Well, they are a special purpose group. Kinda like how the brady bunch are dedicated to exposing all the dangers of firearms.
The trick is, who's more carefull with their research? Who's more accurate? From my looking at many of the brady campaign's ads pushing for renewal of the AWB, I've seen downright misleading ads, trying to convince people that machine guns will flood the streets when it expires. In actuality I'll be able to get a semi-automatic rifle with a flash suppressor (makes the firearm look more authentic), bayonet lug(can be useful for attaching accessories other than bayonets), and folding/collapsing stock(easier storage, fit more people) again.
Remember, the Maryland Snipers could have done their murders with a black powder rifle, bolt action, or single shot just as easily, if not more. And they didn't use an "assault weapon" according to the law, as it was a post-ban rifle, without the folding stock, bayonet lug, or flash suppressor.
, as the hugely disproportionate rate of gun deaths in the US
Compared to where? North Korea? The middle east? Large areas of Africa?
And why single out gun deaths? Even though guns are popular suicide devices in the States, Japan manages to have a much higher suicide rate. Do you think that somebody being killed with a gun is worse than somebody being killed by a knife or a club, or poison, or a car for that matter?
We were so pastoral before firearms were developed, weren't we?
awesome logistical support the the US Armed Forces go into battle with today.
And who provides that logistical support?
Civilians. The only reason that we can keep operating in Afganistan and Iraq is the constant flow of supplies into the countries from civilian factories and warehouses. Heck, we've had cases in the USA of civilians building tanks, civil war artillery, chain-guns, explosives, etc... All on their own.
I agree, the fact that the military comes from all walks of life, and are patriots, prevents a hostile takeover. Today. Who knows about tommorrow? I'm more worried about the SWAT style police forces. They don't have the same rules as the military.
What happens when you subtract out areas of the USA that have gun control comparable to Europe/Canada? As these areas tend to be the highest crime, I imagine that it would tend to change the statistics if you removed Washington DC, New York, and Chicago.
1. It won't be in operation all the time 2. Proper combustion doesn't lead to much smoke, but you still need to vent the exhaust, as you need to get rid of the CO2. I'd be more worried about the access road.
The AWB doesn't cover AK-47s, unless it's a semi-automatic version built in the USA (or at least mostly). Automatic versions are regulated by an earlier law, and importation is banned as its considered to not be a 'sporting weapon'. And Bushmaster produces AR-15 type rifles, which look like the American M-16. And the AWB doesn't even cover them, once they took off the bayonet lug and flash suppressor/grenade launcher (there are grenades designed to fit over the suppressor and be launched by a shot from the gun).
Besides, she can pick up a SKS for less than a $100 bucks, while an AR-15 starts at around $900 new. Heck, she can get a M1 Garand for about $400.
Nah, the best choice is a shotgun. Cheap, reliable, easy to aim, and still powerfull.
Well, when you see them get out of the car with a M-16 rather than a pistol(or in addition to), well, yeah. Add in that I know those guys aren't usually trained in restraint as much as civilian police, I'm not going to mess with them.
You're also talking about federal law on base, and a place that has the ability to lock itself down very quickly. Think of a gated community.
Once you add in shipping (steel's heavy), and some of the quality benefits, yes it can compete.
There's an airline company that's experiencing this bad right now. The union workers are threatening to strike, even as the stock plummets and allegatios of bankrupty go around.
Too often the Unions miss the boat and strangle the golden goose.
As long as the position isn't low-skilled, workers have power. If your job skill is in demand, employers realize that if they aren't willing to pay competitive wages, that they will either get a bad worker or one not skilled enough. You do have to be careful of creep, but if you're good, you should be able to get a job somewhere. Learning a second field can be a great help too.
Hiring another worker is cheaper than than running the risk of having the driver exceed certain limits.
The problem is that government control doesn't really control, it just means that the business commits a 'crime', has added expense in the form of more logging, paperwork, and general butt-covering.
I'm just saying that overworking people to the point they're making mistakes isn't financially rewarding, and thus provides a natural limit.
Besides, the odds are better on you getting creamed by a drunk driver in a SUV.
