Private home sales in the US usually come with lots of inspections of various things: 1) Most buyers demand a physical home inspection by a professional home inspector, looking at physical condition of the property and the mechanical systems. But, no one is an expert at everything, and most home inspection agreements disclaim liability for missing major issues. 2) Most mortgage companies/banks require an appraisal of value before agreeing to the loan. Ironically, most appraisals find the value of the home is just slightly higher than the agreed upon sale price. This is the issue being discussed here. 3) The mortgage company can also demand its own on-site inspections, including such things as radon inspection, pest inspection (termites, carpenter ants, etc), lead paint certification, asbestos certification, etc. 4) The mortgage company will also demand a number of legal investigations: deep historical inspection of title, liens, outstanding permit issues, etc. They'll also demand associated title insurance to protect them if the title search misses something. Most buyers also purchase their own title insurance. 5) Mortgagers also demand that you pay for home insurance for at least the duration of the mortgage. 6) Often, the local municipality requires homes to have a certificate of occupancy, and will demand their own inspection of the home and property at sale for code and safety issues which must be fixed before occupancy by the new owners is permitted. 7) In some jurisdictions, there can be additional legal issues that need to be investigated, such as mineral rights, flood inspections, etc.
There are probably a few others that I'm forgetting.
No, the CRA requires rulemaking decisions by Executive Agencies to be submitted to Congress for review, and it provides for expedited congressional action to override that rulemaking that bypasses the normal rules of the House and Senate. Overriding the rule is done by passage of an act, and that needs a presidential signature, or a veto override by the normal means:
For a regulation to be invalidated under the CRA, the Congressional resolution of disapproval must be either signed by the President or passed over the President's veto by two thirds of both Houses of Congress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You forgot to factor in Locality adjustment. DC area base at step 10 is $126k. Additionally, federal employee benefits are very generous, including pension benefits that are generally unavailable in the comparable private sector jobs.
Except it did. The Supreme Court of the U.S. dramatically reduced the number of cases it heard—from an average of about 75 cases in previous years (and 80 in 2015) to only 25 in 2016.
That case count is incorrect. The Court's annual term starts in October. I see 67 arguments on their docket for the OT2016 term, of which 25 have already resulted in opinions. Since there are also consolidated arguments and per curiam opinions, they have accepted more than 67 cases already. And they may still add cases to the term (although that is unlikely at this point). In OT2015, they decided 82 cases, not all of which had oral arguments. They are behind their previous pace, but not by a factor of 3... more likely by about 10%. https://ballotpedia.org/Suprem...
5) On ice or other slippery roads, it is often impossible to avoid collision with breaks alone
Then you're either the conditions are too poor to drive at all, and you should stay home, or you are tailgating and driving too fast. There is never a time when you as the driver have an excuse for being unable to brake in time.
No... over the last hundred years, with improvements in public hygiene, water supplies, and vaccines, we have essentially conquered lethal childhood disease. We have effectively conquered food-borne illness. We have found effective anaesthetics and antibiotics and discovered effective methods of surgery so that essentially no one dies of minor trauma. The same techniques mean that most birth defects are now survivable.
Heart attack, cancer, etc haven't skyrocketed as causes of death because of our diet... they've skyrocketed because we now live long enough for these to be the primary things that take us out, because we've beat all the other stuff! All these diseases have (obviously) existed for millions of years, but essentially no one ever succumbed to them because they didn't live long enough!
Can most of us eat better and exercise more and eek out a few more years? Sure. But I'd much rather our situation today than that of our forbears of even a hundred years ago.
For both JFK and Newark (both of which I fly through a lot), it depends on the terminal. Newark A sucks, hard. Newark C is quite nice since the renovations. JFK 8 is also pretty nice.
I would go so far as to say they would have required the companies that recorded the data for billing purposes to remove it when the bill was paid without dispute instead of hanging on to it at all.
That's a patently silly claim. There were certainly business records in the 1790s; if they were going to outlaw keeping records after billing was concluded, don't you think they would have done that in, say, the 1790s? They pretty clearly didn't do that...
"Not subject to FOIA" is not the same as "we refuse to respond to FOIA requests".... the Administration is certainly not forbidden from providing more than is required under the law.
