What's passive aggressive. This is a major point of contention.
I don't give a rat's a$$ about who one marries, who one f**ks, how one dresses. Do what you want.
But the military cares about suicide rates. It's a problem. Add to that the well document FACT that transgendered people commit suicide at a far greater rate than the average person (whether or not they have had surgery) and they (the military) have a good reason to be concerned.
Whether they should or should not prevent transgendered people in the military is another issue. It is not, however, a bullsh!t consideration.
1. 1000 years ago Christians were not burning heretics. This "burning" took place almost exclusively during the Spanish Inquisition. Starting in the 1470s and lasting in its most brutal way for 100+ years. Over that period deaths were in the 3-5,000 range.
2. Surgery was around in Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, China, and India. We have numerous examples of skulls that were drilled to in order to relieve internal pressure (and many survived surgery!). The reason surgery did not exist until the late 19th C was a little thing called anesthesia. Germ theory helped to increase survival rates but the key development were ether, nitrous oxide, morphine and tracheal intubation which were a huge step up over opium and alcohol.
Correct. But then we're already dealing with existing steel and not making new steel from iron ore.
I'm not a fan of coal. I would like to see it gone for power generation and steel production. But for now we cannot make steel at an economical price without it. No steel. No cities. No train. No lots of things.
Coal is becoming less and less profitable to produce power thanks to natural gas (fracking).
For the most part the only coal that we truly "need" for the foreseeable future is to make steel..
Coal mines are independent of each other - miner extracts coal from coal seams and sends it to the steel mill. Economy of scale matters matters less here. (I'm not in the industry so this is speculation.).
I think we all want to see the end of coal. We're seeing it disappear for general power generation the only major use left is steel. Maybe one day one of the alternative methods will work. But we're talking about in the here and now: 2017.
You're a fool. And you're attempts at being snarky prove it. No one is for coal per se. What they're opposed to has been written numerous times and you've chosen to gloss over the points and promoted a small-minded, bigoted trope.
Killing jobs for *FEEL-GOOD* environmental reasons (meaning the plant shut downs do nothing in the overall picture) are not a net positive in the environmental arena - and in the jobs arena it's a big loss. The Democrats are no longer the party of labor - and they're paying the price for it. Your small-minded obtuseness has contributed to the rise of Trump. Thank you for being such a d*ck.
You realize that freedom of assembly is code word for racism (see all the klan rallies)
You realize that freedom of the press is code word for racism (see all the klan and nazi pamphlets)
You realize that freedom of speech is code word for racism (see all the speeches at the above rallies).
States rights has nothing more to do with racism than does freedom of the press. It is a boundary in the power between the states and the federal government. The fact that racists used it to bolster their claim does not invalidate the concept.
U6, as far as I can tell, is simply an attempt to account for underemployment. Nothing more. You're correct in that it doesn't account for the type or extent of underemployment.
One more set of useful numbers would be to have the total number of people between in an age range (say 18-68) and the total number of those who are working.
I guess we call agree that U3 is close to worthless and is too easily manipulated.
Agreed. It's like "averages". Averages are, on average, useful. - ooo. just made that up;)
Which is why one needs more than one number. In baseball.400 average only says so much. If you're up to bat 5 times it's ho-hum. If you're batting.400 after 500 at bats - wow.
After 5000 at bats and you're the best player to ever play the game.
Part of the Paris Treaty was for developed countries to send money to developing countries.
Did you really miss that?
Article 9
1. Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist
developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in
continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.
Commissions were to be established which would dictate the allocation of funds. Guess who pay? (US Taxpayers)
Attacks on judges? Disagreeing is an attack. Disagreeing when the judges obviously overstepped their bounds (see Supreme Court slapdown) is an attack? But when Obama criticized judges at the state of the union.... that wasn't an "attack".
No verbal approval no. But it's underground. Only the access points will be covered by NIMBY etc... If the tubes prove safe then a good portion of NIMBY and environmental impact is gone.
2. Do not share your former employer's plans, strategies or technologies with your new employer
I'm going to play devil's advocate here.
What if you were on a chess team helping someone win a championship. Would it be fair to that team if you then switched to another team? You would know the strategies that were being developed. If your job included developing strategy would you not have an advantage by knowing what your previous employer was planning? What if you were hired simply to bring that insight to the new team?
Now, I know that this happens in sports ALL the time. Coaches have a great deal of knowledge of the inner workers of their previous team and use that knowledge against them when the two teams play.
All this is to say that even as a techie who is involved in business meetings I don't see how I can hurt my company by going to a competitor. But I could see how a high level business planner may be barred by a non-compete clause.
Ok. I thought it was for both; debt and confiscating property for "illegal" activity before being convicted of a crime.
I was willing to give a pass on the relationship between state and federal for debt (which, if I remember correctly has not been ruled upon - that there were numerous gray lines) but I agree completely, absolutely regarding the seizure for "illegal" activity. This is horrendous on all levels, local, state and federal.
