We have the bicameral legislature because when the country was first formed the colonies really were separate entities and the smaller colonies refused to join without a bigger say in federal policies. It doesn't have much purpose now (other than the long term vs. short term difference between the house and the senate), it contributes to voter apathy (why vote if it isn't going to count anyway?), and is contrary to the one man, one vote principle upon which we were founded (an Alaskan voter gets, effectively, three votes for every one that a Californian gets).
The "big states vs small states" issue is no longer very important, we are now a unified country rather than a collection of colonies, and tyranny of the minority is not an improvement over tyranny of the majority. The courts exist to prevent tyranny, not the legislature.
This is funny. Here we are talking about how nobody really likes Romney and how they only voted for him because he's republican, and you get angry and defend who? Not Romney. You don't even mention Romney, you only say how much you don't like Obama.
I don't see why, they felt that doing so would make the president beholden to congress, inviting corruption. The oligarchy that I'm talking about here is a large one, not just a few influential people who wrote the constitution but rather preventing the unwashed masses from selecting one of their own.
That's the implication, but it has always been my opinion that the electoral college was about maintaining the oligarchy. Voting was originally just for wealthy white men after all, and they needed a way to prevent someone unapproved from gaining power. This was why electors were not originally required to act in good faith (still true in many states).
They didn't vote for Romney, they voted republican and Romney was the name next to the (R). Even saying that they "voted" is kind of a stretch, it implies a decision with at least some consideration behind it. People have their favorite brands, and for some people that brand is republican.
My impression of Sharp may be anachronistic, I don't know if the company is still what it used to be, but I think of them as manufacturing really terrific products, particularly portable electronics (remember these?), but hardly selling them or anything at all outside of Japan. Even within Japan I guess their marketing wasn't so good. Sorta the anti-Apple - poor marketing, but great and often pretty open products.
On the other hand, I don't condone it, and if it became subsidized by government money (at some point in the future), then I would then be forced to have an opinion on it because then I become responsible for paying for it.
Hopefully, someone does the smart thing and leaves the funding for the actual actions to a nice, private charity organization made up of people who agree with it.
I get the perspective that there are some things which are acceptable for individuals that are unacceptable for government. Not to get political on this, but the issue surrounding gay marriage seems like a perfect example - some people think it's wrong and that's fine, people are entitled to their opinions, but government can't be allowed to play favorites.
The idea that people should ever be forced into dependency on private largesse for their basic needs, including health, is repugnant to me however. Barring extravagant or otherwise wasteful practices, it seems to me that the government's job is to give us choices.
Yes, that's what I got. If you click "no", it prompts you to create an account. There's no way to continue without either signing in with an existing account or creating a new one. That's a particular problem if you don't have a Wifi network to connect through - you pretty well can't use your device at all without connecting to Google at least once.
(That isn't completely true - you can root your tablet and install a third party ROM without connecting to Google, but that's kinda outside the spirit of the question.)
All others are either too willing to go along with truly socialist options
Could you explain what you mean by this? The internet is essentially maximum socialized right now, with only the infrastructure owned by private companies, what would a more socialist internet look like?
And I'm sure I can find at least one person on the left who has made the same claim about Romney
Yeah I saw a story like this already, claiming that Romney/Ryan are hushing up now and trying to hide how they want to cut funding for FEMA and disaster relief. I mean it's a little different, those liberals usually quote lots of "facts" and crap to make Romney look bad instead of just making stuff up directly, but it's the same idea.
With my Nexus 7 there was no option to boot the first time without first setting up a Google account. I don't think this is such a big deal, I set up a separate throwaway account with each of my devices, but that annoyed me.
I'm also a little annoyed that I got my Nexus 7 just a month ago... Would certainly have waited for one of these here Nexus 4's.
Things that happen after I die aren't important. I don't know why people keep railing on about this "environment" nonsense either, somebody wasted my time with his "endangered species" prattle just this morning - I could eat nothing but Ethiopian wolf every day for the rest of my life. That's not a shortage.
Adderall is an amphetamine just like meth (methamphetamine). I wrote a whole thing about how the methyl group doesn't change the way the drug functions, just the rate at which it's absorbed, but Wikipedia says I'm wrong. Oh well. The short is: of course there are some negative side effects, all stimulants have the potential to cause cardiac problems, but it's pretty unlikely that new ones are going to show up. Unlike Fen-Phen, amphetamines have been around for a long time and very thoroughly studied.
The only way you could see these drugs as unethical is if you look at life and learning as a game - if someone learns more than you on the down-low that's cheating, life should be a struggle, etc. Obviously people with rich parents should be banned from the competition.
