The evidence does not support this theory. Read Government by Judiciary by (liberal) Raoul Berger. In it you'll learn that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to give freedmen the right to enter contracts, to own property, and to sue. The Supreme Court may have twisted the meaning to suit their own purposes, but the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of Berger.
I would like you to review the text of the 1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Please take note that the first word of the amendment is Congress and is followed by the absolute term "...shall make no law..." This means just what it states.
Aritlce I, Section 9, Clause 2 The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
Unfortunately, the balance will never be reached if legal requirements keep the cost of labor artificially high are not repealed. It is not the low labor rates of India, it is the artificial requirements placed on U.S. employers that causes the imbalance.
Truly the best way out of this is to follow the Constitution, which does not authorize Congress the power to create such legislation. However, the states have all the power they need to create such laws, and that would be in keeping with the concept of a republic.
The 'outsourcing', when done on such a massive scale, is definitely detrimental. Peter Schiff and other Austrians argue that large trade deficits for extended periods destroy economies. It's basically a direct transfer of wealth. The problem is when this is presented this to policy makers, they tend to think this means they should employ protectionist measures, but those only make the situation worse by igniting a trade war.
What our nation must come to grips with is that the world has scarce resources and we cannot attempt to put so many social guarantees into law, especially federal law, without eventually suffering economic catastrophe.
I have a similar idea, except I wouldn't allow people to look up how they voted individually. Maybe someone somewhere is tracking IP addresses and page views. Just put up like 500,000 block votes in simple text documents, which usually open up in-browser and do a find on page for your number. Obviously the page would have to be devoid of java key-loggers, or whatever those are called. The 'hash' could be as simple as randomly generated numbers on ballots, which here in California already don't have any names on them, and the ballots just have a simple perforated tear-off with the serial number on it.
Individual auditing I think would revolutionize voting, hence the near complete lack of public discourse on the topic.
It informed me that a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of all Citibank credit card customers had been won. I don't remember the exact number, but they were pretty obscene. The judgment was for like $50 million and $30 million was going to the lawyers while $20 million was going to some charity selected by the lawyers. I considered becoming a lawyer and suing lawyers on behalf of people who get 'represented' by these guys.
Perhaps the smallest group is the one that believes in the rule of law and that the Constitution is a contract which should be followed based on the meaning of the agreements when ratified, including amendments. Of course this would mean that all first amendment cases would be out of jurisdiction of the federal courts, something those power-grabbing, legislative and executive branch appeasers will never go for.
Congress shall make no law...
And for those who are going to argue that the 14th changed all that, you're simply wrong. If we look at what the amendment meant to the people who passed it, we find no evidence anywhere that the amendment was ever considered to do anything more than give freedmen the right to enter contracts, to sue, and to own property. If you really care about this, read Government by Judiciary by (liberal) Raoul Berger.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
This article is the one linked to from Drudge. I find it interesting that it reports most people at LaGuardia were willing to go through the TSA security because the 'alternative' is worse (plane blowed up). I queried my friends and acquaintances this past week and not one of them feels these security measures are necessary and many are changing travel plans around which airports have the scanners.
"I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747,"— Rafi Sela, leading Israeli airport security expert, referring to Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion International Airport, which has some of the toughest security in the world. source
The regulators are not 'asleep at the wheel'. They are playing their historic role of do what the boss tells you, and if the boss doesn't tell you to bust one of the huge firms, you don't. If the regulators are incapable of protecting the small investors, then get rid of the regulators, but don't blame the technology. Your assumption that the market is more volatile today than ever before is weak. Take a look at the Dow in the 30s.
They are using all energy used by California divided by all the people who live in California. Climates won't make a difference when evaluating energy used in manufacturing.
Huh? Leads the world in manufacture of what? Go talk to the few Bay Area machine shops still left standing and ask them about manufacturing of high tech equipment. Go talk to a chip maker like Parallax and ask them their opinion on setting up fab in California. Wasn't there just an article on/. about how movies are being made anywhere except California? Heck, they're moving completely out of the U.S. altogether. You really think New Zealand is home to so many huge-budget films just because Peter Jackson was born there? You really think a movie exec signing a $100 million check cares where some dude was born? There are very few companies actually coding software here in the U.S., even California. My landlord got let go from his 20+ years at the IBM Almaden research center to get replaced by Indians, in India.
