Limited liability means the investors cannot lose money beyond their actual investment. Limited liability shouldn't mean limitation of criminal liability.
It would make it a lot easier to find articles on a subject from before some big event. They become virtually impossible to locate after that event if you can't filter by date.
"Buy a cheap common car where parts are dirt cheap."
This is the best predictor for a high-theft car. The more popular it is, and the more parts interchange (which makes them cheap) the more it gets stolen. A car being slow has nothing to do with it. A coupe might be stolen less if it's a base model POS just because there would be less of a market for the body parts.
A smaller car is easier to steal with a flatbed.
The only reason common, cheap cars are cheap to insure is that they are cheap to repair and replace. But the cheapness of their parts is not an impediment to theft, because it is far more profitable to steal a car whose parts sell cheaply but easily than to steal a car whose parts will sell slowly or not at all. Also, the more uncommon the car, the more likely you are to be found as you try to sell the parts.
Getting a Honda Civic, even if it were actually base, is like putting a "STEAL ME" sign on your car. Even if you debadge the SI, people who know the cars will be able to tell.
Unless you're equipped to do it yourself, a good, OEM quality paint job is going to cost at LEAST a thousand dollars, more likely 2000, and possibly a lot more, depending on the type of paint. A body shop doesn't have the economy of scale that a car factory does.
Basically it's like knocking 1-2000 dollars off the resale value of your car, plus whatever value the fact that it has been repainted knocks off by itself. (That introduces uncertainty about accident damage.)
A deliberately misinformed teabagger idiot would point to Fedex or UPS as counterexamples, without paying any attention to the reliance of those two companies on government transportation infrastructure.
It isn't just a language thing. Japanese web pages usually have 2-3 times as many distinct regions with distinct functions on screen at any given time versus American ones. It's like every Japanese website is Amazon (one of the few major offenders in the US)
More important than the pay is the bullshit that teachers have to put up with. If kids are failing, it's their fault, no matter what's wrong at home or what is wrong with the test, and they'll take shit from both parents and government for it. It's their responsibility to teach safe sex, no! abstinence!, no that's not the government's job! (but teach abstinence!). No matter what they're teaching or how, they are conducting communist indoctrination. Or they are teaching kids witchcraft, which is the key focus of Outcome Based Education. But above all, they bear all responsibility for the future success or lack thereof of their students, despite none of that being their responsibility, that's for the parents and the church! All the parents except for me. Except when I disagree with what they're teaching (they're teaching condoms! they're teaching homosexuality! they're teaching masturbation! I don't even know what I mean by that!), then it's my responsibility...except I won't actually do anything about it EXCEPT BLAME THE TEACHERS.
I trust Consumer Reports when they are not missing the point (as often happens with cars), pulling things out their ass (as sometimes happens with cars), and are dealing with actual test data (which usually happens with everything).
This is the kind of specific test of a feature that actually matters that, combined with their reputation for impartiality, justifies the existence of Consumer Reports.
If I saw the design atrocity that is the cover (and might have been a poster?) for that movie, I would not have wanted to watch it either.
http://momsfocusonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/MomHD_3dBR-309x400.jpg
In comparison something like "Motherhood.2010.DVDSCR.xViD-MTRG.[Movie-Torrentz]" looks much more visually appealing.
Slashdot Mirror
Limited liability means the investors cannot lose money beyond their actual investment. Limited liability shouldn't mean limitation of criminal liability.
I can't stand playing Counterstrike on the Internet, but on a LAN it's a different story.
Now how many of those people had any idea what any of those words meant?
Yeah, dude, and the stomata on cacti close during the day and open at night. (Can't believe you'd bring them up and not mention that.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crassulacean_acid_metabolism
500 billion in petroleum subsidies would allow you to do both.
But did the employer suffer? That's the important part. Seriously, this isn't just my thirst for misery speaking, that's the only way offenders learn.
Good thing no one was talking about typing on keyboards.
Hahaha, no. What risk has your typical non-founder CEO ever taken?
They'll even take out insurance on your body
"Really? would you like to wager on that?" Yes. http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-si-coupe/exterior-360-view.aspx http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-coupe/exterior-360-view.aspx What do I win?
It would make it a lot easier to find articles on a subject from before some big event. They become virtually impossible to locate after that event if you can't filter by date.
Does that account for the type of car?
"Buy a cheap common car where parts are dirt cheap."
This is the best predictor for a high-theft car. The more popular it is, and the more parts interchange (which makes them cheap) the more it gets stolen. A car being slow has nothing to do with it. A coupe might be stolen less if it's a base model POS just because there would be less of a market for the body parts.
A smaller car is easier to steal with a flatbed.
The only reason common, cheap cars are cheap to insure is that they are cheap to repair and replace. But the cheapness of their parts is not an impediment to theft, because it is far more profitable to steal a car whose parts sell cheaply but easily than to steal a car whose parts will sell slowly or not at all. Also, the more uncommon the car, the more likely you are to be found as you try to sell the parts.
Getting a Honda Civic, even if it were actually base, is like putting a "STEAL ME" sign on your car. Even if you debadge the SI, people who know the cars will be able to tell.
Unless you're equipped to do it yourself, a good, OEM quality paint job is going to cost at LEAST a thousand dollars, more likely 2000, and possibly a lot more, depending on the type of paint. A body shop doesn't have the economy of scale that a car factory does. Basically it's like knocking 1-2000 dollars off the resale value of your car, plus whatever value the fact that it has been repainted knocks off by itself. (That introduces uncertainty about accident damage.)
What if Oracle tried to scoop up all the water with a sieve?
Holy shit, I was in a focus group for the previous design of that Hi, Seoul site.
A deliberately misinformed teabagger idiot would point to Fedex or UPS as counterexamples, without paying any attention to the reliance of those two companies on government transportation infrastructure.
"E Pluribus Echo"
It isn't just a language thing. Japanese web pages usually have 2-3 times as many distinct regions with distinct functions on screen at any given time versus American ones. It's like every Japanese website is Amazon (one of the few major offenders in the US)
And it infects real life. Any business district in any Korean city looks Geocities circa 1998.
E Pluribus Echo
More important than the pay is the bullshit that teachers have to put up with. If kids are failing, it's their fault, no matter what's wrong at home or what is wrong with the test, and they'll take shit from both parents and government for it. It's their responsibility to teach safe sex, no! abstinence!, no that's not the government's job! (but teach abstinence!). No matter what they're teaching or how, they are conducting communist indoctrination. Or they are teaching kids witchcraft, which is the key focus of Outcome Based Education. But above all, they bear all responsibility for the future success or lack thereof of their students, despite none of that being their responsibility, that's for the parents and the church! All the parents except for me. Except when I disagree with what they're teaching (they're teaching condoms! they're teaching homosexuality! they're teaching masturbation! I don't even know what I mean by that!), then it's my responsibility...except I won't actually do anything about it EXCEPT BLAME THE TEACHERS.
Compared to that, low pay is a minor complaint.
I trust Consumer Reports when they are not missing the point (as often happens with cars), pulling things out their ass (as sometimes happens with cars), and are dealing with actual test data (which usually happens with everything). This is the kind of specific test of a feature that actually matters that, combined with their reputation for impartiality, justifies the existence of Consumer Reports.
It isn't people who were kids in 1990 filing most of the lawsuits. Expect a decline.
If I saw the design atrocity that is the cover (and might have been a poster?) for that movie, I would not have wanted to watch it either.
http://momsfocusonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/MomHD_3dBR-309x400.jpg
In comparison something like "Motherhood.2010.DVDSCR.xViD-MTRG.[Movie-Torrentz]" looks much more visually appealing.