Plenty of Muslims still in the USA and still entering the USA. Perhaps this temporary ban on immigration from a handful of countries is what you erroneously label a "ban on all Muslims". Trump used only the authority granted him under the US Constitution and laws passed by the US Congress well before he even started running for office and were also used the same way by at least his two immediate predecessors.
Plenty of transgenders still in the USA. None have been forced to leave. Perhaps you are referring to the US Military thing. The one where his immediate predecessor acted unilaterally in his last year in office to tell the military what it was going to do (kind of authoritarian/dictatorish) and Trump simply worked with the military leadership and undid that; rolling back the situation to where it had been less than a year prior and then telling the military to take whatever time they wanted to study the situation and let him know if they had valid military reasons for altering the policy. I think using the powers granted to undo dictatorial acts by ones predecessor to reset the situation and then moving forward in a non-dictatorial fashion does not really count as being a dictator. YMMV.
Since we were only "in" the Paris accords because of the signature of a single man who had never bothered to submit those accords to the Senate for ratification to make them enforceable in the US, Trumps actions were, once again, simply undoing the dictatorial actions of his immediate predecessor to reset the situation to the status quo of before his immediate predecessor was in office.
Do you have any examples where Trump "acted like a dictator" that involve him seizing power in a manner not already used many times in the past by Presidents you would claim were not using that same power in a dictatorial manner? Do you have any examples where Trump's actions were not simply undoing an action taken by his immediate predecessor where the immediate predecessor acted just as unilaterally and dictatorially?
Will you make up your damn minds. First, Trump and supporters are a bunch of communists listening to Putin. Then they are a bunch of Nazis building ovens.
Today they are back to being communists?
I remember being taught a little saying about it being very difficult to keep a lie going because it is more difficult to remember all the lies necessary to keep a lie going than it is to simply remember the truth being told.
This Trump is a communist, Trump is a fascist. Trump is a communist cycle pretty much proves that old saying correct.
Well, having the "Central Committee" run the show is a worse solution as you then having a single corporation controlling everything. I haven't seen that the European feudal model works any better.
The less control a government can take, the less power it has and the less reason for corporations to control it.
How will a small community project be taken over by a big corporation? It will only happen if the small community's government agrees or if the larger government around the small community (state or more likely federal) uses overreaching regulatory power to force the small community to acquiesce. I doubt that you can find any modern examples of a big corporation forcibly taking over a community project using hired killers and such. But making nonsense claims about the evilness of corporations sure does make a good slogan for why communism is good. We will just ignore the fact that communism results in the largest, greediest corporation possible being in charge of a country. That makes for a not so good slogan.
If the government did not have the power to grant and enforce a monopoly... Government gets that power when it gets the power to overregulate. If a government only had the power to punish a corporation for unfair business practices (like hiring hired killers to entice ranchers to give up rights of way to railroads if we want to go that far back in history for the abuses) and didn't have the power to grant the railroad exclusive access into an area in the first place...
Well, yeah. See above for that bit about Europe and fascism. The US has that little bit about being allowed to be uncommunicative with the police and it not being able to be used against for the exact reason that the British have been abusing it for well over 250 years. What do you think that quaint little war that George lost was all about? That the crown was being irresponsible with all the freedom it was handing out?
What is all this faux anger about how you will deal with a restaurant that doesn't accept cash? I have never been in a restaurant or store (grocery, furniture, bike, book, adult) or garage or anything that didn't accept cash. I haven't tried cash at a hotel for a couple of decades so I'm not sure about them.
Where are you people at that you have lots of small retail outlets refusing to take cash?
I haven't seen a Burger King or similar run out of burgers but I have seen them run out of buns and other essentials and not so essentials. BTW, they do use software to track their inventory. I worked the delivery side way back (30+ years ago) when the tracking was all done manually in little books and I've watched the technology change as my wife has been involved on the restaurant side.