I am doing things for California. I own a small business and I'm not giving up on it. I help out when I can with candidates I feel are genuine, like John Dennis up in San Francisco. I am hoping to be working with several volunteer groups on real reforms for the state's utterly failed legislature. But I have to admit, the state is only worth so much money to me. If things keep going the way they are going, I will move elsewhere, probably Austin.
It is my opinion that your ignorance and holding on to victories of the past and refusing to face the brutal facts of reality are more damaging to this state than almost anything else. We are in crisis, and the worst is yet to come.
Have you visited or seen pictures of the inside of a factory? If we were to measure energy consumption in BTU/ft2, how many square feet of residential buildings are equal to one square foot of factories? And how do factories compare with offices? California is of course not yet completely devoid of private industry, but if the stat you give is correct, that 75% of the state's energy goes to companies (of course completely impossible given that the state's largest employer is, well, the state, and their offices use electricity), that doesn't mean that the energy is going to manufacturing. It is manufacturing that provides the real economic growth engine of an economy, and we have none, which makes us more 'energy efficient', as well as unemployed.
I have lived in California for most of my 35 years of life, 8 of which were in Modesto. I'm not sure what you consider 'mild', but regular stretches of 100+ highs is not mild. California has some of the hottest regions in North America, even the hottest of course in Death Valley. I'm not sure where you live, but I have observed the urban heat island effect to keep evenings in the urban areas plenty warm enough to justify keeping the A/C running all night.
I don't know if you've read any of the posts above mine, but the whole point of this thread is that there are no factories in California because of the tax and regulatory infrastructure.
As of August, Fresno had a 15.4% unemployment rate. Maybe people like it there because the cost of living is low enough to live on unemployment. The Fresno Wikipedia page lists the city's top ten employers as being in the medical industry, government entities, such as schools, and the bottom 2 of the top ten are private industry. Sounds like it will soon be the next economic hub of California. Many of California's flat cities experienced a lot of growth through the real estate boom because, well, there are still places to build. As opposed to places like the SF Bay Area, where the only places left to build are pretty much outside of what has traditionally been the Bay Area or ludicrous expensive.
I'm not arguing that Fresno is undesirable, I just don't think it qualifies as 'desirable'. From Silicon Valley I can catch a Southwest flight to Tahoe for less than $50. We have the greatest motorcycling roads in the world. Redwood forests. Historic landmarks, every kind of sports team, the ocean, plays, museums, etc. I don't think Fresno compares in these things.
I don't think Modesto, Stockton, Fresno, Bakersfield, or pretty much the entire Central Valley is considered a 'desirable place to live'. And I'm not clear on how running air conditioning 24/7 throughout most of the state reduces energy consumption, nor can even the highest consumer energy consumption compare to myriad widget factories producing millions of widgets each with only 1000 employees or less. How many humans even work in a modern auto plant?
What's funny is how they create bogus metrics to support how wonderful our state is. The one I see most often that really irritates me is the BTU/citizen. They'll state it in a few different ways, but basically they're claiming that because we use less energy per citizen our state is more efficient than everywhere else, but what the metric is really demonstrating is that we have no manufacturing here. Factories require gobs of electricity.
"...the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons.” – Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
Oh, please. Just go wardriving with a vanilla install of ubuntu using a laptop you picked up on craigslist and a wifi card you found in a trash can and you're safe. As usual, these kinds of government activities only infringe on the innocent and do nothing to inhibit the criminals.
Slashdot Mirror
The evidence does not support this theory. Read Government by Judiciary by (liberal) Raoul Berger. In it you'll learn that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to give freedmen the right to enter contracts, to own property, and to sue. The Supreme Court may have twisted the meaning to suit their own purposes, but the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of Berger.
I would like you to review the text of the 1st Amendment:
Please take note that the first word of the amendment is Congress and is followed by the absolute term "...shall make no law..." This means just what it states.