I don't think the UAS community is complaining about the existence of regulations, or even the need for regulations, per se. The main complaint to the FAA is that they are ready for regulations, ANY regulations, just get on with promulgating them. I'm not a drone guy, but even I recognize that the potential of UAVs is huge for fundamental changes in many fields, but the FAA has been (intentionally?) dragging its feet for _so long_ that the technical initiative is bleeding out of the US into other countries that haven't been moving slower than molasses in winter.
It needs to be paid for one way or the other... it's irreducible overhead to move the data you are asking them to move. You either pay for it with a lower effective cap or you pay a higher price per overhead-free byte. Six of one, half dozen o' the other....
Re: Just let me do brain surgery!
on
'Just Let Me Code!'
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Of course brain surgeons don't "just do" brain surgery.... in any surgery, there's a ton of pre-operative work, investigation, preparation, paperwork, practice, etc. No one just dives in and cuts open your head.... and just as no one administrator hovers over the scalpel's every move, no manager hovers over every keystroke, either.
Endowments return significant operating funds in up years, and sales from the endowment assets smooth out what would otherwise be significant operating losses in the down years; they decouple university operating finances from the business cycle and local politics. They _stabilize_ finances. They can also used as collateral allow for much larger debt funded initiatives to be floated. I dearly wish my university employer had a large endowment....
Put another way: you don't eat your seed corn. The endowment is the seed corn. Selling off an endowment for short term, short sighted "it seems wrong to have so much money!" would be criminal
Arresting an occupant for refusing a search would violate the fourth amendment, and poison the search. That's well settled case law, and not even remotely what this case was about.
Utility workers don't have the right to consent, because they are not legal occupants. They can, however, report anything they suspect is illegal to the police, who then need to obtain consent or a warrant. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.
Minors generally can't legally consent to anything... that's why they need parent/guardian signatures on permission slips to do even the most trivial things at school. They certainly can't consent to a warrantless search.
The legal definition of "occupant" is well settled law. This case makes not changes to that definition. If you think this case is going to cause you problems, you probably already have them....
Slashdot Mirror
Private home sales in the US usually come with lots of inspections of various things:
1) Most buyers demand a physical home inspection by a professional home inspector, looking at physical condition of the property and the mechanical systems. But, no one is an expert at everything, and most home inspection agreements disclaim liability for missing major issues.
2) Most mortgage companies/banks require an appraisal of value before agreeing to the loan. Ironically, most appraisals find the value of the home is just slightly higher than the agreed upon sale price. This is the issue being discussed here.
3) The mortgage company can also demand its own on-site inspections, including such things as radon inspection, pest inspection (termites, carpenter ants, etc), lead paint certification, asbestos certification, etc.
4) The mortgage company will also demand a number of legal investigations: deep historical inspection of title, liens, outstanding permit issues, etc. They'll also demand associated title insurance to protect them if the title search misses something. Most buyers also purchase their own title insurance.
5) Mortgagers also demand that you pay for home insurance for at least the duration of the mortgage.
6) Often, the local municipality requires homes to have a certificate of occupancy, and will demand their own inspection of the home and property at sale for code and safety issues which must be fixed before occupancy by the new owners is permitted.
7) In some jurisdictions, there can be additional legal issues that need to be investigated, such as mineral rights, flood inspections, etc.
There are probably a few others that I'm forgetting.
No, the CRA requires rulemaking decisions by Executive Agencies to be submitted to Congress for review, and it provides for expedited congressional action to override that rulemaking that bypasses the normal rules of the House and Senate. Overriding the rule is done by passage of an act, and that needs a presidential signature, or a veto override by the normal means:
For a regulation to be invalidated under the CRA, the Congressional resolution of disapproval must be either signed by the President or passed over the President's veto by two thirds of both Houses of Congress. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You forgot to factor in Locality adjustment. DC area base at step 10 is $126k. Additionally, federal employee benefits are very generous, including pension benefits that are generally unavailable in the comparable private sector jobs.
Or sending a train at 55mph into a block occupied by a stopped train that it should have known was there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Except it did. The Supreme Court of the U.S. dramatically reduced the number of cases it heard—from an average of about 75 cases in previous years (and 80 in 2015) to only 25 in 2016.
That case count is incorrect. The Court's annual term starts in October. I see 67 arguments on their docket for the OT2016 term, of which 25 have already resulted in opinions. Since there are also consolidated arguments and per curiam opinions, they have accepted more than 67 cases already. And they may still add cases to the term (although that is unlikely at this point). In OT2015, they decided 82 cases, not all of which had oral arguments. They are behind their previous pace, but not by a factor of 3 ... more likely by about 10%. https://ballotpedia.org/Suprem...
