They dont even need internet access, they need food and shelter at this point.
That's like saying that, now that slavery is over, blacks need to start worrying about food and shelter at this point, and quit worrying about the job market.
Most Iraqis HAVE shelter. Most have food. What they need is normal life, good jobs, internet access, a continually improving educational system, and all the bush-bashers to quit HOPING they fail (just to make Bush look bad).
What they also need is for the small minority of violent activists to sit the fuck down and take part in the rebuilding process. If they get violence down, prove they're stable, and then demand the US goes home... They can! And they'll have more than enough international support to make it happen. What they're doing is guranteeing that there will be a US military presence there forever. It also gurantees that america gets to fight the terrorist battle over there. As long as terrorists are flocking to Iraq and sending money there, they're of little actual danger to the US.
Eventually terrorists will lose in Iraq. Which organization do you really think is more distracted with it? The million+ man Department of Defense, or the small band of Al Qaeda fighters, who are trying to run for their lives, recruit new people, stop the US from finding and taking their funding, send support to insurgencies in both Iraq and Afghanistan, make deals with other terrorist organizations, AND train new people to carry out attacks ALL while trying to plan and execute attacks against the US as well as the rest of the world? Honestly. I think it has to be Al Qaeda that is distracted at this point. Either way it's not a bad strategy for the US, although I think it would've been better for this to be done in Iran than Iraq... But hey, I'm not paid to make these decisions.
Ok, all of that aside again, having a proper internet system and online presence is vital to MANY industries. Ignoring the insurgency, communications is one of the biggest problems in Iraq these days. Under 56% of male Iraqis are literate. Increased internet access, and an online presence for Iraqi companies, can only benefit the country. They currently have under 700,000 telephone lines (including mobile phones) and approximately 25,000 internet users.
I'm amazed, in a place like slashdot, there aren't more people saying "Give them internet access, give them cyber cafes, and give them books!" These are the new bedrocks of society.
Using the classic example of assassinating Hitler, does anyone believe that any of his likely successors would have been less evil?
That all depends on who assassinates Hitler, and whether that person can use it to take power. If it was someone from the military, they would have been likely to get a good leader, such as Rommel.
If it was someone from the SS, well, it would've been a lot worse than Hitler. The only two things that saved europe were the blood of the allies and the insanity of Hitler. An intelligent, charismatic leader (who knew to listen to his generals) replacing Hitler could well have sealed the fate of much of Europe.
That being said, I feel even democracy over time leads to a kakistocracy. Eventually things become corrupt enough that the vast majority of those in power are corrupt/evil.
I'll tackle your responses in order of most outrageous to least outrageous.
In fact, I'd be breaking american law, thanks to that little customs declaration form you have to fill out when you're mailing something.
I assure you we don't stone people to death here. If they were going to put me in jail for six months, it wouldn't surprise me if the US did send me. And I'd somewhat expect it. I mean, honestly, who doesn't know that it's illegal there? Who doesn't know that pot is a controlled substance in America? If it's being done as civil disobedience to try to get the law changed, don't whine about the fact that you get caught. Go to jail and let people feel sorry for you.
It's not your responsibility to know what's legal/illegal in another country
But my last sentence was "In fact, I'd be breaking american law, thanks to that little customs declaration form you have to fill out when you're mailing something."
There's a difference between not knowing what's legal in a country and knowing something is illegal in a country and trying to find ways around customs.
Now I don't remember from TFA, if the guy genuinely thought it was legal in the states, filled out the customs form saying "10 marijuna seeds" etc. then I don't think he should be in any trouble at all. If he knew, but figured mailing it would be safe as long as he lied on the customs labels, then yes, he broke laws. Sure, I think the laws are stupid and archane, but I don't want a precedent of "if it's a controlled substance you can just mail it here with impunity" to be set.
What about my cousin, John Its, and his wife, Ashley Its. Surely their house could be referred to as "The Its'".
