What most people don't realize is that most of this "extra profit to invest in something else to create more jobs" is complete hogwash.
The stats are there to prove it by miles. They horde it and sit on it when times are bad because at the end of the day if they are making money NOW and they can see everything going to shit around them, they need to have money for if it gets worse, inadvertently making everything worse in the process.
The only way to pry it out of these assholes is to take it IE TAX it away. The government is guaranteed to spend it on something, and that something is almost certainly going to help somehow. How much we don't know, but anything is better than nothing.
Thats one of those fixed items though that becomes less and less of a problem the higher up the pay grade you go.
I enjoy the tax me and if I eventually rack up $500k in medical bills due to some strange, rare, but curable disease then we'll be even. Its like insurance but it benefits everyone right now as well as you later instead of just padding some insurance companies bottom line.
The one on Android(in particular the Samsung Galaxy S2) has the same accuracy approximately and is much faster. The processing is done right on the phone as well so if you happen to be in a spotty reception area it isn't affected.
Which is why I said it was wrong. They're not after all of that 1%, just the filthy rich ones that control everything. You don't get into the club until your net worth is 100m+
There are some details like higher income tax above 250k/yr that would affect all of the top 1% but beyond that...
Also I can't believe the taxes in America. If I was making 250k/yr where I am living right now I would be taxed at a base rate of 55% before deductions. I would also be doing damn fine on the 115k/yr(roughly) that I had left in cash. Thats enough money that if you were a real cheapskate on everything else you could buy my house outright every 3 years, and I'm one of the people thats considered "upper middle class".
Actually more reasonable estimates put it at approximately 150 years away about 30 years ago.
That wasn't really taking into account the fact that Moores law proved fairly sustainable for a long period of time however.
Based on those estimates and accounting for moores law, but also accounting for the fact that a lot of the work needs to be done by humans, sustainable nuclear fusion is approximately 50 years away still without some kind of anomalous fantastic breakthrough in materials and/or physics and/or Artificial Intelligence.
Even with those its probably a minimum of 30 years away regardless.
Not all, but the Majority are, yes. Its less prevalent in some areas, but quebecois often do things differently just because they don't want to do it the same as their english-speaking counterparts.
Likely if that money hadn't been taxed away it wouldn't have been spent on research at all.
Arbitrary targeted research into any somewhat promising field from a government trumps no research at all and that one simple fact invalidates your argument.
I believe that the one they used involves producing way more neutrinos than you need and measuring the neutrinos in one exact direction from near the source and then again once it got to the italy lab.
Not necessarily aiming per say, but a version thereof that suffices for their experiment.
Since their experiment was at least partly to measure if any neutrinos were lost enroute it required a massive amount of time/distance accuracy to execute the experiment at all.
In addition to the other poster mentioning that it is possible with the proper experimental procedures - it was a requirement of the experiment that they be able to aim them to some extent.
The experiment could not have taken place if you were unable to aim neutrinos in some manner.
In order for their experiment to succeed they needed extreme target accuracy, to within 1 meter. This requires they be off by 20 metres. The fact that their experiment succeeded at all for their original purpose kills this bullshit right off.
AV was intended as a PVE raid originally. Learn more about something before you post about others "non-facts"
It WAS intended to be an outdoor raid, similar to many EQ raids. However this would have caused some inherent PVP in the zone. When BG's became a popular time killer they just repurposed the whole deal.
I mean, this shit is all even in the "Making Of" Collectors edition DVD that came with Classic, straight from the devs mouth, on camera no less.
Um, PVE servers in which there were no PVP zones if you didn't want there to be outnumbered PVP servers 4 to 1 at release and were MORE CROWDED. In fact the most crowded PVE servers then are still the most crowded servers today. There is no PVP server that suffers from queue times to log on, meanwhile its a common occurance on some of the PVE servers.
Excuse me Mr. new pvp whore that likes to think he's been playing since beta - but hasn't.
WoW was a specifically stated PVE game. PVP was tacked on after the beta testing started. Molten Core was available at release(mostly, it was buggy, but available) and UBRS was a raid, doable with 10 men but for awhile they allowed 15 man raids.
Hell, Gnomeregan was supposed to be a raid at first, as evidenced by the fact that right up until near the middle of WotLK you could form a 10 man raid and go there.
World PVP was all that was originally intended as PVP for the game with the ability to opt-out by playing on a PVE server. Battlegrounds were tacked on by popular request in Beta.
Your point that World PVP was a hell of a lot of fun is correct: However it was only possible to have that hell of a lot of fun in a game that was almost entirely focused on the player interacting with the Game Environment and thus having incentive to protect said environment. Darkshire and Redshore battles happened because Horde would want to go gank some alliance. Alliance would show up because they were protecting their friends that were questing and the quest mobs for everyone that wanted to use them. Vice versa happened for horde as well in other locations.
Battleground Queueing once they had a few BGs near the end of Vanilla almost immediately had a large noticeable effect. Those that liked PVPing could get their fix in a BG and from the safety of Orgrimmar/Ironforge, leaving the village folk undefended and the opposite faction unmolested.