Restaurants frequently run out of certain dishes. The further from burgers and reheating pre-packaged a restaurant is, the more likely it is to run out of certain dishes; the ones where the major ingredients don't have long shelf or refrigerator lives are the most susceptible to that. I don't see where data mining will help with that because, once a restaurant is fairly established, any half-decent management will have picked up on the trends (usually by tracking their inventory and usage with their accounting system or just in their head and old-fashioned books by hand). What causes problems is when they guess wrong about the unusual events like the infrequent concert down the road or being in the band of totality for a solar eclipse (frequent concerts down the road become part of the trends they can watch). Data mining won't really help these situations.
Are you claiming that your husband is 40% of the members of this site which is why 60% of us are stopped from participating in the aforementioned activity?
I suppose you disagree and believe that artists should be compelled by law to accept commissions to produce works of art promoting messages with which the artist disagrees?
Or do you think producing a wedding cake is nothing more than mixing some eggs and water into a couple of boxes of Duncan Hines and tossing the mixture into an oven for a couple of minutes and done!?
The physical presence thing makes a great deal of sense when deciding legal jurisdiction. Should states like Texas and Florida get to hold people accountable for murders committed in California and Illinois? The former states have harsher punishments than the latter states so why do we let a little thing like physical location get in the way of justice?
Likewise, if I mail something to a customer in California from my home in Wisconsin, under what legal theory does California get to claim the jurisdiction necessary to compel me, as the seller, to collect taxes on their behalf and remit them? California can require my customer in California to do all manner of things but they cannot require anything of me unless the United States Congress authorizes it and does so in a manner that is consistent across all state lines. This is really basic stuff.
From my previous example, Wisconsin could pass laws requiring me as the seller to remit a tax on the sale and I can then decide whether to raise my price to include that tax or to reduce my profit. The reason states don't do that is because they already do that with what we call "income taxes".
Well, Canada has the option of completely regulating all internet traffic entering Canada, don't they. They have complete authority to require that all traffic be decrypted and inspected before being passed to the end user just as they do with physical goods. What they do not have is any authority to compel a corporation not located within their physical boundaries to collect taxes on their behalf and remit them. It is not a "loophole" that needs closing anymore than the "loophole" that prevents the United States from requiring Canadian residents who are not US citizens from paying US income taxes.
And the same theory applies between states. If we are to allow a state like Texas to require Netflix to collect Texas sales tax from Texas customers and remit that sales tax to the State of Texas when Netlfix has no physical presence in Texas (assuming that Netflix does not operate call centers or other offices within Texas) then we must also allow the states of Utah and Wyoming to issue arrest warrants for the owners of marijuana resellers in Colorado. The same legal theory applies to both circumstances. There is absolutely nothing stopping a state like California from telling Netflix that it must remit California sales tax on all sales originating in California as that is an issue between California and business operating within California.
Yes, we all agree on that. Your state of residence has legal jurisdiction over you to compel you to pay the tax. It does not have legal jurisdiction over a corporation with no physical presence in that state to compel them to collect the tax from you and remit it to the state. This is not a "loophole". This is what prevents Utah and Wyoming from issuing warrants for the arrest of anybody consuming marijuana within the boundaries of Colorado. It really is not a difficult concept to understand.
Yes, they can pass laws stating that the act of viewing a streamed movie is taxable consumption but they cannot require the streaming service to collect the tax nor remit the tax unless the streaming company has a physical presence in the state anymore than they can require Amazon, Newegg, Cabelas, or any other catalog/online retailer to collect and remit sales tax if those companies have no physical location in the state. States have known this for a long time and ask you to pay the "use tax" on those catalog and online orders as you settle up with them every April. They also expect you to remit that tax on goods you have physically purchased in a no sales tax state or a state with a lower sales tax and brought home with you.
Slashdot Mirror
Why, will he then be accused of having triggered the Development Teams?
Yes, I have an upgrade waiting for my S5.
Yeah, because central planning never had any issues at all and always provided everything that people wanted and needed.
Plenty of Muslims still in the USA and still entering the USA. Perhaps this temporary ban on immigration from a handful of countries is what you erroneously label a "ban on all Muslims". Trump used only the authority granted him under the US Constitution and laws passed by the US Congress well before he even started running for office and were also used the same way by at least his two immediate predecessors.