I grew up in one of the 'lower rent' parts of the country, where students would look at starting wages in places like California, Chicago, and New York and start salivating. Until I pointed out how much more expensive renting/owning a place was, the higher prices in the stores, and such so that the cost of living was quite literally more than double. They would be better off with a 30k job close to home, vs the 50k job in the city. Where I am now a $100,000 house has 4-5 bedrooms, 2-3 baths, and quite a bit of lawn. In the good area. I saw an old two bedroom going for $25k (it did have a number of problems).
1) Think up of a nifty union name 2) Print up some official looking membership cards 3) Tell the guard "We are Union Members!" (they didn't say which Union). 4) Ignore guard and push cart (or unload van)
Start up some sort of system. Something like 3 lists. Priority 1 (done immediatly), Priority 2 (needs to be done), and Priority 3 (non-critical). If you can, estimate time required per task, and when it needs to be done. Make the management realize that you can't do it. If they want you to work longer, see about making them pay for it, or hire another person, or assign duties elsewhere.
In many areas the job market isn't actually so bad that a good worker can't get a job elsewhere. Make sure though, that you know the hours expected if you're going to go salary.
You were eligible for overtime. However, you were not guaranteed overtime.
The federal government has rules that state that you must be paid overtime if you meet certain criteria. Most states have additional rules. However, if the company decides to pay you overtime on their own, they can. If you are in a union and the union contract with your employer says you get overtime, you get it. If you have a personal contract with your employer that says you'll be paid, you will.
As an example, when I was a teenager I worked for a store that paid overtime for holidays even when they didn't have to.
Don't sell yourself cheap. You might be replaceable, but that still costs money. Make sure that if you work salary you have some form of protection from "hour creep". Find a workplace that desires stability and doesn't want people who burn out after 3 months to a year. Heart attacks and such are expensive too.
Most commercial management requires hours like this. This is part of the reason that many don't want to be managers. They generally have to be there to open and close the store, and be on hand for any problems.
less taxes that there are, the worse the education system is
There are studies that show the correlation between how much money is spent per pupil and quality of education is very low, and some show negative. Some of the worst schools in america spend the most per pupil. Private schools uniformly do more with less money per pupil.
the worse off roads are
Well, again, here it's a matter of, without the government butting in, the most efficient transportation system would become dominant. Which is best? Rail, monorail, road, air? Let the market decide! Private companies, neighborhoods, and businesses could decide how to develop their transportation infrastructure. I do believe that government services has it's place, so I'll admit that allowing cities/states to decide is best. Why do the feds need to be in on it, other than for the interstate system?
less social security
Now, you have me here. Certainly, you wouldn't have the pyramid scheme that's headed for bankruptcy without a major overhaul and lessening of costs (less service anyway!) under a libertarian society. Instead, if you want to retire, you'd better sock away monies for later. Of course, how is this different for me now? Oh yeah, I'd have another 12.4% (6.2% from me, 6.2% paid by my employer) of my income available to invest as I will.
If the company has to pay for the liability of having their drivers overwork, increasing the odds of damage and injury, increasing their expenses due to damaged inventory and equipment, lost time, and needing new or replacement help for the worker in the hospital because you can't work the rest of the workers any more as it is. They'll work out safety procedures on their own. Many companies are focused on safety because it saves money, not so much because it keeps OSHA off their backs.
I wouldn't have a real problem with that. I have a problem that they yack on about their next event, state that they're "commercial free for x long" three times in the spot, and in other words, take up as much time as the commercials would. I want more music, not necessarily fewer commercials.
Well, considering that the Original Star Trek is probably older than half the people on this board, I'd agree that people don't get how 'edgy' TOS was for the time. Heck, the very idea of a female bridge officer! Do you remember the black/white episode? It might seem obvious and overdone now, but back then?
And I have trouble believing that you can truly find enough verified neutral people to count the votes. Thus you have three people doing the count. The "neutral" counter, a democrat representative, and a republican representative. Minor parties can send representatives too, but they generally don't have the manpower.
And what's your definition of "party member"? I'm nominally a republican (I get to vote in the republican primary), but I haven't ever volunteered time, been paid by, or even given money to the republican party. Am I disqualified from being a counter?
