He isn't "essentially" like a republican, as he has the cover of press. Had this been an actual republican, the press would be apoplectic over this. So, in a way, he is worse that republicans.
And the same can be said for HRC and her email scandal. There is an increased deference given to anybody with a (D) after their name.
So, why would you vote for (D)? Because they say things in ways that make you feel good, while screwing you like an (R)?
Good parenting is about knowing the tradeoffs and finding a solution that doesn't require you into compromising "compensating advantages" and getting "Upset" daughters (have them). TV was and is Optional. I chose to give up some conveniences for the sake of raising my kids better than the marketers wanted me to raise them.
At age two - three, there is NOTHING on TV worth getting a brat at the store. Read them a book. Play with them in the sandbox. Teach them YOUR values, one of mine was, "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours".
Which line is "moronic" The line about "all taxes are regressive" ?
I do have evidence, you you care. Remember back in the 90's when Clinton instituted a "Luxury Tax" on things like Boats, Airplanes and super expensive cars? Wasn't supposed to impact anyone except the "super rich".
Well guess what, it nearly killed entire industries when the rich simply avoided the taxes, by not buying new "Luxury" items. Guess who it hurt? Yeah, those moronic workers who were laid off as demand for those items disappeared.
It was so disastrous that it was quickly repealed.
Here is why my premise is true, the rich can spend money to avoid paying taxes, the poor cannot. The poor ALWAYS get hit by taxes, even when they aren't targeted, taxes they cannot avoid. Of course, the socialists in the crowd always think that "progressive" taxes are good, because they "soak the rich" meanwhile, they simply ignore the unintended consequences (and costs) to those that cannot avoid taxes.
And remember Eric Garner? That was over "taxes", because who else cares about selling untaxed "loosies"? Why ONLY the government! (he is my proof that taxes are under threat of government guns, and chokeholds)
Personally, I am against fines for vehicle infractions, such as speeding.
Besides the obvious, the unintended consequences of speeding tickets having fines based on income, would be cops ONLY pulling over Expensive Luxury cars that were speeding, and junky cars (like mine) would escape justice, because people would assume "poor person, low fine".
If you want equality in justice, make the punishment community service.That way, you could send the poor person to clean the municipal golf course, and the rich person to serve in the soup kitchen;)
It isn't good either. It is closer to bad than it is good.
That is, unless you're a mindless idiot searching for useless information. I've done side by side comparisons, and Google returns better and more complete results than Bing. Unless you're searching for coffee, in which case, Bing returns pretty pictures of coffee beans much more often than Google.
Go ahead, try it on anything more than a simple search. See what you find.
To be fair, the part about corporations being "people" is in the actual statute. The court simply held that it was constitutional (the statute). Want to change the statute, change congress. And good luck getting rid of the Republicrats that support the Corporate States of America
The problem with AGW is political will, and bloody mindedness from the "truther" crowd.
The problem with AGW, is that it isn't really proven, and is moving down the falsifiable road. The ONLY thing you can prove is increases in CO2, a small component in global climate. I could fix the whole CO2 thing easily by seeding the oceans with iron powder, that would increase O2 to dangerous levels. BTW, O2 is waste gas for most life, and highly corrosive to most organic material.
Compare to Google Wallet for things like transferring money between users. Google does this for free (for now), Paypal charges 10%. Why anyone would seek that as a payment method at this point is mind numbing.
When Comcast et al figures out how to screw people under those rules, you'll be the first one clambering to Revise, Extend and Extinguish method of fixing it until it breaks.
Many slashdot readers are liberals who think the government solution to every problem is the best. The part that make it NOT Net Neutrality are... the government is involved. Which means, that it can and will be revised and extended until it no longer resembles what it is today. Revise, Extend, Extinguish.
And once it really breaks, there is NO solution to actually fixing the problem, except more of the thing that broke it in the first place.
Actually only the HOUSE can originate new taxes. ObamaCare is a tax, originating in the Senate, so the government is already violating the law. How, pray tell, is that working out?
Yes, I have a 386 handy, and I want to run a modern version of GNOME on it!
Don't YOU be an ass. Expecting hardware to perform outside of its capability is stupid. You know it isn't going to work, so quit your bitching. Expecting a Dell that runs only at 2 properly to run at 5 is expecting too much. A Dell saying it runs at 5 properly, that doesn't, means it is defective, and you have a choice to run it at 2, or return it as defective.
It would be much easier to find a system that does run 5 correctly.
The problem isn't Verizon or Comcast, the problem is last mile Fiber. Make it municipal fiber, and let the content providers fight for the customers. Competition, in the right location fixes everything WITHOUT government intruding on that content.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't for high production runs. This is for printing one offs, and prototyping.
He isn't "essentially" like a republican, as he has the cover of press. Had this been an actual republican, the press would be apoplectic over this. So, in a way, he is worse that republicans.
And the same can be said for HRC and her email scandal. There is an increased deference given to anybody with a (D) after their name.
So, why would you vote for (D)? Because they say things in ways that make you feel good, while screwing you like an (R)?
Socialism trades opportunity for security.
And I don't care how "efficient" government is, it isn't. Nobody gets promoted in government by saving money. Ever.
The next thing is, taking 1/2 of your income, is tantamount to serfdom, and is criminal slavery.
And finally, you talk as if government has a RIGHT to your earnings, as if that is okay. My view is that MY labor is mine to do with as I please.
Life is about grey and tradeoffs.