Or should I say Its's?
Now what if I told you that, in a way its is just short for itis? I mean, that's why we use the apostrophe in possessive, because a letter was omited. "John's Olde Shope" used to be written as "Johnis Olde Shope". Then you bloody "modern" people came around and decided to just up and change everything, and the possessive "is" went the way of the brave frenchman. I guess what I was trying to get at is that the apostrophe isn't to denote posession, but rather to denote a missing letter. It still is, really, you just stopped using the long form. Hence
Correctly placed apostrophes: "John's hat" (Johnis) "It's (It is) going to rain today" "The Its' place (referring to Mr. and Mrs. Its, short for Its's)"
Terribly wrongly incorrectly placed apostrophes: "Put this back in it's place" (its! no missing letter) "CD's for sale" (no missing letter. not needed) "'" (Never put an apostrophe in quotes like that, it's hard to read in most fonts. It's better to be grammatically incorrect, damnit)
No apostrophe needed: "Put this back in its place" "CDs for sale" "My cousins are coming over for dinner"
I'm out of ideas to end this post, so I will be ending it briefly and leave you hanging.
I see little honor in the living dying for one's country. I see considerable honor in the dying living for theirs. The difference is important. The former is a waste, the latter is devotion. As poetic as that sounds, I have to say it's obvious you're clueless about what it really means.
To begin with, "dying for one's country" is a hell of a lot harder. You know exactly what you're getting into, but you have a choice. You know full well that you could go do something else, live it up, and pursue a very happy life without doing it. You've probably already seen some of your friends die, and know your death will probably be as excruciating and premature as deaths come. This is, by definition, willfully choosing to die (or at least take the risk, knowing that it is probable), which goes against all natural reason and instinct. This is one of the hardest choices to make, to go against one's self-preservation. People do it for many different reasons. Some do it because of their families. Some do it because of their religious beliefs. Some do it for their country. Some do it so they won't let their buddies down. If people just wanted to waste their lives away they'd go get themselves addicted to heroine, or just go ahead and commit suicide. Even if you see dying for one's country as a giant waste of life, you have to recognize the fact that people who do it work harder than anyone else at wasting their lives. And they tend to believe whatever reason they have.
As Americans, we value and respect freedom. We even encourage it! Its simply that, under our definitions, freedom ends where the moral beliefs of the most conservative person in a society begin.
In all seriousness, as much as I agree on his views on dope, smuggling goods into a country is illegal damned near everywhere. There are all sorts of international treaties for this. An american would get in trouble for constantly shipping porn into saudi arabia just as a canadian would get in trouble for shipping marijuana into america. A russian would also get in trouble for bringing radioactive material into the US. You can't simply say "Well, yes, he was trying to smuggle controlled substances into that country, but if that country didn't want them there, their customs service should have worked harder!"
Imagine if you caught me, an american, mailing all sorts of things that offend you into canada. Sure, I didn't cross the border with it, but I sure as hell did break canadian law! In fact, I'd be breaking american law, thanks to that little customs declaration form you have to fill out when you're mailing something.
If only I had more mod points and you weren't already at 5.
Excuse my non-linguistic-babble, but I'm sick as hell and not feeling technical. I don't know all the languages of the planet, but, of the ones I know , english seems to have the most adjectives. I could be wrong, but I've had a hell of a time trying to translate documents from english and think of words that carry the same meaning as words like "exquisite".
Speaking of tenses, though, Tagalog is a rather interesting language in this aspect. They mainly use syllable duplication, then use words basically equivalent to "already" and "still" for the aspect.
A simple set of examples: Pumunta si Eric sa dagat. (Eric went to the beach) Pumupunta si Eric sa dagat. (Eric goes to the beach). Pupunta si Eric sa dagat. (Eric will go to the beach). Pupunta na si Eric sa dagat bago alas 12 na. (Eric will have gone to the beach by the time it is noon already).
