HobbyLobby get the financial benefit for following ACA without actually providing the benefits of ACA. An employee gets sub-standard insurance, HobbyLobby gets the tax credits and (this is the kicker for me) the employee is not eligible for subsidized insurance that is not-substandard from the exchanges because HobbyLobby got it's cake and ate it too.
I feel like we've barely grazed the surface of the potential of crowd funding. I mean, in a real sense here we, as society, are funding self-education - we are funding the education of our own society. That's cool.
Government and taxes have been a way of society crowd funding its own education for far longer than kickstarter has been around. It says something about how youngsters perceive our extant system if kickstarter campaigns funding education seem like a new thing.
We both had a moderate amount of snark I think, mostly due to training by "the internet" but we both saw through it. Thank you for that.
I agree we're not going to reach a parking utopia here, but if public transit can be good enough that city dwellers need not own a car and most commuters don't need to drive to work then most of the parking will be for tourists and people with occasional business downtown. I live downtown but I own a car which I park on the street that I use to drive to work in the suburbs because our public transportation is woefully inadequate and a reverse-commute is ten minutes but taking a bus is an hour. I would sell the car in a minute if I had an alternative. That would be one less car on the road or in a parking spot. Every little bit counts.
I think we're coming from two different angles. You seem to think the majority of people live in the suburbs and commute downtown, I seem to think the majority of people live in the city and commute within the city. You are probably right.
But, if those people in the city still need the car from time to time, they will take up space parking in the city. It's best if they never need a car and don't own one. That was my point: it was really only targeted at city residents (which I admit is really only part of the problem).
I get terrible reception with rabbit ears, and live in an apartment where i cannot use a massive outdoor antenna. i would have loved the opportunity to pay someone to "host" MY antenna for me in a place with good reception.
How about asking the landlord to allow you to place an antenna on the roof? Or how about mounting an antenna outside a window?
The same way as when cable TV required a physical cable run to your home
Cable TV today does not require a physical cable run to your home? I was under the impression that Cable TV today still used cables. (I haven't had cable for over a decade so I might be behind the times but Google around didn't net me any over-the-air cable TV.)
Rent in this area is between $700-1200 unless your drive is REALLY long, or you're living in an absolute shithole.
Where I live many people that cannot afford to rent a flat on their own will share a flat with another family or a roommate. It can cut your housing costs a lot. Especially if you choose a two-bedroom place in the city and split it and not have to drive to work. Plus being able to walk to the market means no gym membership!
But in most states no employer can demand you work more than 40 hours.
I assume you mean forty hours per week not total. Of course they cannot demand it, you can always walk away. Or you can refuse and be fired. That's pretty much almost "demand" in spirit. Or is there some law that I'm not aware of?
How do they force you? If anyone is fired for refusing to work more than 40 hours then they can sue since this is breaking the laws of most states in the US.
I assume you mean forty hours a week and not forty hours in toto. Can you point to a law that prevents an employer from firing an employee for refusing to work more than forty hours a week?
Most knowledge workers are exempt employees which means employers need not track their hours or pay them overtime for any time worked beyond forty per week. Nonexempt employees may work more than forty hours per week but must be paid overtime.
Calling it "Workaholism" implies we have a choice.
We do have a choice. Convincing yourself that you can't do anything about it is just fatalism and depressing. With that kind of mindset you are unlikely to choose something for yourself that's not corporate serfdom. The powers that benefit from corporate serfs spend a lot of time and money convincing the populace that their way is the best way. They don't want you to think about creative ways to live your life; they rather you feel like you're getting a great deal from them.
I wish someone would invent a device to turn my conscious brain off and let me get some quality sleep every night. Preferably one that isn't just a big ice-cream scoop lobotomizer.
It's possible that if you teach yourself to meditate for a few minutes a day, after a couple of weeks you'll find your mind able to rest more peacefully when it is time to rest.
Are you saying that there are no people in San Francisco that live downtown and own a car? I agree that most people that park downtown do not live there, but San Francisco has residents, surely. Otherwise, what's the purpose of their RPZ program?
Yes, for the 15 second it takes the guy to drive by at 75MPH.