Plenty of transgenders still in the USA. None have been forced to leave. Perhaps you are referring to the US Military thing. The one where his immediate predecessor acted unilaterally in his last year in office to tell the military what it was going to do (kind of authoritarian/dictatorish) and Trump simply worked with the military leadership and undid that; rolling back the situation to where it had been less than a year prior and then telling the military to take whatever time they wanted to study the situation and let him know if they had valid military reasons for altering the policy. I think using the powers granted to undo dictatorial acts by ones predecessor to reset the situation and then moving forward in a non-dictatorial fashion does not really count as being a dictator. YMMV.
Since we were only "in" the Paris accords because of the signature of a single man who had never bothered to submit those accords to the Senate for ratification to make them enforceable in the US, Trumps actions were, once again, simply undoing the dictatorial actions of his immediate predecessor to reset the situation to the status quo of before his immediate predecessor was in office.
Do you have any examples where Trump "acted like a dictator" that involve him seizing power in a manner not already used many times in the past by Presidents you would claim were not using that same power in a dictatorial manner? Do you have any examples where Trump's actions were not simply undoing an action taken by his immediate predecessor where the immediate predecessor acted just as unilaterally and dictatorially?
Pivot sprinklers
Will you make up your damn minds. First, Trump and supporters are a bunch of communists listening to Putin. Then they are a bunch of Nazis building ovens.
Today they are back to being communists?
I remember being taught a little saying about it being very difficult to keep a lie going because it is more difficult to remember all the lies necessary to keep a lie going than it is to simply remember the truth being told.
This Trump is a communist, Trump is a fascist. Trump is a communist cycle pretty much proves that old saying correct.
Well, having the "Central Committee" run the show is a worse solution as you then having a single corporation controlling everything. I haven't seen that the European feudal model works any better.
The less control a government can take, the less power it has and the less reason for corporations to control it.
How will a small community project be taken over by a big corporation? It will only happen if the small community's government agrees or if the larger government around the small community (state or more likely federal) uses overreaching regulatory power to force the small community to acquiesce. I doubt that you can find any modern examples of a big corporation forcibly taking over a community project using hired killers and such. But making nonsense claims about the evilness of corporations sure does make a good slogan for why communism is good. We will just ignore the fact that communism results in the largest, greediest corporation possible being in charge of a country. That makes for a not so good slogan.
If the government did not have the power to grant and enforce a monopoly... Government gets that power when it gets the power to overregulate. If a government only had the power to punish a corporation for unfair business practices (like hiring hired killers to entice ranchers to give up rights of way to railroads if we want to go that far back in history for the abuses) and didn't have the power to grant the railroad exclusive access into an area in the first place...
Well, yeah. See above for that bit about Europe and fascism. The US has that little bit about being allowed to be uncommunicative with the police and it not being able to be used against for the exact reason that the British have been abusing it for well over 250 years. What do you think that quaint little war that George lost was all about? That the crown was being irresponsible with all the freedom it was handing out?
They are (or have already become) but fail to understand that they are. Try asking a reasonable question that can actually be answered next time.
Generally, but not always, the more you pay, the less you get. Sometimes stated as the fancier the atmosphere and presentation, the less on the plate.
What is all this faux anger about how you will deal with a restaurant that doesn't accept cash? I have never been in a restaurant or store (grocery, furniture, bike, book, adult) or garage or anything that didn't accept cash. I haven't tried cash at a hotel for a couple of decades so I'm not sure about them.
Where are you people at that you have lots of small retail outlets refusing to take cash?
or hassenpfeffer, whatever it takes.
I haven't seen a Burger King or similar run out of burgers but I have seen them run out of buns and other essentials and not so essentials. BTW, they do use software to track their inventory. I worked the delivery side way back (30+ years ago) when the tracking was all done manually in little books and I've watched the technology change as my wife has been involved on the restaurant side.