Thank you for defending the air force, but you're rather incorrect.
The air force has a large fleet of helicopters, and they are frequently utilized by pararescue men (among the best swimmers in the military) in domestic search and rescue operations. There are a lot of articles on the work they did after the tsunami. The air force also has quite a few large and heavy vehicles (very important in maintaining air craft, transporting equipment, and transporting personnel).
I'm not sure why people are coming up with these conspiracy theories. The AF rescued 221 people on August 31st alone link.
Here's some more info from a different link: In addition, about 100 Airmen and four Pave Hawks from the 55th Rescue Squadron at Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz., will depart Sept. 2 for Jackson where they will stage while conducting search and rescue missions.
Two Air Force Reserve Command C-5 Galaxy aircrews from the 439th Airlift Wing at Westover Air Reserve Base, Mass., flew a cross-country mission Aug. 30 to March ARB, Calif., to pick up rescue teams and supplies to help the victims of the hurricane. A third C-5 assigned to the New York Air National Guard's 105th Airlift Group also joined the airlift effort.
Another C-5 from the 60th Air Mobility Wing at Travis AFB, Calif., and a C-17 from the 305th AMW at McGuire AFB, N.J., transported tanker airlift control elements and contingency support groups to Gulfport and New Orleans respectively.
A C-130 Hercules from the 403rd Wing at Keesler AFB, Miss., flying out of Asheville, N.C., returned home to deliver supplies to the base hospital.
The 908th AW at Maxwell AFB, Ala., geared up two C-130s, aircrews and aeromedical evacuation people to help move people.
The 5th Combat Communications Group at Robins AFB, Ga., left for Keesler AFB and New Orleans on Sept. 1. The group members provided Keesler and a makeshift hospital in New Orleans with much-needed communications networks. A priority of the relief mission is to provide public telephone capabilities to the base and medical facility, said Col. John Lent, 5th CCG commander. The 5th will set up voice data communications, e-mail and air traffic control communications. The group is also packing additional loads of communications equipment for quick response to any additional needs for the relief effort.
Two aeromedical evacuation crews from the 932nd Airlift Wing at Scott AFB, Ill., flew out Sept. 1. They will enter a medical staging area and put their skills to work helping move patients where needed. The aeromedical crews took supplies with them including litters, heart monitors, ventilators, power converters, portable oxygen, assorted medicines and bandages.
A C-9A aircraft is also being flown by the Air Force Reserve wing to shuttle two active-duty medical teams to New Orleans.
"This is a difficult time for those directly affected by the wrath of Hurricane Katrina. Our medical crews will join with other agencies on the ground to give what medical aid they can, and make a positive difference in the lives of our fellow Americans," said Col. Maryanne Miller, 932nd AW Operations Group commander.
States like North Dakota get over twice as much as they are taxed. In fact, all of the welfare states are red states. Where do you think the "war in Iraq" money is SPENT?! It's spent in the states! It's spent on paying civilians or contractors to do jobs for the military. It's spent buying equipment, bombs, fuels, rockets, ammunition, airplanes, etc. This is all (well, maybe not the fuel) purchased in the United States. Under different administrations it shifts to who actually receives this money.
California, housing some of the largest arms developers in the world, should be receiving a lot of that money, but it's not.
The system was designed to work so that yes, each state pays taxes to the federal government, and then the federal government spents the money on whatever it needs to do its job. So some money would be spent on hiring people to maintain federal buildings, some would be spent on paying the military, more would be spent on buying equipment and uniforms for the military, more money would be spent on the salaries of all of the government workers. But if these government workers work in an office in San Francisco, all of that money goes back to the state. Those workers are going to buy groceries, buy a house, pay property taxes, etc. So the states are supposed to get most of the money back so that there is not a drain on their economy. Instead, you have states that are footing the bill to prop up the economies of other states! New York is hit far worse than California in this matter, but both are getting screwed.
