost of materials. There's no possibility that the goods are sold for a greater mean price to accomodate the higher salaries. For an article written for a finincial magazine it seems pretty irresponsible to attribute any possible profit/loss/labor cost to union status, while wholly disregarding the myriad of other environmental factors.
I could as easily suggest that a seafood market in Seattle is only more profitable than one in Lincoln Nebraska because the one in Seattle has a union...
You missed the key point in your own damn argument.
Non-union workers in the equally profitable VW and BMJ plants in the non-union American south get $17 an hour.
By your own statement (assuming it has any validity whatsoever), the manufacturers are EQUALLY PROFITABLE. By that very statement you must conceed that in the absence of unions, American workers are still making exactly the same percentage of overall profit after other operating costs are considered as their German counterparts. You must also conceed that if the American workers were earning more money than they are, the American manufacturer would be LESS PROFITABLE than its German counterpart.
So by your figures, the suggestion is that union membership status within a single corporation actually has no impact on the income of the employees. The Germans have to pay union fees and yet gain no greater percentage of the corprorate earnings.
The Teacher's Union has as it's number one priority increasing compensation & benefits...
Exactly. The problem is that this is NOT what a union is SUPPOSED to prioritize. They are supposed to act in the best interests of the employees, and bankrupting the employer does not accomplish that.
A union's function is to protect the rights of the employees and act as a representative of them to the employers in case of disputes. Increasing compensations can be a part of that, but not the the only part and not without limit. More and more money and compensations are not rights. It is counterproductive for a union to forever baloon the income and benefits of the employees if it means that the company can no longer remain profitable.
If unions bring down an auto company, the company fails...
Not under Obama.... We bail them out so that the failures of the unions can be corrected, and then railroad support for more unions in other fields through legislation and regulation.
This is a ridiculous statement. You are suggesting a policy in which society never attempt to help their fellow citizens. Don't touch! It's not your job!
It's this weak-minded insanity that contributes to our decline. You get sued/fired/condemned if you try to stop a stabbing? Guess what, you get sued/fired/condemned for doing nothing and letting a kid get killed while you stand there watching and waiting for cops to show up to mop up the aftermath too. You are exactly the kind of polically correct hands-off nutjob that puts a teacher in a hostile environment in a no win situation. Why the hell would any good and honest human being put themself in a situation in which they are nearly gauranteed to be eventually burned to the ground?
You are actually telling people to not do the right thing and try to stop violence and crime. It's no wonder this world is so fucked up.
He should probably complain to his union. They are meant to provide him representation to defend against exactly this kind of railroading.
But that's not what unions are anymore. They are political activists and spend union dues attempting to inflate salaries in order to further inflate union dues and enrich a very small group of thugs who bully and abuse both the employers and the employees they "represent". The unions have become little more than accepted crime families.
You assume that the artist has already earned something from which those things can be paid. After the artist is established that is true. But the initial investment cannot be made by an artist that is not yet recognized.
I really dont want to find myself defending the vultures, but to be fair its the label thats also handling all the event scheduling, the promo materials, the advertising, the distribution, etc. There is a significant outlay of cost for the label early, and for them it's a gamble. They put up the cash hoping to bring the next big hit to the scene and rake the cash in. They probably fail or break even more often than succeed so when they succeed they milk every penny.
That being said, the deceptive and predatory behavior is exactly the type if thing that inspired Dave Mathews to fully self-promote. I really hope to see more and more artists becoming adept at the business side of their craft (beyond just music), more conscious of the implications that the laws and proposals have, and have to deal with less of the manufactured flavor of the day props that dominate the charts.
So in order to prove that my privacy is not being invaded by the app that I knowingly installed that was meant for the purpose of disclosing my activity, I'm going to sniff packets. And not just sniff packets so taht I see abnormal source and dest, but so that I can prove that the application I know is moving data from me to a destination is only moving the data I approve between me and the same destination....
That's a limiting question. One would have to answer yes, provided all else was equal. What if the society using more power is capable of producing substantially more power, yet produces equal or less waste in doing so. Would you not have to concede that the society using more power is superior?
If the impacts of consuming more energy are offset by superior ability in producing energy, then the measure of energy consumption does not correlate to the measure of success of the society.
Weird. You mean that some random person would actually purposefully change verbage about a news item in an attempt manipulate public perception? Really? Damn good thing real journalists never do that.
