Freedom worked so well in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria...
Cubans have a western culture more compatible with democracy, like the other peoples of the region. You cite countries where the people often have a greater loyalty to local tribes.
Equitable distribution doesn't really address administrative overhead and what makes it to the classroom. That a very well funded school can get sufficient resources to the classroom does not address how efficiently its overall monies were spent.
you mean other than food stamps, welfare, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the numerous tax credits.
Since the implementation of the "war on poverty" the poverty rate has remained constant at about 12-15%. There has been effectively no change for nearly 50 years.
One of the few things the liberals get correct is that one should not leave them laying around loaded. They should be stored safely under lock and key. Once locked up the children are safe.
That then demolishes the argument that they are required for self protection against burglars.
No, there are lock boxes that can be open rather quickly and in the dark.
In this case the conservative side is more fact based and less appealing to emotion and placebo "solutions".
that is itself a biased and not factually accurate statement.
"Assault weapon" and "high capacity magazine" bans are placebos, they make some feel better but do little to nothing to enhance safety. "Normal" semi-auto rifles and pistols are as deadly or more deadly. Low capacity magazines would not have been exhausted in most criminal attacks, plus they can be exchanged so quickly there really is no additional opportunity for flight or defense.
Short of banning nearly all firearms, including many hunting and target shooting rifles "banners" claim they are not after, there will be no effective bans.
Where "reformers" are correct are in areas of background checks, safety instruction and safe storage. Things that many firearms owners already support.
To be honest, I've never managed to figure out what the facts on gun control really are. I do know there are an unusually large number of idiots on both sides of the debate, such as "ban scary-looking guns" or "we can overthrow the government".
In short there is denial that nearly all problems can be solved by keeping firearms and ammunition locked up, and by having owners receive even modest safety training for when the preceding are not locked up. Plus of course some screening of owners for mental deficiency and criminal behavior.
When delving into the common placebo solutions involving "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazine" bans. The proponents are ignorant of the cosmetic and ineffective nature of such bans.
The summary in fact offers an example where conservative websites are emphasized and it happens to be on a topic where the conservatives usually have the facts on their side. Gun control.
Most conservative "facts" when it comes to gun control are still based on the long-ago debunked statistical model of John Lott Jr. If the claims of conservative websites were true, countries like Japan wouldn't have a murder rate per capita that is less than 1/10th of the US nor would countries like Somalia with no gun control would have one that is nearly double that of the US.
Except for the fact that gun violence is more about a poor educational system and few to low quality job opportunities, and not so much about civilian access to firearms. Switzerland has a vibrant sport shooting community but they also have a good educational system, a good social safety net, etc. Plus firearms owners have had safety training and practice safe storage. What is going right in Japan and going wrong in Somalia has little to do with gun violence. Gun violence is a symptom of other problems. But to acknowledge this with respect to US gun violence would mean accepting decades of mistaken US policy and liberal politicians would rather not do that.
Which is an asinine argument because us normal people are trying to protect children from those damn things.
One of the few things the liberals get correct is that one should not leave them laying around loaded. They should be stored safely under lock and key. Once locked up the children are safe.
We're not the emotional ones. They're emotional and irrational since they love their guns more than their children.
Thank you for proving my point about liberals being delusional and emotional on this topic.
The summary in fact offers an example where conservative websites are emphasized and it happens to be on a topic where the conservatives usually have the facts on their side. Gun control. Like it or not the facts from an engineering and historical point of view favor the conservatives. The liberal side of the argument seems mostly emotion and embracing placebo "solutions".
As the summary indicates the bias varies with the topic. Having a conservative bias on gun control suggests the engine is getting things correct. In this case the conservative side is more fact based and less appealing to emotion and placebo "solutions". So yeah, maybe the search engine page ranking is working fine.
Unlikely. Most teachers benefit a lot from the educational status quo, which is defended by the Democratic Party. College professors are the most politically biased group in America. According to some polls, only 3% of them voted for Trump. Our educational system is the problem, not the solution, with a strong vested interest in indoctrination rather than thinking.
Or maybe, just perhaps, those college professors know something you don't. Just a thought.
Yes, they know the world of scholarly journals and ivory towers. Not necessarily the real world. The more we move from hard science to soft science the more their teachings are opinions and beliefs, often politicized ones. If you think professors are beyond such things you have not spent much time around them.