As much as I disagree with you entirely... and I really mean the idea of wealth redistribution through taxation fucking infuriates me, your request for more interesting statistics is RIGHT on the dot!
From CA Commerce dept website: - $1.4 Trillion Gross State Product - Fifth largest economy in the world - Largest state economy in the U.S. - State's economy is 13% of GDP
Now, keep in mind that California has many EXTREMELY HIGH COST OF LIVING areas such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, Silcion Valley, etc. These areas are responsible for a lot of income, but are also very expensive to live in. The federal tax system doesn't properly adjust to that. Where I grew up, making $100,000 a year meant you MIGHT be able to afford having your own house if you managed your money well. Other places I've lived, $40,000 a year was good money, you could own your own house and car, etc, and of course the federal tax burden on such an income is significantly lower.
So, I personally feel that living in california is a higher tax burden, despite what all the statistics seem to say! But here is a great link with information on that: http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html spreadsheet here Now THEY say we pay 19.6% of the federal taxes, which ranks us as #10.
But, and here is the big difference, California doesn't get it's share of federal money. In 2002, California paid $58 billion more to Washington than it received. This includes federal salaries in california, grants, etc. California only got 77% of the money back in some way. This is probably mostly attributable to the large base of defense contractors and some major military bases.
$58B might not sound like a lot of money for such a large state, but keep in mind the total state taxes paid every year totals to only $130B. If california received that extra $14B the budget would be balanced again.
I strongly recommend you also read http://www.caltax.org/research/taxburdn.htm which does a great job of explaining why the simple tax burden measurements used above are terribly ineffective.
A typical "Rich" family To sum it all up, a family of five making $100,000 in Los Angeles (at least the area I lived) would be lucky to be able to purchase a home. Let's estimate about $600,000 for a decent home. With a downpayment of $100,000 (which would take a real long time to save up while renting for $2-3K/month), and a mortgage at the current average of 5.30%, they could come away with a 30-year mortgage at $2776/month. Keep in mind this is paying almost exactly $1,000,000 for a $600,000 home. Now, because their income is so high ($100K, very wealthy) they can expect to be in the upper tax bracket. Not just federally, but state-wise. This is because california has a progressive tax system, where the wealthy people (and $100K is wealthy, isn't it?) pay the majority of the taxes, in terms of a percentage of their income! All said and done, this family would require a skillfull tax advisor to get their annual tax burden down to $40,000. So now they have $60,000 left, of which they would already be paying ~$3000/month for their house (homeowner's insurance, etc.). So that leaves... $100,00 - $40,000 - $24,000 = $36,000
Now, I'm going to go ahead and PRETEND that they don't have to pay for their own medical insurance. Wealthy people should pay for the medical insurance of those who make under $100,000 a year, not the other way around, RIGHT?
So let's go ahead and say this family needs two vehicles, both costing approx $20,000. So let's do a loan for $40,000, assuming the national average of 6.51% for a 48month loan. This comes out to payments of approx $949/month for both vehi
Microsoft, with Bill Gates as their spiritual leader, is an up-and-coming religion. They're already almost as rich and powerful as the Vatican.
Linux, with Linux Torvalds as their spiritual leader, is also a religion now. They're the new atheists, heretics, agnostics, humanists, and pretty much anything else that'll get you burned at the steak.
Slashdot Mirror
That's like saying that, now that slavery is over, blacks need to start worrying about food and shelter at this point, and quit worrying about the job market.
Most Iraqis HAVE shelter. Most have food. What they need is normal life, good jobs, internet access, a continually improving educational system, and all the bush-bashers to quit HOPING they fail (just to make Bush look bad).
What they also need is for the small minority of violent activists to sit the fuck down and take part in the rebuilding process. If they get violence down, prove they're stable, and then demand the US goes home... They can! And they'll have more than enough international support to make it happen. What they're doing is guranteeing that there will be a US military presence there forever. It also gurantees that america gets to fight the terrorist battle over there. As long as terrorists are flocking to Iraq and sending money there, they're of little actual danger to the US.