Slashdot Mirror
So basically you're saying that as long as the police tell everyone to stop being witness to their criminal and unlawful acts, they are within their legal rights to detain those witnesses and destroy any evidence they may have collected.
I dont fault the energy companies. I dont even fault the pursuit of clean energy or some level of assistance by the federal govt to do so.I fault the Obama administration's role in encouraging the DOE to disregard questionable qualifications of those companies to recieve loans and providing the loans anyway. I get flat out pissed when I learn about companies treated in this way coinciding with political contributions.
Did you look at the link I posted? That information is all from a CBS News report. I dont think I've ever heard CBS accused of being right wing....
Here's a list of 5 green energy companies that recieved gauranteed loans through the DOE, and have since filed for bankruptcy :
Solyndra
Beacon Power
SpectraWatt
Evergreen Solar
AES - Eastern Energy
Here are more that got loans are having notable difficulties:
A123
Fisker Automotive
Nevada Geothermal
Sun Power
First Solar
These alone are putting the taxpayers on the hook for $6billion. It's not that there was a company that failed. It's that there is a laundry list of companys that have and continue to fail. They were given financial ratings as low as CCC+, which would prevent me from getting a used car loan, and yet the Obama administration "encouraged" the DOE to fast track loans. Any one of these loans were bad investments by anyone's defintion, but we dont have 1 or 2. We have a list, and the predictions from economists and business analysts suggest that the list will continue to grow. And THEN if you cross-reference these failed or struggling companies with the list of Obama and Democratic party contributions it's enough to make your blood start to boil. http://www.popmodal.com/video/11918/Obama-does-it-again-11-green-energy-failures-costing-Billions-of-your-money
I think you could argue that it was a mistake to break the law to begin with... On the part of the CEO, and Democrat party reps, and the Obama administration....
Riiiight. That's why you're seeing so many reports and articles in the last few days about the LightSquared CEO resigning due to alleged bribery and pay-to-play actions with the Obama administration and the Democratic party. This has been out there for plenty of time now, and the only people really pursuing it are the right-wing activists. It's not a little thing. The allegations are substantiated and suggest outright corruption.
ABC, NBC, CBS, even Fox News.... Nothing.
They are all making damn sure that we get out of context quotes and every nugget of dirt that can be scraped about the Rebuplican primaries. But there's no way that we're going to let these LightSquared allegations get close enough to Obama to raise any eyebrows. Not in an election year, and not when the polls show that a Republican candidate could very well unseat this President.
But by God we can spend :
$120 million in retirement and disability benefits to federal employees who have died
$30 million to help Pakistani Mango farmers
$550,000 for a documentary about how rock music contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union
$10 million for a remake of “Sesame Street” for Pakistan
$764,825 to examine how college students use mobile devices for social networking.
$113,227 for a video game preservation center in New York
$765,828 to subsidize a “pancakes for yuppies” program in Washington, D.C.
$100,000 for a celebrity chef show in Indonesia
$175,587 for a study on the link between cocaine and the mating habits of quail
$606,000 for a study about online dating$17.80 Million in Foreign Aid to China – (Department of State & U.S. Agency for International Development)
The Super-Bridge to Nowhere – (Alaska) $15.3 Million
This is of course just a fraction of the stupidity.
Personally, I'd rather send an unmanned mission to Mars.
Investigative journalists investigate and actually do hard work before shitting out useless waste.
This is what they used to do. They've failed to do it for about a decade however. They instead ignore the information that is not condusive to their polictal leanings, and fabricate trash against their politiclal antithesis.
If the "journalists" wont do their job I'm more and more ok with the rookies taking a stab at it. No matter how juvenile their results may be at least it's less likely to be willfully deceptive.
Well the US media is almost entirely safe then.
That's a nice piece of writing. But it still doesn't address the basic point. It suggest that if pay is inequal while profite remains equal, the difference must be the presence or absence of unions. It couldn't possibly be regulation, taxation, or cost of materials. There's no possibility that the goods are sold for a greater mean price to accomodate the higher salaries. For an article written for a finincial magazine it seems pretty irresponsible to attribute any possible profit/loss/labor cost to union status, while wholly disregarding the myriad of other environmental factors.
I could as easily suggest that a seafood market in Seattle is only more profitable than one in Lincoln Nebraska because the one in Seattle has a union...