I also feel it would be helpful for you to review the writ of habeas corpus to better understand the Suspension Clause:
Of course, I already know your rebuttal: Murphy's Golden Rule.
My understanding is that the TSA does not have law enforcement capabilities. IOW, they're not LEO's. They're basically rent-a-cops.
I read that as instead of a choice of Coke or Pepsi it is a choice of Diet Coke or Coke Zero.
Unfortunately, the balance will never be reached if legal requirements keep the cost of labor artificially high are not repealed. It is not the low labor rates of India, it is the artificial requirements placed on U.S. employers that causes the imbalance.
Truly the best way out of this is to follow the Constitution, which does not authorize Congress the power to create such legislation. However, the states have all the power they need to create such laws, and that would be in keeping with the concept of a republic.
The 'outsourcing', when done on such a massive scale, is definitely detrimental. Peter Schiff and other Austrians argue that large trade deficits for extended periods destroy economies. It's basically a direct transfer of wealth. The problem is when this is presented this to policy makers, they tend to think this means they should employ protectionist measures, but those only make the situation worse by igniting a trade war.
What our nation must come to grips with is that the world has scarce resources and we cannot attempt to put so many social guarantees into law, especially federal law, without eventually suffering economic catastrophe.
I have a similar idea, except I wouldn't allow people to look up how they voted individually. Maybe someone somewhere is tracking IP addresses and page views. Just put up like 500,000 block votes in simple text documents, which usually open up in-browser and do a find on page for your number. Obviously the page would have to be devoid of java key-loggers, or whatever those are called. The 'hash' could be as simple as randomly generated numbers on ballots, which here in California already don't have any names on them, and the ballots just have a simple perforated tear-off with the serial number on it.
Individual auditing I think would revolutionize voting, hence the near complete lack of public discourse on the topic.
It informed me that a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of all Citibank credit card customers had been won. I don't remember the exact number, but they were pretty obscene. The judgment was for like $50 million and $30 million was going to the lawyers while $20 million was going to some charity selected by the lawyers. I considered becoming a lawyer and suing lawyers on behalf of people who get 'represented' by these guys.
Perhaps the smallest group is the one that believes in the rule of law and that the Constitution is a contract which should be followed based on the meaning of the agreements when ratified, including amendments. Of course this would mean that all first amendment cases would be out of jurisdiction of the federal courts, something those power-grabbing, legislative and executive branch appeasers will never go for.
And for those who are going to argue that the 14th changed all that, you're simply wrong. If we look at what the amendment meant to the people who passed it, we find no evidence anywhere that the amendment was ever considered to do anything more than give freedmen the right to enter contracts, to sue, and to own property. If you really care about this, read Government by Judiciary by (liberal) Raoul Berger.
This article is the one linked to from Drudge. I find it interesting that it reports most people at LaGuardia were willing to go through the TSA security because the 'alternative' is worse (plane blowed up). I queried my friends and acquaintances this past week and not one of them feels these security measures are necessary and many are changing travel plans around which airports have the scanners.
"I don't know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines. I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747,"— Rafi Sela, leading Israeli airport security expert, referring to Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion International Airport, which has some of the toughest security in the world. source
The regulators are not 'asleep at the wheel'. They are playing their historic role of do what the boss tells you, and if the boss doesn't tell you to bust one of the huge firms, you don't. If the regulators are incapable of protecting the small investors, then get rid of the regulators, but don't blame the technology. Your assumption that the market is more volatile today than ever before is weak. Take a look at the Dow in the 30s.
Well you'll benefit by all the jobs it creates, right?
How come they didn't build it in California? Hm.
They are using all energy used by California divided by all the people who live in California. Climates won't make a difference when evaluating energy used in manufacturing.