Eventually terrorists will lose in Iraq. Which organization do you really think is more distracted with it? The million+ man Department of Defense, or the small band of Al Qaeda fighters, who are trying to run for their lives, recruit new people, stop the US from finding and taking their funding, send support to insurgencies in both Iraq and Afghanistan, make deals with other terrorist organizations, AND train new people to carry out attacks ALL while trying to plan and execute attacks against the US as well as the rest of the world? Honestly. I think it has to be Al Qaeda that is distracted at this point. Either way it's not a bad strategy for the US, although I think it would've been better for this to be done in Iran than Iraq... But hey, I'm not paid to make these decisions.
Ok, all of that aside again, having a proper internet system and online presence is vital to MANY industries. Ignoring the insurgency, communications is one of the biggest problems in Iraq these days. Under 56% of male Iraqis are literate. Increased internet access, and an online presence for Iraqi companies, can only benefit the country. They currently have under 700,000 telephone lines (including mobile phones) and approximately 25,000 internet users.
I'm amazed, in a place like slashdot, there aren't more people saying "Give them internet access, give them cyber cafes, and give them books!" These are the new bedrocks of society.
The french integrated those into their combat uniforms a long time ago.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Seriously, who says that?
That all depends on who assassinates Hitler, and whether that person can use it to take power. If it was someone from the military, they would have been likely to get a good leader, such as Rommel.
If it was someone from the SS, well, it would've been a lot worse than Hitler. The only two things that saved europe were the blood of the allies and the insanity of Hitler. An intelligent, charismatic leader (who knew to listen to his generals) replacing Hitler could well have sealed the fate of much of Europe.
That being said, I feel even democracy over time leads to a kakistocracy. Eventually things become corrupt enough that the vast majority of those in power are corrupt/evil.
But by then computers will be so large and so expensive that only the ten richest people in the world will be able to afford them.
I assure you we don't stone people to death here. If they were going to put me in jail for six months, it wouldn't surprise me if the US did send me. And I'd somewhat expect it. I mean, honestly, who doesn't know that it's illegal there? Who doesn't know that pot is a controlled substance in America? If it's being done as civil disobedience to try to get the law changed, don't whine about the fact that you get caught. Go to jail and let people feel sorry for you.
But my last sentence was "In fact, I'd be breaking american law, thanks to that little customs declaration form you have to fill out when you're mailing something."
There's a difference between not knowing what's legal in a country and knowing something is illegal in a country and trying to find ways around customs.
Now I don't remember from TFA, if the guy genuinely thought it was legal in the states, filled out the customs form saying "10 marijuna seeds" etc. then I don't think he should be in any trouble at all. If he knew, but figured mailing it would be safe as long as he lied on the customs labels, then yes, he broke laws. Sure, I think the laws are stupid and archane, but I don't want a precedent of "if it's a controlled substance you can just mail it here with impunity" to be set.
Its' is never valid?!
What about my cousin, John Its, and his wife, Ashley Its. Surely their house could be referred to as "The Its'".
Or should I say Its's?
Now what if I told you that, in a way its is just short for itis? I mean, that's why we use the apostrophe in possessive, because a letter was omited. "John's Olde Shope" used to be written as "Johnis Olde Shope". Then you bloody "modern" people came around and decided to just up and change everything, and the possessive "is" went the way of the brave frenchman. I guess what I was trying to get at is that the apostrophe isn't to denote posession, but rather to denote a missing letter. It still is, really, you just stopped using the long form. Hence
Correctly placed apostrophes:
"John's hat" (Johnis)
"It's (It is) going to rain today"
"The Its' place (referring to Mr. and Mrs. Its, short for Its's)"
Terribly wrongly incorrectly placed apostrophes:
"Put this back in it's place" (its! no missing letter)
"CD's for sale" (no missing letter. not needed)
"'" (Never put an apostrophe in quotes like that, it's hard to read in most fonts. It's better to be grammatically incorrect, damnit)
No apostrophe needed:
"Put this back in its place"
"CDs for sale"
"My cousins are coming over for dinner"
I'm out of ideas to end this post, so I will be ending it briefly and leave you hanging.
