That question is also your answer. There is a very large chain of people involved in the financial crisis, and it's unlikely that any single one of them can be apportioned enough blame to go to jail.
Thanks for that. I enjoyed reading that this morning. FWIW, I tried pretty hard in English classes, to the point that I'm pretty sure I passed a few only for class participation. Turns out that "how do you know that's a symbol and not really just a cigar" is a pretty hard question. Never got a good answer to it.
The weird thing is that the kids who hated math because it was useless outside of school seemed to love English class, which really is useless outside of school. Somehow they're able to get over the barrier of "school stuff is only useful in school" for English, but once they get into math class they have no imagination at all.
I suspect it really is incuriosity. They like English class because it's easy, you can make up whatever you want, and it doesn't have to be right because there is no right answer (although I seem to be very good at coming up with wrong answers somehow). If they applied some critical thinking to the situation, they'd realize it's a waste of time. Math on the other hand requires you to think.
One big government idiot over another big government idiot. Why should I vote Obama? It's obviously not going to prevent things like the NDAA getting passed. So what's the point?
Of course, if most people were required to bear complete financial responsibility for an accident, they'd be unable to drive. That would grind the economy to a halt. The real solution to this problem is universal health care. If you get into an accident, it shouldn't matter how wealthy the person at fault is.
I think that the real issue is that things are taught in a way that separates them in the heads of the pupils.
Are they? I remember when I was in school a lot of kids used to complain that math was irrelevant to daily life. And then we learned word problems, and they complained about how awful word problems were. Somehow it never got through to them that word problems were exactly what they were asking for, a demonstration of how to apply math to real life.
I don't think that students are not taught how math applies to real life. I think they are merely incurious bastards.
Doing sums in your head has absolutely nothing to do with numeracy. Understanding the principles is far, far more important than being able to crunch through the mechanics.
If you actually have to do sums in your head, just estimate. If it's not important enough to bother getting a calculator, your precision isn't going to matter that much.
This is not true. Only the very largest and most popular athletic programs are profitable. Consider this from Reason magazine:
Most college athletic departments are a net drain on the budget. Three years ago, the NCAA issued a report that found most athletic departments operate in the red. A more recent analysis by Bloomberg found the same thing: 46 of the 53 schools it looked at subsidized their sports programs. The money usually comes from sources such as student activity fees, such as that charged at Virginia Commonwealth University. Earlier this year VCU jacked up its fee by $50 to help fund the Rams basketball program.
Why would young people enter science and engineering when they can go into management and finance? Then they can take the credit and pay that would have been taken from them if they had gone into STEM.
called it "ill-conceived" in his signing statement
Signing statements are meaningless. To whatever extent they have meaning, they are unconstitutional. Laws are written by the legislature.
and he has now issued executive orders curtailing its effect
Which will do absolutely nothing to prevent future presidents from recinding those orders and detaining anyone he wants for as long as he wants for whatever reason he wants.
Of course, as soon as Obama is out of office, be that in one year or five, the next president can erase all that and come up with their own guidelines
Exactly. Obama signed the law for political leverage. Now he can fear monger more effectively about what a republican president would do. Such cynical politicking with our basic liberties should not be rewarded.
He did the absolute best he could do to diminish the effect of the law, but there was nothing he could do to stop it. If you don't like it, then don't sit out the midterms. The idiot "liberals" who handed Congress over to the Repubs in 2010 by staying home are responsible for every bit of harm the GOP has done.
Bullshit. It was clear by 2010 that the Obama was no friend of liberty, and neither were any other Democrats. Any continued show of support for Democrats would have legitimized this, and every other horrible policy foreign and domestic Obama is responsible for.
If you want liberal voters, you have to govern in a way that's distinguishable from a neocon. Obama hasn't and he doesn't deserve a single liberal vote.
The first is that a veto not only would have been over ridden by both houses, but would have been EASILY over ridden.
That's no excuse. Make the fascists fight for fascism in public, where everyone can see.
Now, you can always make the argument that it would have raised his standing among members of the public to veto it... but I'm not so sure.
I don't care. He violated his oath to defend the constitution. He is totally unfit for office.
And that's pretty much political suicide.
That's the fundamental problem with the American system. Anyone who's working to save their hide, instead of fixing the utterly broken system is not a friend of freedom. He could have used this opportunity to illustrate how broken the system is. People don't like riders.
Instead, he *chose* to sell out the American people and betray his oath to the constitution. Hang the bastard.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no reason a constitutional republic would be better than a constitutional democracy.
That question is also your answer. There is a very large chain of people involved in the financial crisis, and it's unlikely that any single one of them can be apportioned enough blame to go to jail.
This is what RICO is for.
Thanks for that. I enjoyed reading that this morning. FWIW, I tried pretty hard in English classes, to the point that I'm pretty sure I passed a few only for class participation. Turns out that "how do you know that's a symbol and not really just a cigar" is a pretty hard question. Never got a good answer to it.