Not in this military! Maybe in some other countries, but in the US Military we have the concept of illegal orders. We have the duty to disobey if we are ordered to commit an illegal act. The most obvious (and briefed) are Geneva convention violations. People have been tried and convicted for following illegal orders. Though it does tend to be a tough decision. You know that there will be court martials(trials) all around if you have to invoke the illegal order refusal.
1) I'm not a real social person. Low charisma. 2) Wait 14 years. Then I'll be in a financial situation where I can afford to. 3) I'm a little extreme. I don't even toe the libertarian party line. For example, I'd put up fences and mine the border between the USA and Mexico (and maybe Canada). I'd make immigration easy(quick criminal check, fingerprints, picture, other identification method of the week), but please be legal about it. I'd also work for eliminating welfare, social security(gradually, there are a few generations who paid & planned on retiring on it), NEA, DEA, BATF... I usually have at least one view that will piss off somebody. I think that the best programs are the local ones, as well as private causes. Don't like abortion? Donate money to adoption & 'carry to term' clinics.
I didn't say that the measures couldn't hurt the bottom-line. By cripple I meant busting the bottom line. A company has to profit to survive. We've passed enviromental regulations that are so onerous that new industry can't start, and the old industry ends up 'hiding' under grandfather clauses such that as long as they don't renovate, they can keep operating at the old levels. This hurts the local economy because other countries can build nice new efficient plants (that still pollute more than what our regs would allow) and undersell the older domestic plants, putting them out of business.
Industry in the United States can survive, as long as we don't make the regulatory expense so high that it rivals the employment costs! The problem with this route is that you have to work with experts in the industry to figure out how to maximize pollution reduction while not busting the bottom line.
And for the insulation-well, we have a lot of old houses, I think the average age of a house in my area is nearly 60 years. I looked at a house built in 1917 when I was house-shoping. New houses are built with more insulation all the time. As for your house that cost $800 to heat, I assume you were renting. You might have been able to convince your landlord to install more. My parents had extra insulation added to their house years and years ago, and it dropped their bills by 2/3rds. It paid itself off in something like three years.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, they are a special purpose group. Kinda like how the brady bunch are dedicated to exposing all the dangers of firearms.
The trick is, who's more carefull with their research? Who's more accurate? From my looking at many of the brady campaign's ads pushing for renewal of the AWB, I've seen downright misleading ads, trying to convince people that machine guns will flood the streets when it expires. In actuality I'll be able to get a semi-automatic rifle with a flash suppressor (makes the firearm look more authentic), bayonet lug(can be useful for attaching accessories other than bayonets), and folding/collapsing stock(easier storage, fit more people) again.
Remember, the Maryland Snipers could have done their murders with a black powder rifle, bolt action, or single shot just as easily, if not more. And they didn't use an "assault weapon" according to the law, as it was a post-ban rifle, without the folding stock, bayonet lug, or flash suppressor.
, as the hugely disproportionate rate of gun deaths in the US
Compared to where? North Korea? The middle east? Large areas of Africa?
And why single out gun deaths? Even though guns are popular suicide devices in the States, Japan manages to have a much higher suicide rate. Do you think that somebody being killed with a gun is worse than somebody being killed by a knife or a club, or poison, or a car for that matter?
We were so pastoral before firearms were developed, weren't we?
awesome logistical support the the US Armed Forces go into battle with today.
And who provides that logistical support?
Civilians. The only reason that we can keep operating in Afganistan and Iraq is the constant flow of supplies into the countries from civilian factories and warehouses. Heck, we've had cases in the USA of civilians building tanks, civil war artillery, chain-guns, explosives, etc... All on their own.
I agree, the fact that the military comes from all walks of life, and are patriots, prevents a hostile takeover. Today. Who knows about tommorrow? I'm more worried about the SWAT style police forces. They don't have the same rules as the military.
This raises the question:
What happens when you subtract out areas of the USA that have gun control comparable to Europe/Canada? As these areas tend to be the highest crime, I imagine that it would tend to change the statistics if you removed Washington DC, New York, and Chicago.
1. It won't be in operation all the time
2. Proper combustion doesn't lead to much smoke, but you still need to vent the exhaust, as you need to get rid of the CO2. I'd be more worried about the access road.
Don't forget the shovel and 40 acres!
Sigh...