Calling yourself a Hacker will be misunderstood by the general public forever.
Yeah, but it's a great way to get laid in bars!
The viruses that do destroy their hosts aren't very successfull, so they don't spread too far.
Is this why humans haven't colonized the moon yet?
I see little honor in the living dying for one's country. I see considerable honor in the dying living for theirs. The difference is important. The former is a waste, the latter is devotion.
As poetic as that sounds, I have to say it's obvious you're clueless about what it really means.
To begin with, "dying for one's country" is a hell of a lot harder. You know exactly what you're getting into, but you have a choice. You know full well that you could go do something else, live it up, and pursue a very happy life without doing it. You've probably already seen some of your friends die, and know your death will probably be as excruciating and premature as deaths come. This is, by definition, willfully choosing to die (or at least take the risk, knowing that it is probable), which goes against all natural reason and instinct. This is one of the hardest choices to make, to go against one's self-preservation. People do it for many different reasons. Some do it because of their families. Some do it because of their religious beliefs. Some do it for their country. Some do it so they won't let their buddies down. If people just wanted to waste their lives away they'd go get themselves addicted to heroine, or just go ahead and commit suicide. Even if you see dying for one's country as a giant waste of life, you have to recognize the fact that people who do it work harder than anyone else at wasting their lives. And they tend to believe whatever reason they have.
I give up. Hopefully you see the point.
Fucking officers.
Don't forget shell access.
And anonymous ftp would be nice, too.
Ok, this is the last time you'll ever hear me praise Zonk, but, I'll quit complaining if you never bring Katz back.
Deal?
Why settle for 50mbps DSL? For just $70/month you can get 100mbps fibre here.
I think you're missing the point.
As Americans, we value and respect freedom. We even encourage it! Its simply that, under our definitions, freedom ends where the moral beliefs of the most conservative person in a society begin.
In all seriousness, as much as I agree on his views on dope, smuggling goods into a country is illegal damned near everywhere. There are all sorts of international treaties for this. An american would get in trouble for constantly shipping porn into saudi arabia just as a canadian would get in trouble for shipping marijuana into america. A russian would also get in trouble for bringing radioactive material into the US. You can't simply say "Well, yes, he was trying to smuggle controlled substances into that country, but if that country didn't want them there, their customs service should have worked harder!"
Imagine if you caught me, an american, mailing all sorts of things that offend you into canada. Sure, I didn't cross the border with it, but I sure as hell did break canadian law! In fact, I'd be breaking american law, thanks to that little customs declaration form you have to fill out when you're mailing something.
The only intelligent, well-thought-out, non-blaming post I've seen on this topic all day!
I agree with you. Though I wouldn't mind seeing the Paris Hilton version, either.
If only I had more mod points and you weren't already at 5.
Excuse my non-linguistic-babble, but I'm sick as hell and not feeling technical. I don't know all the languages of the planet, but, of the ones I know , english seems to have the most adjectives. I could be wrong, but I've had a hell of a time trying to translate documents from english and think of words that carry the same meaning as words like "exquisite".
Speaking of tenses, though, Tagalog is a rather interesting language in this aspect. They mainly use syllable duplication, then use words basically equivalent to "already" and "still" for the aspect.
A simple set of examples:
Pumunta si Eric sa dagat. (Eric went to the beach)
Pumupunta si Eric sa dagat. (Eric goes to the beach).
Pupunta si Eric sa dagat. (Eric will go to the beach).
Pupunta na si Eric sa dagat bago alas 12 na. (Eric will have gone to the beach by the time it is noon already).