There are statements out there from previous devs on WoW that they kind of hate what the game has become with Arenas etc.
They see that the arenas can be fun but they don't fit into what was envisioned for the game originally at all.
Its pretty god-awful everywhere. The Community doesn't exist anymore. What you have now are a bunch of gamers better suited to playing FPS's that thrive on instant gratification and barely even interacts with the community.
Those that do seek some sort of pleasure out of it for the most part. These consist largely of trolls etc.
There are a very very few like myself, and perhaps yourself, left that are genuinely helpful and relatively patient.
However profs have been crying out since about 2000, maybe a little before that, that they can't get qualified students. When a prof has to go back to teach basic geometry to a student that has graduated high school with honors there is something seriously fucked in the system.
I see this straw man quite often. You would expect at best a small increase in test failures. I'm not talking about numbers of accepted entrants, that number is horribly skewed by numerous factors, but purely about test results.
As affluence has traditionally affected who can/can't go to school before, not anything to do with intelligence, test scores on average should stay roughly the same. They are in fact falling.
Wonderful thing about percentages. If only 20% of a population takes a test and who takes that test isn't a factor of intelligence then an increase to 90% of people taking that same test should see fairly similar pass/fail rates. This isn't what we're seeing and what we are seeing is continued decreases in pass rates since the late 80's/early 90's.
You also have near-retirement professors stating explicitly that they are not receiving the same quality of entrants that do get in as they were 20-30 years ago. They often have to go back and re-teach many of the basics that the K-12 standard schooling failed to teach. Things that they did not have to teach until fairly recently.
Really? Are you sure about that? Because we have ever higher rates of students failing basic math and science tests upon entrance into universities that have been the same for over 100 years. You apparently have been hiding under a rock whilst your education system has been crumbling.
Slashdot Mirror
Most individuals suck at negotiating. This is a large part of the reason Unions were born in the first place.
Tax increases can actually help a bad economy.
What most people don't realize is that most of this "extra profit to invest in something else to create more jobs" is complete hogwash.
The stats are there to prove it by miles. They horde it and sit on it when times are bad because at the end of the day if they are making money NOW and they can see everything going to shit around them, they need to have money for if it gets worse, inadvertently making everything worse in the process.
The only way to pry it out of these assholes is to take it IE TAX it away. The government is guaranteed to spend it on something, and that something is almost certainly going to help somehow. How much we don't know, but anything is better than nothing.
Aye, if we happen to find two objects in this solar system that contain life then life is quite prolific everywhere.
Ouch. Yeah.
Thats one of those fixed items though that becomes less and less of a problem the higher up the pay grade you go.
I enjoy the tax me and if I eventually rack up $500k in medical bills due to some strange, rare, but curable disease then we'll be even. Its like insurance but it benefits everyone right now as well as you later instead of just padding some insurance companies bottom line.
The one on Android(in particular the Samsung Galaxy S2) has the same accuracy approximately and is much faster. The processing is done right on the phone as well so if you happen to be in a spotty reception area it isn't affected.
Which is why I said it was wrong. They're not after all of that 1%, just the filthy rich ones that control everything. You don't get into the club until your net worth is 100m+
There are some details like higher income tax above 250k/yr that would affect all of the top 1% but beyond that...
Also I can't believe the taxes in America. If I was making 250k/yr where I am living right now I would be taxed at a base rate of 55% before deductions. I would also be doing damn fine on the 115k/yr(roughly) that I had left in cash. Thats enough money that if you were a real cheapskate on everything else you could buy my house outright every 3 years, and I'm one of the people thats considered "upper middle class".
They're not even close to being in the 1%.
The 1% won't even let them sit at thier kiddie table.
The 1% is a bit of a misnomer actually. Its more like .1%. Something like 80% of all revenue in america can be traced back to a few hundred people.
Actually more reasonable estimates put it at approximately 150 years away about 30 years ago.
That wasn't really taking into account the fact that Moores law proved fairly sustainable for a long period of time however.
Based on those estimates and accounting for moores law, but also accounting for the fact that a lot of the work needs to be done by humans, sustainable nuclear fusion is approximately 50 years away still without some kind of anomalous fantastic breakthrough in materials and/or physics and/or Artificial Intelligence.
Even with those its probably a minimum of 30 years away regardless.
Not all, but the Majority are, yes. Its less prevalent in some areas, but quebecois often do things differently just because they don't want to do it the same as their english-speaking counterparts.
This causes all kinds of problems.
You are espousing another fallacy.
Likely if that money hadn't been taxed away it wouldn't have been spent on research at all.
Arbitrary targeted research into any somewhat promising field from a government trumps no research at all and that one simple fact invalidates your argument.
It should be noted that in comparison to the russian losses, these "massive" german losses you cite are a drop in the ocean.
The german average kill rate per soldier for german:russian was 1:26.
Yes, for every one german that died, 26 russians died. Not including civilians.
I believe that the one they used involves producing way more neutrinos than you need and measuring the neutrinos in one exact direction from near the source and then again once it got to the italy lab.