I'm a big proponent of states rights as a way of limiting Federal power and as a way of bringing in needed change in a more timely manner.
You're correct in that this is not simply a left/right or Democrat/Republican thing.
Obama and his administration overstepped their role (without enough state pushback) as far as California medical marijuana laws.
Sessions is doing much the same here. In both cases they're wrong.
There are powers reserved to the states and others which belong to the Federal government. And we, the citizens, should do what we can to enforce these boundaries instead of being cheering spectators. Furthermore national parties are made up of factions (Ted Cruz != McCain, Bernie Sanders != Hillary Clinton) nor is the national party infrastructure equal to the grassroots of either party.
So, I, a proponent of states rights will join you in opposing Sessions. It needs to go to the Supreme Court to delineate how state law can limit asset forfeiture on debts owed to the Federal Government.
States rights are an essential check and balance on the concentration of power. The fact that some racists took it up as a rallying point no more indicts states rights than a KKK or Final Call newsletter indicts Freedom of the Press.
Imagine how much further along we would be if we, as a nation, respected states rights. You want weed legal. Good do so in your state. You think universal health care should exist. Good do so. Pass it in your state. That is the only way we, as a continent sized country, with a lot of different sides (it's way more complicated than left/right) can coexist without much friction.
You want to allow women to walk around topless, allow anyone to use any bathroom, x,y,z. Pass it your state. If others find it to be a good idea they'll adopt it.
Leaked document says 2,000 men allegedly assaulted 1,200 German... https://www.washingtonpost.com......
Jul 11, 2016 - Germany approves new sexual assault law after mass New Year's Eve... outcry over mass attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve.
No acid attacks in London. Acid attacks in the UK - how many have there been in London and... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/...
2 days ago - IN LONDON alone the number of acid attacks shot up by 65 per cent last year to 431 – or one every 20 hours – as a growing number of victims...
Why are you so certain that these things are not happening?
Slashdot Mirror
What's passive aggressive. This is a major point of contention.
I don't give a rat's a$$ about who one marries, who one f**ks, how one dresses. Do what you want.
But the military cares about suicide rates. It's a problem. Add to that the well document FACT that transgendered people commit suicide at a far greater rate than the average person (whether or not they have had surgery) and they (the military) have a good reason to be concerned.
Whether they should or should not prevent transgendered people in the military is another issue. It is not, however, a bullsh!t consideration.
Nope.
1. 1000 years ago Christians were not burning heretics. This "burning" took place almost exclusively during the Spanish Inquisition. Starting in the 1470s and lasting in its most brutal way for 100+ years. Over that period deaths were in the 3-5,000 range.
2. Surgery was around in Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, China, and India. We have numerous examples of skulls that were drilled to in order to relieve internal pressure (and many survived surgery!). The reason surgery did not exist until the late 19th C was a little thing called anesthesia. Germ theory helped to increase survival rates but the key development were ether, nitrous oxide, morphine and tracheal intubation which were a huge step up over opium and alcohol.
Correct. But then we're already dealing with existing steel and not making new steel from iron ore.
I'm not a fan of coal. I would like to see it gone for power generation and steel production. But for now we cannot make steel at an economical price without it. No steel. No cities. No train. No lots of things.
Coal is becoming less and less profitable to produce power thanks to natural gas (fracking).
.
.
For the most part the only coal that we truly "need" for the foreseeable future is to make steel.
Coal mines are independent of each other - miner extracts coal from coal seams and sends it to the steel mill. Economy of scale matters matters less here. (I'm not in the industry so this is speculation.)
I think we all want to see the end of coal. We're seeing it disappear for general power generation the only major use left is steel. Maybe one day one of the alternative methods will work. But we're talking about in the here and now: 2017.
lol. :)
Yup. That's the answer.
Does tech require steel? And how does one make steel? mmmm with coal.
You're a fool. And you're attempts at being snarky prove it. No one is for coal per se. What they're opposed to has been written numerous times and you've chosen to gloss over the points and promoted a small-minded, bigoted trope.
Killing jobs for *FEEL-GOOD* environmental reasons (meaning the plant shut downs do nothing in the overall picture) are not a net positive in the environmental arena - and in the jobs arena it's a big loss. The Democrats are no longer the party of labor - and they're paying the price for it. Your small-minded obtuseness has contributed to the rise of Trump. Thank you for being such a d*ck.
You realize that freedom of assembly is code word for racism (see all the klan rallies)
You realize that freedom of the press is code word for racism (see all the klan and nazi pamphlets)
You realize that freedom of speech is code word for racism (see all the speeches at the above rallies).
States rights has nothing more to do with racism than does freedom of the press. It is a boundary in the power between the states and the federal government. The fact that racists used it to bolster their claim does not invalidate the concept.
Oh f**king hell no.
U6, as far as I can tell, is simply an attempt to account for underemployment. Nothing more. You're correct in that it doesn't account for the type or extent of underemployment.