For those who haven't tried it: adderall is a much smoother stimulant than caffeine. The effect is similar, but without the crash. Hands down better for productivity, just more expensive thanks to prohibition.
Conspiracy? Sure - the TSA spends billions on useless scanners that kill more people than they save and then rather then just getting rid of the scanners they hustle them off to smaller airports where fewer people will be paying attention. Getting rid of the scanners entirely would be tantamount to admitting to either a mistake or corruption, depending on who you ask. Equally bad from the TSA's perspective, so better to just sweep them under the rug.
The red/blue thing is stupid and submitter should feel bad.
Not to sound resentful, but I submitted this a month ago when it was first published. Actually, I do intend to sound a little resentful... What I submitted was the Ebay policy change, which is apparently being kept separate from the Paypal one. More importantly, you only have until Nov. 9th to opt out of the new Ebay policy.
Your apparently random guess of a maximum of 500 million only applies if we take a completely laissez-faire approach to environmental regulation. If we maintain even the fairly lax standards that we have right now in the United States the earth can sustainably support two billion people in a lifestyle similar to that of the average American. The earth can support considerably more if we're willing to put up with stronger environmental regulation and/or a less decadent lifestyle. (A whole lot more if we stop wasting so much - twenty billion people in a lifestyle similar to the average Mexican.)
Aside from the difference in numbers, I can't say that I care for your conclusion. It's taken a hundred years to go from a population of two billion to a population of seven billion, it would be pretty naive to think that we could solve the problem in less time. But given a daunting task, your solution of throwing up our hands and waiting for Technology From The Future to save us is pretty ridiculous. And ridiculing people who haven't given up like you have? That's offensive.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as that's caffeine free diet coke, you're probably okay.
The big screw up on his side was putting it in non-gas approved containers, but the charge was actually hoarding supplies.
No...
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Two-Arrested-for-Gasoline-Hoarding-177184891.html
"Both men were issued a misdemeanor summons for violation of regulation concerning flammable or combustible liquids."
We have the bicameral legislature because when the country was first formed the colonies really were separate entities and the smaller colonies refused to join without a bigger say in federal policies. It doesn't have much purpose now (other than the long term vs. short term difference between the house and the senate), it contributes to voter apathy (why vote if it isn't going to count anyway?), and is contrary to the one man, one vote principle upon which we were founded (an Alaskan voter gets, effectively, three votes for every one that a Californian gets).
The "big states vs small states" issue is no longer very important, we are now a unified country rather than a collection of colonies, and tyranny of the minority is not an improvement over tyranny of the majority. The courts exist to prevent tyranny, not the legislature.
He is aggregating many polls which each survey thousands of people. Three digits of precision is not at all unreasonable.
This is funny. Here we are talking about how nobody really likes Romney and how they only voted for him because he's republican, and you get angry and defend who? Not Romney. You don't even mention Romney, you only say how much you don't like Obama.
I don't see why, they felt that doing so would make the president beholden to congress, inviting corruption. The oligarchy that I'm talking about here is a large one, not just a few influential people who wrote the constitution but rather preventing the unwashed masses from selecting one of their own.
That's the implication, but it has always been my opinion that the electoral college was about maintaining the oligarchy. Voting was originally just for wealthy white men after all, and they needed a way to prevent someone unapproved from gaining power. This was why electors were not originally required to act in good faith (still true in many states).
They didn't vote for Romney, they voted republican and Romney was the name next to the (R). Even saying that they "voted" is kind of a stretch, it implies a decision with at least some consideration behind it. People have their favorite brands, and for some people that brand is republican.
I don't think it's possible to have location data that is really anonymous. How many people live in your house?
My impression of Sharp may be anachronistic, I don't know if the company is still what it used to be, but I think of them as manufacturing really terrific products, particularly portable electronics (remember these?), but hardly selling them or anything at all outside of Japan. Even within Japan I guess their marketing wasn't so good. Sorta the anti-Apple - poor marketing, but great and often pretty open products.
On the other hand, I don't condone it, and if it became subsidized by government money (at some point in the future), then I would then be forced to have an opinion on it because then I become responsible for paying for it.
Hopefully, someone does the smart thing and leaves the funding for the actual actions to a nice, private charity organization made up of people who agree with it.
I get the perspective that there are some things which are acceptable for individuals that are unacceptable for government. Not to get political on this, but the issue surrounding gay marriage seems like a perfect example - some people think it's wrong and that's fine, people are entitled to their opinions, but government can't be allowed to play favorites.
