I don't pay too much attention to the Daily Mail. They have turned out to be unreliable too many times in the past. I've even caught them intentionally lying about some issues with global warming.
The 2nd chart in the article I used is from the US Census. I think that's pretty reliable.
I used the 2nd table which provides a straight histogram of the number of individuals in a particular income range. Per capita doesn't come into it at all.
The household income table is much more difficult to interpret in this context.
> I wonder what the other shareholders in FB feel about the issue of 18 million shares of stock without renumeration as it will water down their EPS and stock value
Facebook stock is down 4% today. However on the year it has more than doubled. Most investors would be happy I think. Short term traders (who are not investors) not so much.
Mostly in the tax treatment of the donation. Donating the $990 million in shares avoids having to sell the shares and getting the cap gains tax, then donating the remaining money.
The charity sells the shares instead and gets the full value instead of the reduced value, and Zuck gets to deduct the market value of the stocks instead of the value reduced by the cap gains tax.
Really it's a win for the charity to get the shares rather than the cash. For Zuck the end result is pretty much the same.
Average working stiffs can do pretty much the same thing by setting up a Donor Advised Fund and donating shares to them. This has the added benefit of bunching the funds into one year for tax purposes. You can then distribute the money to charities over time.
The important concern is the economics of the situation, not the conceptualization of the utility grid.
Assuming the utility credits you a certain amount for the electricity you supply them, and then charges you another amount for what you use, and the credit/debit at the end of the month is the difference I'd think you would want to minimize the amount of electricity you use at night.
Resistive heating certainly doesn't do that. In fact it's likely to be more expensive than even heating using LPG.
They are not restricting your right to be on the roads. They are restricting your right to operate dangerous machinery on the roads as a matter of public safety.
There are many well known limits to rights arising from similar issues. It's really idiotic to think an absolute right to exercise one of these rights exists.
One common example is that Freedom of Religion does not permit you to engage in ritual human sacrifice.
Enforcement of Supreme Court decisions is a problem far older than the 21st century. Generally it only works because of respect for the institutions of the Constitution.
For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.
Slashdot Mirror
The only way to kneecap special interests is to limit campaign contributions to a few dollars per voter.
While we are at it the House should also limit campaign contributions to $5 per voter to maintain true proportional representation.
Well, if you talk to retired people in an area with high real estate taxes you sure will hear complaints about property values going up.
I'm going to lose 2% of my fixed income next year to property tax increases because of this.
I don't pay too much attention to the Daily Mail. They have turned out to be unreliable too many times in the past. I've even caught them intentionally lying about some issues with global warming.
The 2nd chart in the article I used is from the US Census. I think that's pretty reliable.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032011/perinc/new01_001.htm
For the top 1% worldwide I used this:
http://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwphe/0305002.html
And the calculator here:
http://www.givingwhatwecan.org/why-give/how-rich-am-i
which is based on the above.
I used the 2nd table which provides a straight histogram of the number of individuals in a particular income range. Per capita doesn't come into it at all.
The household income table is much more difficult to interpret in this context.
In the United States 25% of the >15 year old population has a personal income > $50K
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States .25 * 234 x 10^6 = 58.5 x 10^6.
That's 0.8% of the world population.
> The difference is in the quantity that you might ingest.
Do you have a reference on that one?
> MIR162 as a major consumption hazard (I'm sure I've eaten some already as I live in the USA)
MIR162 is approved pretty much worldwide.
> Low-level doses that permeate the environment seem like they will inevitably breed resistance in the pests.
Bt toxins have been permeating the environment from natural sources for millions of years.
My wife had a miscarriage like this.
Dipwad isn't the right word. I don't think human language is capable of expressing what this triggers in me.
Not only by the EU. It is also approved for food in Canada, Australia, Taiwan, Philippines, Japan, Columbia and Korea.
I am sure there will be no problem finding customers. Meanwhile billions of Chinese babies will go hungry.
The expressed protein is a Bt toxin, which is approved for and used on organic farms as a natural pesticide.
You should feel grateful to your NSA overlords that you are even allowed to have communications at all.
It seems reasonable only to uninformed people.
The pest control is bacillus thuringiensis toxin, a group of proteins so specific that they affects only a few species of insects.
These materials are permitted for use by organic farmers as a natural pesticide.
Boeing has a very large backlog (345 billion) of orders in the commercial sector.
I really doubt they will be up the creek any time soon.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/avd_10_24_2013_p01-02-629774.xml
Not correct. There is both a secondary offering from Facebook and a sale by Zuck and some of the other Facebook officers.
http://allthingsd.com/20131219/facebook-and-mark-zuckerberg-sell-and-so-does-wall-street/
> I wonder what the other shareholders in FB feel about the issue of 18 million shares of stock without renumeration as it will water down their EPS and stock value
Facebook stock is down 4% today. However on the year it has more than doubled. Most investors would be happy I think. Short term traders (who are not investors) not so much.
I am not comparing a continent to a country
US only contributes 22%. Europe pays more.
DOH!
Mostly in the tax treatment of the donation. Donating the $990 million in shares avoids having to sell the shares and getting the cap gains tax, then donating the remaining money.
The charity sells the shares instead and gets the full value instead of the reduced value, and Zuck gets to deduct the market value of the stocks instead of the value reduced by the cap gains tax.
Really it's a win for the charity to get the shares rather than the cash. For Zuck the end result is pretty much the same.
Average working stiffs can do pretty much the same thing by setting up a Donor Advised Fund and donating shares to them. This has the added benefit of bunching the funds into one year for tax purposes. You can then distribute the money to charities over time.
You would think that these breaches would get the US to update it's security practices.
1. Chip and Pin credit cards.
2. Separate authentication and authorization in the SS system.
> When was the last time you heard of a police officer sent to prison for brutality?
It happens fairly frequently. Here is one recent case:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/09/23/former-officer-gets-month-prison-sentence-brutality-case/GqLq7DbwPRf1dDRPHN8LzK/story.html
Be careful. Issuing a negative review of a Scandinavian country might get you borked by a Swedish judge!
He put it in?
Please explain to me how a Vice President passes legislation.
Have been known for years. The problem is you have to gain admin access to the machine first, so basically you are bricking your own botnet.
LOL.
The important concern is the economics of the situation, not the conceptualization of the utility grid.
Assuming the utility credits you a certain amount for the electricity you supply them, and then charges you another amount for what you use, and the credit/debit at the end of the month is the difference I'd think you would want to minimize the amount of electricity you use at night.
Resistive heating certainly doesn't do that. In fact it's likely to be more expensive than even heating using LPG.
They are not restricting your right to be on the roads. They are restricting your right to operate dangerous machinery on the roads as a matter of public safety.
There are many well known limits to rights arising from similar issues. It's really idiotic to think an absolute right to exercise one of these rights exists.
One common example is that Freedom of Religion does not permit you to engage in ritual human sacrifice.
Enforcement of Supreme Court decisions is a problem far older than the 21st century. Generally it only works because of respect for the institutions of the Constitution.
For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.
That would be my position.
The internets are pretty new. It is an unhappy event to be reminded as to how venial people in position of power in government can be.
Hopefully there will be some careful thought by people in office channeling The Founders that will restore balance.
If not well maybe a new political party has to be established.