Good parenting is about knowing the tradeoffs and finding a solution that doesn't require you into compromising "compensating advantages" and getting "Upset" daughters (have them). TV was and is Optional. I chose to give up some conveniences for the sake of raising my kids better than the marketers wanted me to raise them.
At age two - three, there is NOTHING on TV worth getting a brat at the store. Read them a book. Play with them in the sandbox. Teach them YOUR values, one of mine was, "you're more important to me than plopping you in front of a TV for the next three hours".
OR, you know ... good parenting, not allowing them to watch TV except when appropriate
OR you know ... teaching your kids about how commercials work, trying to get them to buy useless toys and crappy "food" products.
Why did you allow your kids to be bombarded with commercials at an age where they couldn't cope?
Which line is "moronic" The line about "all taxes are regressive" ?
I do have evidence, you you care. Remember back in the 90's when Clinton instituted a "Luxury Tax" on things like Boats, Airplanes and super expensive cars? Wasn't supposed to impact anyone except the "super rich".
Well guess what, it nearly killed entire industries when the rich simply avoided the taxes, by not buying new "Luxury" items. Guess who it hurt? Yeah, those moronic workers who were laid off as demand for those items disappeared.
It was so disastrous that it was quickly repealed.
Here is why my premise is true, the rich can spend money to avoid paying taxes, the poor cannot. The poor ALWAYS get hit by taxes, even when they aren't targeted, taxes they cannot avoid. Of course, the socialists in the crowd always think that "progressive" taxes are good, because they "soak the rich" meanwhile, they simply ignore the unintended consequences (and costs) to those that cannot avoid taxes.
And remember Eric Garner? That was over "taxes", because who else cares about selling untaxed "loosies"? Why ONLY the government! (he is my proof that taxes are under threat of government guns, and chokeholds)
Personally, I am against fines for vehicle infractions, such as speeding.
Besides the obvious, the unintended consequences of speeding tickets having fines based on income, would be cops ONLY pulling over Expensive Luxury cars that were speeding, and junky cars (like mine) would escape justice, because people would assume "poor person, low fine".
If you want equality in justice, make the punishment community service.That way, you could send the poor person to clean the municipal golf course, and the rich person to serve in the soup kitchen ;)
IRS is (supposedly) governed by the 16th Amendment. So it is constitutional.
Besides, if you ask me, I would tell you that All taxes are regressive.
Time. Except that isn't equal to everyone. Some people live longer than others, and that is obviously unfair!
Envy is an ugly emotion. Why people tolerate it in politics and governance is beyond me.
Money doesn't equal speech. No Supreme court ever said that.
They said you couldn't restrict speech based on money. There is a difference between restricting, and allowing.
Everyone is allowed to speak the same. Money is just a tool to adjust reach of that speech (bullhorn)
how far will an m16 bullet drop at 500 yards
Best Answer I found ... 500 yds, 62 grain fmj, 47 inches
We have a constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law. Socialistic viewpoints don't work here.
You don't do something unless you have plans to use it. I call bullshit.
Be Vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting Asteroids!
. Bing isn't a terrible search engine
It isn't good either. It is closer to bad than it is good.
That is, unless you're a mindless idiot searching for useless information. I've done side by side comparisons, and Google returns better and more complete results than Bing. Unless you're searching for coffee, in which case, Bing returns pretty pictures of coffee beans much more often than Google.
Go ahead, try it on anything more than a simple search. See what you find.
To be fair, the part about corporations being "people" is in the actual statute. The court simply held that it was constitutional (the statute). Want to change the statute, change congress. And good luck getting rid of the Republicrats that support the Corporate States of America
The problem with AGW is political will, and bloody mindedness from the "truther" crowd.
The problem with AGW, is that it isn't really proven, and is moving down the falsifiable road. The ONLY thing you can prove is increases in CO2, a small component in global climate. I could fix the whole CO2 thing easily by seeding the oceans with iron powder, that would increase O2 to dangerous levels. BTW, O2 is waste gas for most life, and highly corrosive to most organic material.
Compare to Google Wallet for things like transferring money between users. Google does this for free (for now), Paypal charges 10%. Why anyone would seek that as a payment method at this point is mind numbing.
It currently boils down to only 3 things
FTFY
When Comcast et al figures out how to screw people under those rules, you'll be the first one clambering to Revise, Extend and Extinguish method of fixing it until it breaks.
Many slashdot readers are liberals who think the government solution to every problem is the best. The part that make it NOT Net Neutrality are ... the government is involved. Which means, that it can and will be revised and extended until it no longer resembles what it is today. Revise, Extend, Extinguish.
And once it really breaks, there is NO solution to actually fixing the problem, except more of the thing that broke it in the first place.
Actually only the HOUSE can originate new taxes. ObamaCare is a tax, originating in the Senate, so the government is already violating the law. How, pray tell, is that working out?
Yes, I have a 386 handy, and I want to run a modern version of GNOME on it!
Don't YOU be an ass. Expecting hardware to perform outside of its capability is stupid. You know it isn't going to work, so quit your bitching. Expecting a Dell that runs only at 2 properly to run at 5 is expecting too much. A Dell saying it runs at 5 properly, that doesn't, means it is defective, and you have a choice to run it at 2, or return it as defective.
It would be much easier to find a system that does run 5 correctly.
The problem isn't Verizon or Comcast, the problem is last mile Fiber. Make it municipal fiber, and let the content providers fight for the customers. Competition, in the right location fixes everything WITHOUT government intruding on that content.
Having the government enforce neutrality is actually a very good thing.
Yes. BUT what was passed in congress is anything but Net Neutrality. Remember, it takes GOVERNMENT to screw up something simple.