The AWB doesn't cover AK-47s, unless it's a semi-automatic version built in the USA (or at least mostly). Automatic versions are regulated by an earlier law, and importation is banned as its considered to not be a 'sporting weapon'.
And Bushmaster produces AR-15 type rifles, which look like the American M-16. And the AWB doesn't even cover them, once they took off the bayonet lug and flash suppressor/grenade launcher (there are grenades designed to fit over the suppressor and be launched by a shot from the gun).
Besides, she can pick up a SKS for less than a $100 bucks, while an AR-15 starts at around $900 new. Heck, she can get a M1 Garand for about $400.
Nah, the best choice is a shotgun. Cheap, reliable, easy to aim, and still powerfull.
Well, when you see them get out of the car with a M-16 rather than a pistol(or in addition to), well, yeah. Add in that I know those guys aren't usually trained in restraint as much as civilian police, I'm not going to mess with them.
You're also talking about federal law on base, and a place that has the ability to lock itself down very quickly. Think of a gated community.
Actually, it sounds just about identical. The vote counter is the only one to touch the ballots, the others are just to verify
Once you add in shipping (steel's heavy), and some of the quality benefits, yes it can compete.
There's an airline company that's experiencing this bad right now. The union workers are threatening to strike, even as the stock plummets and allegatios of bankrupty go around.
Too often the Unions miss the boat and strangle the golden goose.
As long as the position isn't low-skilled, workers have power. If your job skill is in demand, employers realize that if they aren't willing to pay competitive wages, that they will either get a bad worker or one not skilled enough. You do have to be careful of creep, but if you're good, you should be able to get a job somewhere. Learning a second field can be a great help too.
Hiring another worker is cheaper than than running the risk of having the driver exceed certain limits.
The problem is that government control doesn't really control, it just means that the business commits a 'crime', has added expense in the form of more logging, paperwork, and general butt-covering.
I'm just saying that overworking people to the point they're making mistakes isn't financially rewarding, and thus provides a natural limit.
Besides, the odds are better on you getting creamed by a drunk driver in a SUV.
I grew up in one of the 'lower rent' parts of the country, where students would look at starting wages in places like California, Chicago, and New York and start salivating. Until I pointed out how much more expensive renting/owning a place was, the higher prices in the stores, and such so that the cost of living was quite literally more than double. They would be better off with a 30k job close to home, vs the 50k job in the city. Where I am now a $100,000 house has 4-5 bedrooms, 2-3 baths, and quite a bit of lawn. In the good area. I saw an old two bedroom going for $25k (it did have a number of problems).
My advice:
1) Think up of a nifty union name
2) Print up some official looking membership cards
3) Tell the guard "We are Union Members!" (they didn't say which Union).
4) Ignore guard and push cart (or unload van)
Start saying no
Start up some sort of system. Something like 3 lists. Priority 1 (done immediatly), Priority 2 (needs to be done), and Priority 3 (non-critical). If you can, estimate time required per task, and when it needs to be done. Make the management realize that you can't do it. If they want you to work longer, see about making them pay for it, or hire another person, or assign duties elsewhere.
In many areas the job market isn't actually so bad that a good worker can't get a job elsewhere. Make sure though, that you know the hours expected if you're going to go salary.
This might sound subtle but:
You were eligible for overtime. However, you were not guaranteed overtime.
The federal government has rules that state that you must be paid overtime if you meet certain criteria. Most states have additional rules. However, if the company decides to pay you overtime on their own, they can. If you are in a union and the union contract with your employer says you get overtime, you get it. If you have a personal contract with your employer that says you'll be paid, you will.
As an example, when I was a teenager I worked for a store that paid overtime for holidays even when they didn't have to.
Don't sell yourself cheap. You might be replaceable, but that still costs money. Make sure that if you work salary you have some form of protection from "hour creep". Find a workplace that desires stability and doesn't want people who burn out after 3 months to a year. Heart attacks and such are expensive too.