Smoking marijuana is wholly innocent conduct. Can we get that one declared unconstitutional too?
The funny thing is, I remember computer camps being common in the 80s. Somehow as computers got more popular, computer camps got less so.
The weird thing is that the kids who hated math because it was useless outside of school seemed to love English class, which really is useless outside of school. Somehow they're able to get over the barrier of "school stuff is only useful in school" for English, but once they get into math class they have no imagination at all.
I suspect it really is incuriosity. They like English class because it's easy, you can make up whatever you want, and it doesn't have to be right because there is no right answer (although I seem to be very good at coming up with wrong answers somehow). If they applied some critical thinking to the situation, they'd realize it's a waste of time. Math on the other hand requires you to think.
One big government idiot over another big government idiot. Why should I vote Obama? It's obviously not going to prevent things like the NDAA getting passed. So what's the point?
Why do you think she's a cashier at 50?
Of course, if most people were required to bear complete financial responsibility for an accident, they'd be unable to drive. That would grind the economy to a halt. The real solution to this problem is universal health care. If you get into an accident, it shouldn't matter how wealthy the person at fault is.
Because software as a service is fundamentally incompatible with your software freedoms.
I think that the real issue is that things are taught in a way that separates them in the heads of the pupils.
Are they? I remember when I was in school a lot of kids used to complain that math was irrelevant to daily life. And then we learned word problems, and they complained about how awful word problems were. Somehow it never got through to them that word problems were exactly what they were asking for, a demonstration of how to apply math to real life.
I don't think that students are not taught how math applies to real life. I think they are merely incurious bastards.
Doing sums in your head has absolutely nothing to do with numeracy. Understanding the principles is far, far more important than being able to crunch through the mechanics.
If you actually have to do sums in your head, just estimate. If it's not important enough to bother getting a calculator, your precision isn't going to matter that much.
Athletic departments usually sustain themselves.
This is not true. Only the very largest and most popular athletic programs are profitable. Consider this from Reason magazine:
Is never a good idea for the purchaser. This doesn't change when it's video games instead of spreadsheets or databases.
The solution is to make finance professionals accountable for malpractice too.
Why would young people enter science and engineering when they can go into management and finance? Then they can take the credit and pay that would have been taken from them if they had gone into STEM.
Obama opposed the law
Signing a law is not opposition.
called it "ill-conceived" in his signing statement
Signing statements are meaningless. To whatever extent they have meaning, they are unconstitutional. Laws are written by the legislature.
and he has now issued executive orders curtailing its effect
Which will do absolutely nothing to prevent future presidents from recinding those orders and detaining anyone he wants for as long as he wants for whatever reason he wants.
Of course, as soon as Obama is out of office, be that in one year or five, the next president can erase all that and come up with their own guidelines
Exactly. Obama signed the law for political leverage. Now he can fear monger more effectively about what a republican president would do. Such cynical politicking with our basic liberties should not be rewarded.
He did the absolute best he could do to diminish the effect of the law, but there was nothing he could do to stop it. If you don't like it, then don't sit out the midterms. The idiot "liberals" who handed Congress over to the Repubs in 2010 by staying home are responsible for every bit of harm the GOP has done.
Bullshit. It was clear by 2010 that the Obama was no friend of liberty, and neither were any other Democrats. Any continued show of support for Democrats would have legitimized this, and every other horrible policy foreign and domestic Obama is responsible for.
If you want liberal voters, you have to govern in a way that's distinguishable from a neocon. Obama hasn't and he doesn't deserve a single liberal vote.
The first is that a veto not only would have been over ridden by both houses, but would have been EASILY over ridden.
That's no excuse. Make the fascists fight for fascism in public, where everyone can see.
Now, you can always make the argument that it would have raised his standing among members of the public to veto it... but I'm not so sure.
I don't care. He violated his oath to defend the constitution. He is totally unfit for office.
And that's pretty much political suicide.
That's the fundamental problem with the American system. Anyone who's working to save their hide, instead of fixing the utterly broken system is not a friend of freedom. He could have used this opportunity to illustrate how broken the system is. People don't like riders.
Instead, he *chose* to sell out the American people and betray his oath to the constitution. Hang the bastard.
Your car is already an electromechanical device. EMP would disable modern gasoline vehicles just as surely as it would electric vehicles.
Saying people are "stupid and evil" isn't really accurate, though; call them selfish and hopelessly tribalistic and we'll be in agreement.
What's the difference?
You should go to your local Obama campaign headquarters and tell them that.
That's easy enough to accomodate. Stop pressing for draconian censorship legislation and this will never happen again.
It doesn't have to be real to be a good example. See also, Jesus.
If Stratfor isn't taken seriously, how do they charge so much?