One more set of useful numbers would be to have the total number of people between in an age range (say 18-68) and the total number of those who are working.
I guess we call agree that U3 is close to worthless and is too easily manipulated.
Agreed. It's like "averages". Averages are, on average, useful. - ooo. just made that up ;)
.400 average only says so much. If you're up to bat 5 times it's ho-hum. If you're batting .400 after 500 at bats - wow.
Which is why one needs more than one number. In baseball
After 5000 at bats and you're the best player to ever play the game.
And of course the media, in its infinite wisdom, decides when to question the validity of the employment numbers.
As in most cases you need more than one set of numbers. I think reporting U3 and U6 should be done as a matter of course.
I am in favor of market based solutions. The Paris Treaty is not a market based solution.
Did you really miss that?
Article 9
1. Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist
developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in
continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.
Commissions were to be established which would dictate the allocation of funds. Guess who pay? (US Taxpayers)
The above quote comes from the alt-right spew site known as the United Nations https://unfccc.int/files/essen...
What extortion?
.... that wasn't an "attack".
Literally WHAT extortion.
Attacks on judges? Disagreeing is an attack. Disagreeing when the judges obviously overstepped their bounds (see Supreme Court slapdown) is an attack? But when Obama criticized judges at the state of the union
No verbal approval no. But it's underground. Only the access points will be covered by NIMBY etc... If the tubes prove safe then a good portion of NIMBY and environmental impact is gone.
Do you actually believe your BS?
Mafia don?
For your sake I hope not.
2. Do not share your former employer's plans, strategies or technologies with your new employer
I'm going to play devil's advocate here.
What if you were on a chess team helping someone win a championship. Would it be fair to that team if you then switched to another team? You would know the strategies that were being developed. If your job included developing strategy would you not have an advantage by knowing what your previous employer was planning? What if you were hired simply to bring that insight to the new team?
Now, I know that this happens in sports ALL the time. Coaches have a great deal of knowledge of the inner workers of their previous team and use that knowledge against them when the two teams play.
All this is to say that even as a techie who is involved in business meetings I don't see how I can hurt my company by going to a competitor. But I could see how a high level business planner may be barred by a non-compete clause.
Ya. watch the young turks and go to the intercept once in a while. Don't really listen to their podcasts.
thanks yes- I thought it was debt owed as well as pre-conviction seizure for participating in "illicit" activities.
Regarding debt - I can see some gray area - but not for pre-conviction seizures.
Ok. I thought it was for both; debt and confiscating property for "illegal" activity before being convicted of a crime.
I was willing to give a pass on the relationship between state and federal for debt (which, if I remember correctly has not been ruled upon - that there were numerous gray lines) but I agree completely, absolutely regarding the seizure for "illegal" activity. This is horrendous on all levels, local, state and federal.
I'm a big proponent of states rights as a way of limiting Federal power and as a way of bringing in needed change in a more timely manner.
You're correct in that this is not simply a left/right or Democrat/Republican thing.
Obama and his administration overstepped their role (without enough state pushback) as far as California medical marijuana laws. Sessions is doing much the same here. In both cases they're wrong.
There are powers reserved to the states and others which belong to the Federal government. And we, the citizens, should do what we can to enforce these boundaries instead of being cheering spectators. Furthermore national parties are made up of factions (Ted Cruz != McCain, Bernie Sanders != Hillary Clinton) nor is the national party infrastructure equal to the grassroots of either party.
So, I, a proponent of states rights will join you in opposing Sessions. It needs to go to the Supreme Court to delineate how state law can limit asset forfeiture on debts owed to the Federal Government.
You realize incorrectly.
States rights are an essential check and balance on the concentration of power. The fact that some racists took it up as a rallying point no more indicts states rights than a KKK or Final Call newsletter indicts Freedom of the Press.
Imagine how much further along we would be if we, as a nation, respected states rights. You want weed legal. Good do so in your state. You think universal health care should exist. Good do so. Pass it in your state. That is the only way we, as a continent sized country, with a lot of different sides (it's way more complicated than left/right) can coexist without much friction. You want to allow women to walk around topless, allow anyone to use any bathroom, x,y,z. Pass it your state. If others find it to be a good idea they'll adopt it.
What did I make up?
Wow. Nice guy.
By the way I did not vote Trump and I'm card-carrying Pastafarian.
Yeah. No mass sexual assault in Germany
... ... outcry over mass attacks on women in Cologne on New Year's Eve.
... ...
Leaked document says 2,000 men allegedly assaulted 1,200 German
https://www.washingtonpost.com......
Jul 11, 2016 - Germany approves new sexual assault law after mass New Year's Eve
No acid attacks in London.
Acid attacks in the UK - how many have there been in London and
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/...
2 days ago - IN LONDON alone the number of acid attacks shot up by 65 per cent last year to 431 – or one every 20 hours – as a growing number of victims
Why are you so certain that these things are not happening?