Most commercial management requires hours like this. This is part of the reason that many don't want to be managers. They generally have to be there to open and close the store, and be on hand for any problems.
less taxes that there are, the worse the education system is
There are studies that show the correlation between how much money is spent per pupil and quality of education is very low, and some show negative. Some of the worst schools in america spend the most per pupil. Private schools uniformly do more with less money per pupil.
the worse off roads are
Well, again, here it's a matter of, without the government butting in, the most efficient transportation system would become dominant. Which is best? Rail, monorail, road, air? Let the market decide! Private companies, neighborhoods, and businesses could decide how to develop their transportation infrastructure. I do believe that government services has it's place, so I'll admit that allowing cities/states to decide is best. Why do the feds need to be in on it, other than for the interstate system?
less social security
Now, you have me here. Certainly, you wouldn't have the pyramid scheme that's headed for bankruptcy without a major overhaul and lessening of costs (less service anyway!) under a libertarian society. Instead, if you want to retire, you'd better sock away monies for later. Of course, how is this different for me now? Oh yeah, I'd have another 12.4% (6.2% from me, 6.2% paid by my employer) of my income available to invest as I will.
If the company has to pay for the liability of having their drivers overwork, increasing the odds of damage and injury, increasing their expenses due to damaged inventory and equipment, lost time, and needing new or replacement help for the worker in the hospital because you can't work the rest of the workers any more as it is. They'll work out safety procedures on their own. Many companies are focused on safety because it saves money, not so much because it keeps OSHA off their backs.
I wouldn't have a real problem with that. I have a problem that they yack on about their next event, state that they're "commercial free for x long" three times in the spot, and in other words, take up as much time as the commercials would. I want more music, not necessarily fewer commercials.
Well, considering that the Original Star Trek is probably older than half the people on this board, I'd agree that people don't get how 'edgy' TOS was for the time. Heck, the very idea of a female bridge officer! Do you remember the black/white episode? It might seem obvious and overdone now, but back then?
And I have trouble believing that you can truly find enough verified neutral people to count the votes. Thus you have three people doing the count. The "neutral" counter, a democrat representative, and a republican representative. Minor parties can send representatives too, but they generally don't have the manpower.
And what's your definition of "party member"? I'm nominally a republican (I get to vote in the republican primary), but I haven't ever volunteered time, been paid by, or even given money to the republican party. Am I disqualified from being a counter?
you have to obey your officers period.
Not in this military! Maybe in some other countries, but in the US Military we have the concept of illegal orders. We have the duty to disobey if we are ordered to commit an illegal act. The most obvious (and briefed) are Geneva convention violations. People have been tried and convicted for following illegal orders. Though it does tend to be a tough decision. You know that there will be court martials(trials) all around if you have to invoke the illegal order refusal.
1) I'm not a real social person. Low charisma.
2) Wait 14 years. Then I'll be in a financial situation where I can afford to.
3) I'm a little extreme. I don't even toe the libertarian party line. For example, I'd put up fences and mine the border between the USA and Mexico (and maybe Canada). I'd make immigration easy(quick criminal check, fingerprints, picture, other identification method of the week), but please be legal about it. I'd also work for eliminating welfare, social security(gradually, there are a few generations who paid & planned on retiring on it), NEA, DEA, BATF... I usually have at least one view that will piss off somebody. I think that the best programs are the local ones, as well as private causes. Don't like abortion? Donate money to adoption & 'carry to term' clinics.
I didn't say that the measures couldn't hurt the bottom-line. By cripple I meant busting the bottom line. A company has to profit to survive. We've passed enviromental regulations that are so onerous that new industry can't start, and the old industry ends up 'hiding' under grandfather clauses such that as long as they don't renovate, they can keep operating at the old levels. This hurts the local economy because other countries can build nice new efficient plants (that still pollute more than what our regs would allow) and undersell the older domestic plants, putting them out of business.
Industry in the United States can survive, as long as we don't make the regulatory expense so high that it rivals the employment costs! The problem with this route is that you have to work with experts in the industry to figure out how to maximize pollution reduction while not busting the bottom line.
And for the insulation-well, we have a lot of old houses, I think the average age of a house in my area is nearly 60 years. I looked at a house built in 1917 when I was house-shoping. New houses are built with more insulation all the time. As for your house that cost $800 to heat, I assume you were renting. You might have been able to convince your landlord to install more. My parents had extra insulation added to their house years and years ago, and it dropped their bills by 2/3rds. It paid itself off in something like three years.