Not necessarily aiming per say, but a version thereof that suffices for their experiment.
Since their experiment was at least partly to measure if any neutrinos were lost enroute it required a massive amount of time/distance accuracy to execute the experiment at all.
In addition to the other poster mentioning that it is possible with the proper experimental procedures - it was a requirement of the experiment that they be able to aim them to some extent.
The experiment could not have taken place if you were unable to aim neutrinos in some manner.
Its complete garbage.
In order for their experiment to succeed they needed extreme target accuracy, to within 1 meter. This requires they be off by 20 metres. The fact that their experiment succeeded at all for their original purpose kills this bullshit right off.
Sigh, I guess I should pay attention to the "Do Not Feed" sign you should have hanging around your neck however:
The dvd is available for download in several locations. Download it, watch it, be enlightened.
From forum announcements on the US side. I never paid attention to the EU so you could be right there - I wouldn't know.
I was playing since beta.
AV was intended as a PVE raid originally. Learn more about something before you post about others "non-facts"
It WAS intended to be an outdoor raid, similar to many EQ raids. However this would have caused some inherent PVP in the zone. When BG's became a popular time killer they just repurposed the whole deal.
I mean, this shit is all even in the "Making Of" Collectors edition DVD that came with Classic, straight from the devs mouth, on camera no less.
Um, PVE servers in which there were no PVP zones if you didn't want there to be outnumbered PVP servers 4 to 1 at release and were MORE CROWDED. In fact the most crowded PVE servers then are still the most crowded servers today. There is no PVP server that suffers from queue times to log on, meanwhile its a common occurance on some of the PVE servers.
It was actually stated outright in the making of WoW DVD in the Classic collectors edition.
Excuse me Mr. new pvp whore that likes to think he's been playing since beta - but hasn't.
WoW was a specifically stated PVE game. PVP was tacked on after the beta testing started. Molten Core was available at release(mostly, it was buggy, but available) and UBRS was a raid, doable with 10 men but for awhile they allowed 15 man raids.
Hell, Gnomeregan was supposed to be a raid at first, as evidenced by the fact that right up until near the middle of WotLK you could form a 10 man raid and go there.
World PVP was all that was originally intended as PVP for the game with the ability to opt-out by playing on a PVE server. Battlegrounds were tacked on by popular request in Beta.
Your point that World PVP was a hell of a lot of fun is correct: However it was only possible to have that hell of a lot of fun in a game that was almost entirely focused on the player interacting with the Game Environment and thus having incentive to protect said environment. Darkshire and Redshore battles happened because Horde would want to go gank some alliance. Alliance would show up because they were protecting their friends that were questing and the quest mobs for everyone that wanted to use them. Vice versa happened for horde as well in other locations.
Battleground Queueing once they had a few BGs near the end of Vanilla almost immediately had a large noticeable effect. Those that liked PVPing could get their fix in a BG and from the safety of Orgrimmar/Ironforge, leaving the village folk undefended and the opposite faction unmolested.
There are statements out there from previous devs on WoW that they kind of hate what the game has become with Arenas etc.
They see that the arenas can be fun but they don't fit into what was envisioned for the game originally at all.
Its pretty god-awful everywhere. The Community doesn't exist anymore. What you have now are a bunch of gamers better suited to playing FPS's that thrive on instant gratification and barely even interacts with the community.
Those that do seek some sort of pleasure out of it for the most part. These consist largely of trolls etc.
There are a very very few like myself, and perhaps yourself, left that are genuinely helpful and relatively patient.
Most of us have quit already, I know I have.
Crumbling - That word doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
When something is in the process of crumbling it is entirely possible for certain random parts of it to be completely whole.
There is data to prove it. All I could find right now was this:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/17/education.stem.graduation/index.html
However profs have been crying out since about 2000, maybe a little before that, that they can't get qualified students. When a prof has to go back to teach basic geometry to a student that has graduated high school with honors there is something seriously fucked in the system.
last estimate to run a fibre cable to Iqaluit(population 6000 ish) was 97 million. 5 years ago.
I see this straw man quite often. You would expect at best a small increase in test failures. I'm not talking about numbers of accepted entrants, that number is horribly skewed by numerous factors, but purely about test results.
As affluence has traditionally affected who can/can't go to school before, not anything to do with intelligence, test scores on average should stay roughly the same. They are in fact falling.
Wonderful thing about percentages. If only 20% of a population takes a test and who takes that test isn't a factor of intelligence then an increase to 90% of people taking that same test should see fairly similar pass/fail rates. This isn't what we're seeing and what we are seeing is continued decreases in pass rates since the late 80's/early 90's.
You also have near-retirement professors stating explicitly that they are not receiving the same quality of entrants that do get in as they were 20-30 years ago. They often have to go back and re-teach many of the basics that the K-12 standard schooling failed to teach. Things that they did not have to teach until fairly recently.
Really? Are you sure about that? Because we have ever higher rates of students failing basic math and science tests upon entrance into universities that have been the same for over 100 years. You apparently have been hiding under a rock whilst your education system has been crumbling.