I had an amazing teacher in middle school. He'd teach us exactly that--how to spot propaganda, false advertising claims, etc. It was probably the best set of lessons I ever learned because now I'm impervious to all the crap.
Of course, if he was teaching today they'd try to brand him as a communist or a "leftist" (whatever that means)...
Actually he would alternately be branded a communist/leftist and a racist/misogynist/[something]-phobe depending on whose propaganda was being scrutinized.
There, I reject your implication that it is only the right offering false claims.:-)
Its a tradition and if anything he was a non-traditional candidate. He was not a politician who engineered his life for public scrutiny for decades, i.e. move the shady stuff to a "foundation" where plausible deniability can be claimed. Face it, both candidates went to extremes to hide things from the public. His tax return was mostly a campaign prop, he most likely correctly calculated that breaking with tradition would have little to no cost.
I recall him saying his lawyers advised against it when he was pressed for details. He may not have explained "can't" on all occasions but he did on some. And frankly, its a tradition not a requirement, and in a weird election where both candidates had such extremely high negatives it was probably irrelevant. Irrelevant in the sense that there was no cost for breaking tradition.
Just like Trump dodged releasing his taxes by saying he couldn't because he was under audit. Which was also not true: there's no legal impediment to releasing your taxes if you're under audit.
There is no legal impediment to confessing everything when arrested either. However in both these cases when your lawyer advices you to say nothing, to show nothing, its probably good advice. Follow it. Trump made it pretty clear his attorneys said do not release it.
The majority of the voters voted against Clinton. Plus both candidates focused on states to maximize the electoral count, not the popular count. You are just moving the goal post in frustration.
Comey did not cost Clinton the election. One day he's a Democratic hero for announcing she was merely incompetent not criminal, another day he's a villain because he announces there is more evidence to look at. In your frustration you ignore the fact that Hillary's poor judgement got her there, having her own server in first place, delaying and obfuscating in the second place... the investigation stretched into the final days of the election because of her actions. If she had just come clean and been more transparent it would have been all over long ago.
Hillary lost because she neglected key states. She thought she had a "blue wall" and could spend her time elsewhere. That made voters in hard hit industrial portions of the country feel they were unimportant to her. Face such facts and stop looking for BS excuses. These excuses are just the talking points of the Democratic party establishment trying to save their positions of power, trying to deflect from the fact that they totally f'd up and misread the situation and steered the party in a losing direction. Or you can embrace their BS and continue misreading the situation and face similar results in 2020.
I would love that technicality.
We brought manufacturing to the U.S!...but it's still no increase in American jobs because it's done by robots.
There are some jobs, maintaining and repairing the robots. Some prep or post manufacturing handling may need some people. I believe the robots are designed by Apple so there are those jobs too. Plus the money is being spent in the US rather than China so it stimulates the US economy not the Chinese economy.
With iCloud enabled calls to your iPhone are also routed to iPads or Macs so you can answer via FaceTime. Apple is "integrating" with your phone service provider.
What's your point? Once the call is over with it can't be routed to your Mac or iPad, so there's no reason to keep a log of a call once it is completed.
"Move seamlessly between your devices with Handoff, Universal Clipboard, iPhone Cellular Calls, SMS/MMS messaging, Instant Hotspot, and Auto Unlock." https://support.apple.com/en-u...
Plus as the AC mentioned there is also calling someone back using the Mac or iPad at a later date.
I'm sorry but the people selling you phone service keeping logs of your phone calls is one thing, the people that just made the phone have no business at all logging that data for any reason. But I guess it's ok though because apple did it and apple can do no wrong.
With iCloud enabled calls to your iPhone are also routed to iPads or Macs so you can answer via FaceTime. Apple is "integrating" with your phone service provider.
China ain't gonna just stand buy and let all their hard work go down the drain. Expect a fight.
We are already in a "fight". The proposals are merely about "fighting back" rather than just "taking it". For example see China adopting US and EU made jet engines but require technology transfer and manufacture in China, while simultaneously planning to switch to domestic jet engine companies in a decade after the necessary expertise is accumulated. If Chinese markets were to become more open to US goods and services (including forgoing the requirement of domestic partnerships), IP was better protected, and a rule of law more fairly applied (see Fellows paper shredder case) then its unlikely factories in China would be a "big" issue.
But don't worry Americans are twenty seven times as fast at sticking all those fiddly things together, even without the years of experience and training the current staff have.