Huh? Leads the world in manufacture of what? Go talk to the few Bay Area machine shops still left standing and ask them about manufacturing of high tech equipment. Go talk to a chip maker like Parallax and ask them their opinion on setting up fab in California. Wasn't there just an article on /. about how movies are being made anywhere except California? Heck, they're moving completely out of the U.S. altogether. You really think New Zealand is home to so many huge-budget films just because Peter Jackson was born there? You really think a movie exec signing a $100 million check cares where some dude was born? There are very few companies actually coding software here in the U.S., even California. My landlord got let go from his 20+ years at the IBM Almaden research center to get replaced by Indians, in India.
I am doing things for California. I own a small business and I'm not giving up on it. I help out when I can with candidates I feel are genuine, like John Dennis up in San Francisco. I am hoping to be working with several volunteer groups on real reforms for the state's utterly failed legislature. But I have to admit, the state is only worth so much money to me. If things keep going the way they are going, I will move elsewhere, probably Austin.
It is my opinion that your ignorance and holding on to victories of the past and refusing to face the brutal facts of reality are more damaging to this state than almost anything else. We are in crisis, and the worst is yet to come.
Have you visited or seen pictures of the inside of a factory? If we were to measure energy consumption in BTU/ft2, how many square feet of residential buildings are equal to one square foot of factories? And how do factories compare with offices? California is of course not yet completely devoid of private industry, but if the stat you give is correct, that 75% of the state's energy goes to companies (of course completely impossible given that the state's largest employer is, well, the state, and their offices use electricity), that doesn't mean that the energy is going to manufacturing. It is manufacturing that provides the real economic growth engine of an economy, and we have none, which makes us more 'energy efficient', as well as unemployed.
I have lived in California for most of my 35 years of life, 8 of which were in Modesto. I'm not sure what you consider 'mild', but regular stretches of 100+ highs is not mild. California has some of the hottest regions in North America, even the hottest of course in Death Valley. I'm not sure where you live, but I have observed the urban heat island effect to keep evenings in the urban areas plenty warm enough to justify keeping the A/C running all night.
I don't know if you've read any of the posts above mine, but the whole point of this thread is that there are no factories in California because of the tax and regulatory infrastructure.
As of August, Fresno had a 15.4% unemployment rate. Maybe people like it there because the cost of living is low enough to live on unemployment. The Fresno Wikipedia page lists the city's top ten employers as being in the medical industry, government entities, such as schools, and the bottom 2 of the top ten are private industry. Sounds like it will soon be the next economic hub of California. Many of California's flat cities experienced a lot of growth through the real estate boom because, well, there are still places to build. As opposed to places like the SF Bay Area, where the only places left to build are pretty much outside of what has traditionally been the Bay Area or ludicrous expensive.
I'm not arguing that Fresno is undesirable, I just don't think it qualifies as 'desirable'. From Silicon Valley I can catch a Southwest flight to Tahoe for less than $50. We have the greatest motorcycling roads in the world. Redwood forests. Historic landmarks, every kind of sports team, the ocean, plays, museums, etc. I don't think Fresno compares in these things.
I don't think Modesto, Stockton, Fresno, Bakersfield, or pretty much the entire Central Valley is considered a 'desirable place to live'. And I'm not clear on how running air conditioning 24/7 throughout most of the state reduces energy consumption, nor can even the highest consumer energy consumption compare to myriad widget factories producing millions of widgets each with only 1000 employees or less. How many humans even work in a modern auto plant?
1. Bulk. A car is big, shipping is expensive. JimFive
Not only is it big, it's mostly air. Shipping too much air is what makes the shipping too expensive.
What's funny is how they create bogus metrics to support how wonderful our state is. The one I see most often that really irritates me is the BTU/citizen. They'll state it in a few different ways, but basically they're claiming that because we use less energy per citizen our state is more efficient than everywhere else, but what the metric is really demonstrating is that we have no manufacturing here. Factories require gobs of electricity.
You've been plundered.
"...the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons.” – Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
The Sun appeared to move from east to west today.
The Conversation
googlesharing.net uses no javascript. Hurray!
Oh, please. Just go wardriving with a vanilla install of ubuntu using a laptop you picked up on craigslist and a wifi card you found in a trash can and you're safe. As usual, these kinds of government activities only infringe on the innocent and do nothing to inhibit the criminals.