Restaurants frequently run out of certain dishes. The further from burgers and reheating pre-packaged a restaurant is, the more likely it is to run out of certain dishes; the ones where the major ingredients don't have long shelf or refrigerator lives are the most susceptible to that. I don't see where data mining will help with that because, once a restaurant is fairly established, any half-decent management will have picked up on the trends (usually by tracking their inventory and usage with their accounting system or just in their head and old-fashioned books by hand). What causes problems is when they guess wrong about the unusual events like the infrequent concert down the road or being in the band of totality for a solar eclipse (frequent concerts down the road become part of the trends they can watch). Data mining won't really help these situations.
Are you claiming that your husband is 40% of the members of this site which is why 60% of us are stopped from participating in the aforementioned activity?
"whipped cream on my nipples." So not fully naked then. Stop hiding.
Oh stop talking economics and profit/loss to the vegan. They don't believe in all that mumbo jumbo anyway.
I suppose you disagree and believe that artists should be compelled by law to accept commissions to produce works of art promoting messages with which the artist disagrees?
Or do you think producing a wedding cake is nothing more than mixing some eggs and water into a couple of boxes of Duncan Hines and tossing the mixture into an oven for a couple of minutes and done!?
So show that it is happening that way. The article just made a vague statement about people causing more volcanoes.
The physical presence thing makes a great deal of sense when deciding legal jurisdiction. Should states like Texas and Florida get to hold people accountable for murders committed in California and Illinois? The former states have harsher punishments than the latter states so why do we let a little thing like physical location get in the way of justice?
Likewise, if I mail something to a customer in California from my home in Wisconsin, under what legal theory does California get to claim the jurisdiction necessary to compel me, as the seller, to collect taxes on their behalf and remit them? California can require my customer in California to do all manner of things but they cannot require anything of me unless the United States Congress authorizes it and does so in a manner that is consistent across all state lines. This is really basic stuff.
From my previous example, Wisconsin could pass laws requiring me as the seller to remit a tax on the sale and I can then decide whether to raise my price to include that tax or to reduce my profit. The reason states don't do that is because they already do that with what we call "income taxes".
Well, Canada has the option of completely regulating all internet traffic entering Canada, don't they. They have complete authority to require that all traffic be decrypted and inspected before being passed to the end user just as they do with physical goods. What they do not have is any authority to compel a corporation not located within their physical boundaries to collect taxes on their behalf and remit them. It is not a "loophole" that needs closing anymore than the "loophole" that prevents the United States from requiring Canadian residents who are not US citizens from paying US income taxes.
And the same theory applies between states. If we are to allow a state like Texas to require Netflix to collect Texas sales tax from Texas customers and remit that sales tax to the State of Texas when Netlfix has no physical presence in Texas (assuming that Netflix does not operate call centers or other offices within Texas) then we must also allow the states of Utah and Wyoming to issue arrest warrants for the owners of marijuana resellers in Colorado. The same legal theory applies to both circumstances. There is absolutely nothing stopping a state like California from telling Netflix that it must remit California sales tax on all sales originating in California as that is an issue between California and business operating within California.
Yes, we all agree on that. Your state of residence has legal jurisdiction over you to compel you to pay the tax. It does not have legal jurisdiction over a corporation with no physical presence in that state to compel them to collect the tax from you and remit it to the state. This is not a "loophole". This is what prevents Utah and Wyoming from issuing warrants for the arrest of anybody consuming marijuana within the boundaries of Colorado. It really is not a difficult concept to understand.
What is with the extraneous "an"?
Yes, they can pass laws stating that the act of viewing a streamed movie is taxable consumption but they cannot require the streaming service to collect the tax nor remit the tax unless the streaming company has a physical presence in the state anymore than they can require Amazon, Newegg, Cabelas, or any other catalog/online retailer to collect and remit sales tax if those companies have no physical location in the state. States have known this for a long time and ask you to pay the "use tax" on those catalog and online orders as you settle up with them every April. They also expect you to remit that tax on goods you have physically purchased in a no sales tax state or a state with a lower sales tax and brought home with you.