The idea that people should ever be forced into dependency on private largesse for their basic needs, including health, is repugnant to me however. Barring extravagant or otherwise wasteful practices, it seems to me that the government's job is to give us choices.
Even I can make more than $1.80 in three years, these might not be the greatest gyros.
That's more like voodoo than a real thing, but I'll give it a try next time. We'll see. ::skeptical squint::
Yes, that's what I got. If you click "no", it prompts you to create an account. There's no way to continue without either signing in with an existing account or creating a new one. That's a particular problem if you don't have a Wifi network to connect through - you pretty well can't use your device at all without connecting to Google at least once.
(That isn't completely true - you can root your tablet and install a third party ROM without connecting to Google, but that's kinda outside the spirit of the question.)
All others are either too willing to go along with truly socialist options
Could you explain what you mean by this? The internet is essentially maximum socialized right now, with only the infrastructure owned by private companies, what would a more socialist internet look like?
And I'm sure I can find at least one person on the left who has made the same claim about Romney
Yeah I saw a story like this already, claiming that Romney/Ryan are hushing up now and trying to hide how they want to cut funding for FEMA and disaster relief. I mean it's a little different, those liberals usually quote lots of "facts" and crap to make Romney look bad instead of just making stuff up directly, but it's the same idea.
With my Nexus 7 there was no option to boot the first time without first setting up a Google account. I don't think this is such a big deal, I set up a separate throwaway account with each of my devices, but that annoyed me.
I'm also a little annoyed that I got my Nexus 7 just a month ago... Would certainly have waited for one of these here Nexus 4's.
Things that happen after I die aren't important. I don't know why people keep railing on about this "environment" nonsense either, somebody wasted my time with his "endangered species" prattle just this morning - I could eat nothing but Ethiopian wolf every day for the rest of my life. That's not a shortage.
- Rush
Well if that's no good, how about this: http://www.silentpcreview.com/Ninja2
This is what I use on my Athlon 2, works perfectly, is very quiet, and it's rather old now so you could probably pick a used one up pretty cheap.
Adderall is an amphetamine just like meth (methamphetamine). I wrote a whole thing about how the methyl group doesn't change the way the drug functions, just the rate at which it's absorbed, but Wikipedia says I'm wrong. Oh well. The short is: of course there are some negative side effects, all stimulants have the potential to cause cardiac problems, but it's pretty unlikely that new ones are going to show up. Unlike Fen-Phen, amphetamines have been around for a long time and very thoroughly studied.
The only way you could see these drugs as unethical is if you look at life and learning as a game - if someone learns more than you on the down-low that's cheating, life should be a struggle, etc. Obviously people with rich parents should be banned from the competition.
For those who haven't tried it: adderall is a much smoother stimulant than caffeine. The effect is similar, but without the crash. Hands down better for productivity, just more expensive thanks to prohibition.
Conspiracy? Sure - the TSA spends billions on useless scanners that kill more people than they save and then rather then just getting rid of the scanners they hustle them off to smaller airports where fewer people will be paying attention. Getting rid of the scanners entirely would be tantamount to admitting to either a mistake or corruption, depending on who you ask. Equally bad from the TSA's perspective, so better to just sweep them under the rug.
The red/blue thing is stupid and submitter should feel bad.
Not to sound resentful, but I submitted this a month ago when it was first published. Actually, I do intend to sound a little resentful... What I submitted was the Ebay policy change, which is apparently being kept separate from the Paypal one. More importantly, you only have until Nov. 9th to opt out of the new Ebay policy.
Thanks for clarifying that. From the summary I had been under the impression that this was being set up as an alternative to Kickstarter.
I feel like I link this article every time the issue of population comes up, but here we go:
http://www.ecofuture.org/pop/rpts/mccluney_maxpop.html
Your apparently random guess of a maximum of 500 million only applies if we take a completely laissez-faire approach to environmental regulation. If we maintain even the fairly lax standards that we have right now in the United States the earth can sustainably support two billion people in a lifestyle similar to that of the average American. The earth can support considerably more if we're willing to put up with stronger environmental regulation and/or a less decadent lifestyle. (A whole lot more if we stop wasting so much - twenty billion people in a lifestyle similar to the average Mexican.)
Aside from the difference in numbers, I can't say that I care for your conclusion. It's taken a hundred years to go from a population of two billion to a population of seven billion, it would be pretty naive to think that we could solve the problem in less time. But given a daunting task, your solution of throwing up our hands and waiting for Technology From The Future to save us is pretty ridiculous. And ridiculing people who haven't given up like you have? That's offensive.