They already did:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
5) On ice or other slippery roads, it is often impossible to avoid collision with breaks alone
Then you're either the conditions are too poor to drive at all, and you should stay home, or you are tailgating and driving too fast. There is never a time when you as the driver have an excuse for being unable to brake in time.
No ... over the last hundred years, with improvements in public hygiene, water supplies, and vaccines, we have essentially conquered lethal childhood disease. We have effectively conquered food-borne illness. We have found effective anaesthetics and antibiotics and discovered effective methods of surgery so that essentially no one dies of minor trauma. The same techniques mean that most birth defects are now survivable.
Heart attack, cancer, etc haven't skyrocketed as causes of death because of our diet ... they've skyrocketed because we now live long enough for these to be the primary things that take us out, because we've beat all the other stuff! All these diseases have (obviously) existed for millions of years, but essentially no one ever succumbed to them because they didn't live long enough!
Can most of us eat better and exercise more and eek out a few more years? Sure. But I'd much rather our situation today than that of our forbears of even a hundred years ago.
For both JFK and Newark (both of which I fly through a lot), it depends on the terminal. Newark A sucks, hard. Newark C is quite nice since the renovations. JFK 8 is also pretty nice.
I would go so far as to say they would have required the companies that recorded the data for billing purposes to remove it when the bill was paid without dispute instead of hanging on to it at all.
That's a patently silly claim. There were certainly business records in the 1790s; if they were going to outlaw keeping records after billing was concluded, don't you think they would have done that in, say, the 1790s? They pretty clearly didn't do that...
"Not subject to FOIA" is not the same as "we refuse to respond to FOIA requests" .... the Administration is certainly not forbidden from providing more than is required under the law.
I don't think the UAS community is complaining about the existence of regulations, or even the need for regulations, per se. The main complaint to the FAA is that they are ready for regulations, ANY regulations, just get on with promulgating them. I'm not a drone guy, but even I recognize that the potential of UAVs is huge for fundamental changes in many fields, but the FAA has been (intentionally?) dragging its feet for _so long_ that the technical initiative is bleeding out of the US into other countries that haven't been moving slower than molasses in winter.
Eminent != Imminent
It needs to be paid for one way or the other ... it's irreducible overhead to move the data you are asking them to move. You either pay for it with a lower effective cap or you pay a higher price per overhead-free byte. Six of one, half dozen o' the other. ...
Of course brain surgeons don't "just do" brain surgery .... in any surgery, there's a ton of pre-operative work, investigation, preparation, paperwork, practice, etc. No one just dives in and cuts open your head.... and just as no one administrator hovers over the scalpel's every move, no manager hovers over every keystroke, either.
Endowments return significant operating funds in up years, and sales from the endowment assets smooth out what would otherwise be significant operating losses in the down years; they decouple university operating finances from the business cycle and local politics. They _stabilize_ finances. They can also used as collateral allow for much larger debt funded initiatives to be floated. I dearly wish my university employer had a large endowment....
Put another way: you don't eat your seed corn. The endowment is the seed corn. Selling off an endowment for short term, short sighted "it seems wrong to have so much money!" would be criminal
Which is more officially the Doctrine of Constitutional Avoidance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
The station and shuttle were in incompatible orbits for docking: it would have been physically impossible to get the Columbia to the station.
Arresting an occupant for refusing a search would violate the fourth amendment, and poison the search. That's well settled case law, and not even remotely what this case was about.
Warrants aren't required when consent exists. Warrants exist for those cases where no one gives consent. That's kind of the point.
"Occupant" has a long standing, well understood legal definition. It isn't "random schmoe who happens to be near the house"....
Utility workers don't have the right to consent, because they are not legal occupants. They can, however, report anything they suspect is illegal to the police, who then need to obtain consent or a warrant. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.
Minors generally can't legally consent to anything ... that's why they need parent/guardian signatures on permission slips to do even the most trivial things at school. They certainly can't consent to a warrantless search.
The legal definition of "occupant" is well settled law. This case makes not changes to that definition. If you think this case is going to cause you problems, you probably already have them ....
A four year old can't legally consent to anything.