But the largest deficit spending happens when we have a Republican president and Democrat Congress. I don't know what that means, except that they're all spending too much of our money
"Under the law," he declared himself a combatant, which made him a legal target of military forces. There's no requirement in the law of war to have a trial before you can shoot at someone during combat.
Even if the methodology is poor, the conclusion might be correct.
What? If the methodology is poor, how can you trust the conclusion?
when it comes to Mann, Jones, Hansen, and co. those guys have repeatedly been shown to have used poor methodology
Actually, they haven't.
The parent has already listed several examples. Wishing they didn't exist doesn't make them go away.
As for the stations, you should read Watt's paper, in which he answers the questions you asked. Many of the sites were set up in suitable locations, then were encroached upon later, making the sites unsuitable. But, those sites were NOT compensated for. When taken as a whole, the stations have a margin of error greater than the temperature change they are said to demonstrate.
All true. But this ruling does not abridge anyone's freedom to say whatever they like. The issue is about libel; you can say whatever you like, but if you make an untrue statement that causes damage to another person, you may have to make restitution. This judge ruled that claiming to be a journalist doesn't protect you from being held accountable for that damage.
Absolutely right. However, Thomas Paine didn't simply print "King George is a thief and a liar." He made a case based on facts that reasonably supported that conclusion. Just because someone has a computer does not grant them the right to make false assertions against another. Free speech does not mean free from responsibility.
Money does not equal value. If I value the tire more than the money I'm trading for it, then it's a gain for me. Since Goodyear values the money more than the tire, it's a gain for them.
That's how the free market is supposed to work. The final price of an item is determined by the value placed on it by both the seller and the buyer.
Re:Then Why Are We Seeing the Same Negative Effect
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 2
All this talk about Reagan's deficit spending, Clinton's deficit spending, and Bush's deficit spending is very interesting. But why is it that no one wants to talk about Obama's deficit spending?
He is on pace to double Bush's spending, and triple the per-year deficit spending.
Let's stop arguing about who is worse, and concede that they are all to blame. Then let's get on with finding a way to build budgets closer to $$OUT = $$IN.
There are organizations like Fox that feel the need to make up their stories and editorialize all over the place, but to call them "journalists" is misleading and quite dishonest.
You're trolling, right?
Or do you just think that those facts that don't fit your opinions must be fabricated?
I believe the GP's point was that the school's job is to teach the kids while they are in school. What they do outside of school is the responsibility of their parents, not the school.
Given that churches aren't taxed, religion already receives more government funding than science.
So what tax is levied on science?
I find it interesting that you think that no tax equals government funding. I guess we should all be greatful to the Government for whatever it lets us keep from our paychecks.
Agreed. When I was a kid, it was somewhat difficult to get things I "shouldn't" have without my parents finding out. It mostly involved enlisting the help of someone old enough to buy the cigarettes/beer/porn.
That is not the case today. Kids can easily get digital products from the comfort of their bedroom, with little chance of alerting mom & dad taht something suspicious is going on (no need to explain the new 22yo 'friend'). If the law requires you to be 18 to purchase explicit magazines, then why not explicit digital products?
The goal is not to do the job for parents, but to help the parents do their job.
the USA has privatised vast parts of the infrastructure of its society.
The USA has not privatized it's infrastructure; most of it was never public.
For human rights to be preserved in the USA, human rights must now be observed by private industry.
How does burning a book violate anyone's human rights? The whole point is FREEDOM, which applies to each of us (as individuals or as private entities) equally. Imposing one person or group's belief of what is 'right' on another is not freedom.
Why not? Assuming that an external entity (government or otherwise) could grant one "happiness" (caveats about actual ability of doing so and different individuals' definitions of same being applied, etc.), why would you not want this external entity to do so?
Because human beings cannot be "given" happiness. That is something that can only be achieved. It is human nature to view that something obtained for free (no work, no sacrifice, etc.) has a much lower value than something that was earned through one's own efforts.
Give a man a fish, and he'll wait around until you to give him another, and curse you when it isn't to his liking.
You've obviously never worked in the government. You are absolutely correct about the insanely inefficient bureaucracy. That same bureaucracy makes such a massive, well-coordinated conspiratorial plot implausible, but very nicely allows for individual abuses of the system.
Slashdot Mirror
But the largest deficit spending happens when we have a Republican president and Democrat Congress. I don't know what that means, except that they're all spending too much of our money
OBL declared war against America. As the parent stated, once there is a decared war, the international law of war takes over, and civil and criminal laws no longer apply.