Anyways, *I* find it interesting...
Hell, I didn't even read that as Dave not wanting John to date her!
I figured it meant "Well, she's already had two kids, so you know she'll put out!"
Or possibly a "Go for the kids instead" or a "you're going to have to deal with her kids too" or any of those choices. And yes, you're very correct.
Thank you for defending the air force, but you're rather incorrect.
The air force has a large fleet of helicopters, and they are frequently utilized by pararescue men (among the best swimmers in the military) in domestic search and rescue operations. There are a lot of articles on the work they did after the tsunami. The air force also has quite a few large and heavy vehicles (very important in maintaining air craft, transporting equipment, and transporting personnel).
I'm not sure why people are coming up with these conspiracy theories. The AF rescued 221 people on August 31st alone link.
Here's some more info from a different link:
In addition, about 100 Airmen and four Pave Hawks from the 55th Rescue Squadron at Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz., will depart Sept. 2 for Jackson where they will stage while conducting search and rescue missions.
Two Air Force Reserve Command C-5 Galaxy aircrews from the 439th Airlift Wing at Westover Air Reserve Base, Mass., flew a cross-country mission Aug. 30 to March ARB, Calif., to pick up rescue teams and supplies to help the victims of the hurricane. A third C-5 assigned to the New York Air National Guard's 105th Airlift Group also joined the airlift effort.
Another C-5 from the 60th Air Mobility Wing at Travis AFB, Calif., and a C-17 from the 305th AMW at McGuire AFB, N.J., transported tanker airlift control elements and contingency support groups to Gulfport and New Orleans respectively.
A C-130 Hercules from the 403rd Wing at Keesler AFB, Miss., flying out of Asheville, N.C., returned home to deliver supplies to the base hospital.
The 908th AW at Maxwell AFB, Ala., geared up two C-130s, aircrews and aeromedical evacuation people to help move people.
The 5th Combat Communications Group at Robins AFB, Ga., left for Keesler AFB and New Orleans on Sept. 1. The group members provided Keesler and a makeshift hospital in New Orleans with much-needed communications networks. A priority of the relief mission is to provide public telephone capabilities to the base and medical facility, said Col. John Lent, 5th CCG commander. The 5th will set up voice data communications, e-mail and air traffic control communications. The group is also packing additional loads of communications equipment for quick response to any additional needs for the relief effort.
Two aeromedical evacuation crews from the 932nd Airlift Wing at Scott AFB, Ill., flew out Sept. 1. They will enter a medical staging area and put their skills to work helping move patients where needed. The aeromedical crews took supplies with them including litters, heart monitors, ventilators, power converters, portable oxygen, assorted medicines and bandages.
A C-9A aircraft is also being flown by the Air Force Reserve wing to shuttle two active-duty medical teams to New Orleans.
"This is a difficult time for those directly affected by the wrath of Hurricane Katrina. Our medical crews will join with other agencies on the ground to give what medical aid they can, and make a positive difference in the lives of our fellow Americans," said Col. Maryanne Miller, 932nd AW Operations Group commander.
States like North Dakota get over twice as much as they are taxed. In fact, all of the welfare states are red states. Where do you think the "war in Iraq" money is SPENT?! It's spent in the states! It's spent on paying civilians or contractors to do jobs for the military. It's spent buying equipment, bombs, fuels, rockets, ammunition, airplanes, etc. This is all (well, maybe not the fuel) purchased in the United States. Under different administrations it shifts to who actually receives this money.
California, housing some of the largest arms developers in the world, should be receiving a lot of that money, but it's not.
The system was designed to work so that yes, each state pays taxes to the federal government, and then the federal government spents the money on whatever it needs to do its job. So some money would be spent on hiring people to maintain federal buildings, some would be spent on paying the military, more would be spent on buying equipment and uniforms for the military, more money would be spent on the salaries of all of the government workers. But if these government workers work in an office in San Francisco, all of that money goes back to the state. Those workers are going to buy groceries, buy a house, pay property taxes, etc. So the states are supposed to get most of the money back so that there is not a drain on their economy. Instead, you have states that are footing the bill to prop up the economies of other states! New York is hit far worse than California in this matter, but both are getting screwed.