Fifteen seconds is enough to make a difference in some cases. Is it worth endangering innocents to prevent someone from receiving a text. For starters, not all drivers read their texts while driving. Let's recall why some people are making arguments that what this man is doing is A-Okay: "Consider this: A driver who does not receive texts will not check their texts."
What are you even talking about? U.S. law has no effect on non-US citizens.
The visitors to our country would disagree with you. I'm pretty sure that if you were shot and maimed by a legal tourist from abroad you would hope the US law applied to them. Or if you were t-boned by a legal tourist from abroad running a red light.
What's to escalate? When the schedule flat out doesn't work, and your calls to customer service get handed over to a customer svc agent's voice mail, unless they want to talk to you, and they don't... that was what happened with us, I have no idea what happened with them... escalate doesn't help.
For starters, they could have filed their paperwork without using the new software. It stands to reason there was a system in place before this upgrade. I'm sure they had a plan B, right? If not, then I hope they learned a lesson.
When people say "going faster than 80", then refer to 150 a bit later down the text, they don't mean 81. They mean a value that is significantly higher than 80.
People should write what they mean. "Going beyond 80mph is illegal." clearly means greater than 80 not greatly greater. Also, even if we rule out the ~81mph speed limits we are still left with a good number higher than that and some which are unlimited.
Slashdot Mirror
you serve it still in the cast iron pan
This recipe does not call for resting the steak on a rack?
HobbyLobby get the financial benefit for following ACA without actually providing the benefits of ACA. An employee gets sub-standard insurance, HobbyLobby gets the tax credits and (this is the kicker for me) the employee is not eligible for subsidized insurance that is not-substandard from the exchanges because HobbyLobby got it's cake and ate it too.
I feel like we've barely grazed the surface of the potential of crowd funding. I mean, in a real sense here we, as society, are funding self-education - we are funding the education of our own society. That's cool.
Government and taxes have been a way of society crowd funding its own education for far longer than kickstarter has been around. It says something about how youngsters perceive our extant system if kickstarter campaigns funding education seem like a new thing.
Works of art too!
Words of art are not commodities, by definition.
You mean delivering small, low margin items, on a local basis, is not a viable business model? Well, shit... Wish somebody'd told us.
- Kozmo.com
I heard somewhere that they will be re-launching.
We both had a moderate amount of snark I think, mostly due to training by "the internet" but we both saw through it. Thank you for that.
I agree we're not going to reach a parking utopia here, but if public transit can be good enough that city dwellers need not own a car and most commuters don't need to drive to work then most of the parking will be for tourists and people with occasional business downtown. I live downtown but I own a car which I park on the street that I use to drive to work in the suburbs because our public transportation is woefully inadequate and a reverse-commute is ten minutes but taking a bus is an hour. I would sell the car in a minute if I had an alternative. That would be one less car on the road or in a parking spot. Every little bit counts.
I think we're coming from two different angles. You seem to think the majority of people live in the suburbs and commute downtown, I seem to think the majority of people live in the city and commute within the city. You are probably right.
But, if those people in the city still need the car from time to time, they will take up space parking in the city. It's best if they never need a car and don't own one. That was my point: it was really only targeted at city residents (which I admit is really only part of the problem).
I get terrible reception with rabbit ears, and live in an apartment where i cannot use a massive outdoor antenna. i would have loved the opportunity to pay someone to "host" MY antenna for me in a place with good reception.
How about asking the landlord to allow you to place an antenna on the roof? Or how about mounting an antenna outside a window?
The same way as when cable TV required a physical cable run to your home
Cable TV today does not require a physical cable run to your home? I was under the impression that Cable TV today still used cables. (I haven't had cable for over a decade so I might be behind the times but Google around didn't net me any over-the-air cable TV.)
And it's before taxes. So figure $1200 a month.
Rent in this area is between $700-1200 unless your drive is REALLY long, or you're living in an absolute shithole.
Where I live many people that cannot afford to rent a flat on their own will share a flat with another family or a roommate. It can cut your housing costs a lot. Especially if you choose a two-bedroom place in the city and split it and not have to drive to work. Plus being able to walk to the market means no gym membership!
But in most states no employer can demand you work more than 40 hours.
I assume you mean forty hours per week not total. Of course they cannot demand it, you can always walk away. Or you can refuse and be fired. That's pretty much almost "demand" in spirit. Or is there some law that I'm not aware of?