"Under the law," he declared himself a combatant, which made him a legal target of military forces. There's no requirement in the law of war to have a trial before you can shoot at someone during combat.
But... how would we know the head was OBL's???
So you'd prefer that all companies were dismal failures that cannot turn a profit? No products, no services, no jobs...... how would that work out?
Wow... Windows for Workgroups. And "Office" 6.0, on 70-some disks.
Even if the methodology is poor, the conclusion might be correct.
What? If the methodology is poor, how can you trust the conclusion?
when it comes to Mann, Jones, Hansen, and co. those guys have repeatedly been shown to have used poor methodology
Actually, they haven't.
The parent has already listed several examples. Wishing they didn't exist doesn't make them go away.
As for the stations, you should read Watt's paper, in which he answers the questions you asked. Many of the sites were set up in suitable locations, then were encroached upon later, making the sites unsuitable. But, those sites were NOT compensated for. When taken as a whole, the stations have a margin of error greater than the temperature change they are said to demonstrate.
All true. But this ruling does not abridge anyone's freedom to say whatever they like. The issue is about libel; you can say whatever you like, but if you make an untrue statement that causes damage to another person, you may have to make restitution. This judge ruled that claiming to be a journalist doesn't protect you from being held accountable for that damage.
Absolutely right. However, Thomas Paine didn't simply print "King George is a thief and a liar." He made a case based on facts that reasonably supported that conclusion. Just because someone has a computer does not grant them the right to make false assertions against another. Free speech does not mean free from responsibility.
That's how the free market is supposed to work. The final price of an item is determined by the value placed on it by both the seller and the buyer.
All this talk about Reagan's deficit spending, Clinton's deficit spending, and Bush's deficit spending is very interesting. But why is it that no one wants to talk about Obama's deficit spending? He is on pace to double Bush's spending, and triple the per-year deficit spending.
Let's stop arguing about who is worse, and concede that they are all to blame. Then let's get on with finding a way to build budgets closer to $$OUT = $$IN.
"Tamper proof" is only claimed in the summary, not TFA. This is intended to be "a secure end node from trusted media" for "general telecommuting use."
It's not supposed to be a bullet-proof connection to super-secret networks, just a better way to check email from outside the office.
You're trolling, right?
Or do you just think that those facts that don't fit your opinions must be fabricated?
I believe the GP's point was that the school's job is to teach the kids while they are in school. What they do outside of school is the responsibility of their parents, not the school.
I don't see how the youth crime rate is relevant.
Given that churches aren't taxed, religion already receives more government funding than science.
So what tax is levied on science?
I find it interesting that you think that no tax equals government funding. I guess we should all be greatful to the Government for whatever it lets us keep from our paychecks.
Are they also going to include technology that rips the sandwich out of your hand if you try to eat while driving?
So, how will more laws will fix those companies that blatantly disregard the current laws?
Sometimes life is a hard teacher.
Agreed. When I was a kid, it was somewhat difficult to get things I "shouldn't" have without my parents finding out. It mostly involved enlisting the help of someone old enough to buy the cigarettes/beer/porn.
That is not the case today. Kids can easily get digital products from the comfort of their bedroom, with little chance of alerting mom & dad taht something suspicious is going on (no need to explain the new 22yo 'friend'). If the law requires you to be 18 to purchase explicit magazines, then why not explicit digital products?
The goal is not to do the job for parents, but to help the parents do their job.
the USA has privatised vast parts of the infrastructure of its society.
The USA has not privatized it's infrastructure; most of it was never public.
For human rights to be preserved in the USA, human rights must now be observed by private industry.
How does burning a book violate anyone's human rights? The whole point is FREEDOM, which applies to each of us (as individuals or as private entities) equally. Imposing one person or group's belief of what is 'right' on another is not freedom.
Why not? Assuming that an external entity (government or otherwise) could grant one "happiness" (caveats about actual ability of doing so and different individuals' definitions of same being applied, etc.), why would you not want this external entity to do so?
Because human beings cannot be "given" happiness. That is something that can only be achieved. It is human nature to view that something obtained for free (no work, no sacrifice, etc.) has a much lower value than something that was earned through one's own efforts. Give a man a fish, and he'll wait around until you to give him another, and curse you when it isn't to his liking.
You've obviously never worked in the government. You are absolutely correct about the insanely inefficient bureaucracy. That same bureaucracy makes such a massive, well-coordinated conspiratorial plot implausible, but very nicely allows for individual abuses of the system.
If you define "cheap" as paying the least for the most tangible value. I'm sure most people do not have the luxury of spending their money otherwise.