As much as I disagree with you entirely... and I really mean the idea of wealth redistribution through taxation fucking infuriates me, your request for more interesting statistics is RIGHT on the dot!
From CA Commerce dept website:
- $1.4 Trillion Gross State Product
- Fifth largest economy in the world
- Largest state economy in the U.S.
- State's economy is 13% of GDP
Now, keep in mind that California has many EXTREMELY HIGH COST OF LIVING areas such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, Silcion Valley, etc. These areas are responsible for a lot of income, but are also very expensive to live in. The federal tax system doesn't properly adjust to that. Where I grew up, making $100,000 a year meant you MIGHT be able to afford having your own house if you managed your money well. Other places I've lived, $40,000 a year was good money, you could own your own house and car, etc, and of course the federal tax burden on such an income is significantly lower.
So, I personally feel that living in california is a higher tax burden, despite what all the statistics seem to say! But here is a great link with information on that:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html
spreadsheet here
Now THEY say we pay 19.6% of the federal taxes, which ranks us as #10.
But, and here is the big difference, California doesn't get it's share of federal money. In 2002, California paid $58 billion more to Washington than it received. This includes federal salaries in california, grants, etc. California only got 77% of the money back in some way. This is probably mostly attributable to the large base of defense contractors and some major military bases.
$58B might not sound like a lot of money for such a large state, but keep in mind the total state taxes paid every year totals to only $130B. If california received that extra $14B the budget would be balanced again.
I strongly recommend you also read http://www.caltax.org/research/taxburdn.htm which does a great job of explaining why the simple tax burden measurements used above are terribly ineffective.
A typical "Rich" family
To sum it all up, a family of five making $100,000 in Los Angeles (at least the area I lived) would be lucky to be able to purchase a home. Let's estimate about $600,000 for a decent home. With a downpayment of $100,000 (which would take a real long time to save up while renting for $2-3K/month), and a mortgage at the current average of 5.30%, they could come away with a 30-year mortgage at $2776/month. Keep in mind this is paying almost exactly $1,000,000 for a $600,000 home. Now, because their income is so high ($100K, very wealthy) they can expect to be in the upper tax bracket. Not just federally, but state-wise. This is because california has a progressive tax system, where the wealthy people (and $100K is wealthy, isn't it?) pay the majority of the taxes, in terms of a percentage of their income! All said and done, this family would require a skillfull tax advisor to get their annual tax burden down to $40,000. So now they have $60,000 left, of which they would already be paying ~$3000/month for their house (homeowner's insurance, etc.). So that leaves...
$100,00 - $40,000 - $24,000 = $36,000
Now, I'm going to go ahead and PRETEND that they don't have to pay for their own medical insurance. Wealthy people should pay for the medical insurance of those who make under $100,000 a year, not the other way around, RIGHT?
So let's go ahead and say this family needs two vehicles, both costing approx $20,000. So let's do a loan for $40,000, assuming the national average of 6.51% for a 48month loan. This comes out to payments of approx $949/month for both vehi
As much as I dislike liberals overall, I'd say George W Bush is the new King of Wealth Redistribution.
He hasn't exactly made government smaller, has he?
I'd hire them in a heartbeat! Creativity is a valuable skill, and their experience will certainly be useful!
I guess you're missing the point.
Microsoft, with Bill Gates as their spiritual leader, is an up-and-coming religion. They're already almost as rich and powerful as the Vatican.
Linux, with Linux Torvalds as their spiritual leader, is also a religion now. They're the new atheists, heretics, agnostics, humanists, and pretty much anything else that'll get you burned at the steak.
Mmmmm steak.