Non-union workers in the equally profitable VW and BMJ plants in the non-union American south get $17 an hour.
By your own statement (assuming it has any validity whatsoever), the manufacturers are EQUALLY PROFITABLE. By that very statement you must conceed that in the absence of unions, American workers are still making exactly the same percentage of overall profit after other operating costs are considered as their German counterparts. You must also conceed that if the American workers were earning more money than they are, the American manufacturer would be LESS PROFITABLE than its German counterpart.
So by your figures, the suggestion is that union membership status within a single corporation actually has no impact on the income of the employees. The Germans have to pay union fees and yet gain no greater percentage of the corprorate earnings.
The Teacher's Union has as it's number one priority increasing compensation & benefits...
Exactly. The problem is that this is NOT what a union is SUPPOSED to prioritize. They are supposed to act in the best interests of the employees, and bankrupting the employer does not accomplish that.
A union's function is to protect the rights of the employees and act as a representative of them to the employers in case of disputes. Increasing compensations can be a part of that, but not the the only part and not without limit. More and more money and compensations are not rights. It is counterproductive for a union to forever baloon the income and benefits of the employees if it means that the company can no longer remain profitable.
If unions bring down an auto company, the company fails...
Not under Obama.... We bail them out so that the failures of the unions can be corrected, and then railroad support for more unions in other fields through legislation and regulation.
This is a ridiculous statement. You are suggesting a policy in which society never attempt to help their fellow citizens. Don't touch! It's not your job!
It's this weak-minded insanity that contributes to our decline. You get sued/fired/condemned if you try to stop a stabbing? Guess what, you get sued/fired/condemned for doing nothing and letting a kid get killed while you stand there watching and waiting for cops to show up to mop up the aftermath too. You are exactly the kind of polically correct hands-off nutjob that puts a teacher in a hostile environment in a no win situation. Why the hell would any good and honest human being put themself in a situation in which they are nearly gauranteed to be eventually burned to the ground?
You are actually telling people to not do the right thing and try to stop violence and crime. It's no wonder this world is so fucked up.
He should probably complain to his union. They are meant to provide him representation to defend against exactly this kind of railroading.
But that's not what unions are anymore. They are political activists and spend union dues attempting to inflate salaries in order to further inflate union dues and enrich a very small group of thugs who bully and abuse both the employers and the employees they "represent". The unions have become little more than accepted crime families.
You assume that the artist has already earned something from which those things can be paid. After the artist is established that is true. But the initial investment cannot be made by an artist that is not yet recognized.
In retrospect, you're right. When I read the above I was still annoyed with this story:
http://cbsla.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/la-county-updates-ordinance-on-ball-frisbee-throwing-at-beaches/
I really dont want to find myself defending the vultures, but to be fair its the label thats also handling all the event scheduling, the promo materials, the advertising, the distribution, etc. There is a significant outlay of cost for the label early, and for them it's a gamble. They put up the cash hoping to bring the next big hit to the scene and rake the cash in. They probably fail or break even more often than succeed so when they succeed they milk every penny.
That being said, the deceptive and predatory behavior is exactly the type if thing that inspired Dave Mathews to fully self-promote. I really hope to see more and more artists becoming adept at the business side of their craft (beyond just music), more conscious of the implications that the laws and proposals have, and have to deal with less of the manufactured flavor of the day props that dominate the charts.
You bet. Next thing you know they will be as great as states like California.
/sarcasm
Because I dont install applications whose purpose is inherently to catalog and report on my activity.
So in order to prove that my privacy is not being invaded by the app that I knowingly installed that was meant for the purpose of disclosing my activity, I'm going to sniff packets. And not just sniff packets so taht I see abnormal source and dest, but so that I can prove that the application I know is moving data from me to a destination is only moving the data I approve between me and the same destination....
That's a limiting question. One would have to answer yes, provided all else was equal. What if the society using more power is capable of producing substantially more power, yet produces equal or less waste in doing so. Would you not have to concede that the society using more power is superior?
If the impacts of consuming more energy are offset by superior ability in producing energy, then the measure of energy consumption does not correlate to the measure of success of the society.
Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.
Prove it.
Weird. You mean that some random person would actually purposefully change verbage about a news item in an attempt manipulate public perception? Really? Damn good thing real journalists never do that.
The EPA would have put a stop to this nonsense.