How do they force you? If anyone is fired for refusing to work more than 40 hours then they can sue since this is breaking the laws of most states in the US.
I assume you mean forty hours a week and not forty hours in toto. Can you point to a law that prevents an employer from firing an employee for refusing to work more than forty hours a week?
Most knowledge workers are exempt employees which means employers need not track their hours or pay them overtime for any time worked beyond forty per week. Nonexempt employees may work more than forty hours per week but must be paid overtime.
Calling it "Workaholism" implies we have a choice.
We do have a choice. Convincing yourself that you can't do anything about it is just fatalism and depressing. With that kind of mindset you are unlikely to choose something for yourself that's not corporate serfdom. The powers that benefit from corporate serfs spend a lot of time and money convincing the populace that their way is the best way. They don't want you to think about creative ways to live your life; they rather you feel like you're getting a great deal from them.
I wish someone would invent a device to turn my conscious brain off and let me get some quality sleep every night. Preferably one that isn't just a big ice-cream scoop lobotomizer.
It's possible that if you teach yourself to meditate for a few minutes a day, after a couple of weeks you'll find your mind able to rest more peacefully when it is time to rest.
Are you saying that there are no people in San Francisco that live downtown and own a car? I agree that most people that park downtown do not live there, but San Francisco has residents, surely. Otherwise, what's the purpose of their RPZ program?
Yes, for the 15 second it takes the guy to drive by at 75MPH.
Fifteen seconds is enough to make a difference in some cases. Is it worth endangering innocents to prevent someone from receiving a text. For starters, not all drivers read their texts while driving. Let's recall why some people are making arguments that what this man is doing is A-Okay: "Consider this: A driver who does not receive texts will not check their texts."
The accuser has the burden of proof.
This amounts to the city trying to extort money out of people. In short, the city is just mad they don't get a piece of the pie.
Coercion is a crime, and the city official in making such threats is not in performance of his duty, but is in comission of a crime.
The accuser indeed does have the burden of proof. What proof do you have that the city official committed a crime?
Or they need better public transportation so people don't have to drive their cars everywhere.
It needs to be good enough public transportation to allow not owning a car for an owned car must still be parked somewhere.
For a few minutes anyway. The signal jammer moves with the guy's car.
A few minutes can make a difference, especially if the attempting caller is only conscious for ten seconds.
Consider this: A driver who does not receive texts will not check their texts.
That's true. Sadly a driver that attempts to call 911 from a ditch will wonder what's up.
What are you even talking about? U.S. law has no effect on non-US citizens.
The visitors to our country would disagree with you. I'm pretty sure that if you were shot and maimed by a legal tourist from abroad you would hope the US law applied to them. Or if you were t-boned by a legal tourist from abroad running a red light.
What's to escalate? When the schedule flat out doesn't work, and your calls to customer service get handed over to a customer svc agent's voice mail, unless they want to talk to you, and they don't... that was what happened with us, I have no idea what happened with them... escalate doesn't help.
For starters, they could have filed their paperwork without using the new software. It stands to reason there was a system in place before this upgrade. I'm sure they had a plan B, right? If not, then I hope they learned a lesson.
When people say "going faster than 80", then refer to 150 a bit later down the text, they don't mean 81. They mean a value that is significantly higher than 80.
People should write what they mean. "Going beyond 80mph is illegal." clearly means greater than 80 not greatly greater. Also, even if we rule out the ~81mph speed limits we are still left with a good number higher than that and some which are unlimited.
Countries that use kilometres are irrelevant. People don't talk about "going faster than 80mph" there.
Why does it matter what language they say it in or what units they use? They travel faster than 80 mph legally.
Moreover 130km/h (which is the speed limit in France, and one of the highest speed limits) is 81mph. That's hardly higher.
Hardly higher is still higher. We're talking about a limit here. Doing 80 mph in a 81 mph limit is legal.
Apparently most of the freeways in the US have a limit of 70mph, with some exceptions that go up to 85. That's hardly much more than 80.
Again, there are roads in the US were doing 80 mph is legal.
My only point was that "Going beyond 80mph is illegal." is only true on a subset of roads, not globally true.