American robots may be. Note that Apple is investing in robots to disassemble iPhones for e-waste and recycling purposes. Assembly would seem a related problem.
Because in these "politically correct" "entitled to a safe zone on demand" times anything hinting of Trump support is "hard evidence" that a person is a racist and a misogynist. There is no possibility that a person might think a Trump proposal might actually have merit or at least be the least worse or two bad proposals.
Disclaimer: I voted, but not for Trump nor Hillary.
The additional costs would also include the new plant. I believe the Chinese government built their factories for them as an incentive to get them in China in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Freedom worked so well in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria...
Cubans have a western culture more compatible with democracy, like the other peoples of the region. You cite countries where the people often have a greater loyalty to local tribes.
Equitable distribution doesn't really address administrative overhead and what makes it to the classroom. That a very well funded school can get sufficient resources to the classroom does not address how efficiently its overall monies were spent.
you mean other than food stamps, welfare, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the numerous tax credits.
Since the implementation of the "war on poverty" the poverty rate has remained constant at about 12-15%. There has been effectively no change for nearly 50 years.
One of the few things the liberals get correct is that one should not leave them laying around loaded. They should be stored safely under lock and key. Once locked up the children are safe.
That then demolishes the argument that they are required for self protection against burglars.
No, there are lock boxes that can be open rather quickly and in the dark.
In this case the conservative side is more fact based and less appealing to emotion and placebo "solutions".
that is itself a biased and not factually accurate statement.
"Assault weapon" and "high capacity magazine" bans are placebos, they make some feel better but do little to nothing to enhance safety. "Normal" semi-auto rifles and pistols are as deadly or more deadly. Low capacity magazines would not have been exhausted in most criminal attacks, plus they can be exchanged so quickly there really is no additional opportunity for flight or defense.
Short of banning nearly all firearms, including many hunting and target shooting rifles "banners" claim they are not after, there will be no effective bans.
Where "reformers" are correct are in areas of background checks, safety instruction and safe storage. Things that many firearms owners already support.
To be honest, I've never managed to figure out what the facts on gun control really are. I do know there are an unusually large number of idiots on both sides of the debate, such as "ban scary-looking guns" or "we can overthrow the government".
In short there is denial that nearly all problems can be solved by keeping firearms and ammunition locked up, and by having owners receive even modest safety training for when the preceding are not locked up. Plus of course some screening of owners for mental deficiency and criminal behavior.
When delving into the common placebo solutions involving "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazine" bans. The proponents are ignorant of the cosmetic and ineffective nature of such bans.
The summary in fact offers an example where conservative websites are emphasized and it happens to be on a topic where the conservatives usually have the facts on their side. Gun control.
Most conservative "facts" when it comes to gun control are still based on the long-ago debunked statistical model of John Lott Jr. If the claims of conservative websites were true, countries like Japan wouldn't have a murder rate per capita that is less than 1/10th of the US nor would countries like Somalia with no gun control would have one that is nearly double that of the US.
Except for the fact that gun violence is more about a poor educational system and few to low quality job opportunities, and not so much about civilian access to firearms. Switzerland has a vibrant sport shooting community but they also have a good educational system, a good social safety net, etc. Plus firearms owners have had safety training and practice safe storage. What is going right in Japan and going wrong in Somalia has little to do with gun violence. Gun violence is a symptom of other problems. But to acknowledge this with respect to US gun violence would mean accepting decades of mistaken US policy and liberal politicians would rather not do that.
Which is an asinine argument because us normal people are trying to protect children from those damn things.
One of the few things the liberals get correct is that one should not leave them laying around loaded. They should be stored safely under lock and key. Once locked up the children are safe.
We're not the emotional ones. They're emotional and irrational since they love their guns more than their children.
Thank you for proving my point about liberals being delusional and emotional on this topic.
The summary in fact offers an example where conservative websites are emphasized and it happens to be on a topic where the conservatives usually have the facts on their side. Gun control. Like it or not the facts from an engineering and historical point of view favor the conservatives. The liberal side of the argument seems mostly emotion and embracing placebo "solutions".
As the summary indicates the bias varies with the topic. Having a conservative bias on gun control suggests the engine is getting things correct. In this case the conservative side is more fact based and less appealing to emotion and placebo "solutions". So yeah, maybe the search engine page ranking is working fine.
But that might lead to critical thinking.
Unlikely. Most teachers benefit a lot from the educational status quo, which is defended by the Democratic Party. College professors are the most politically biased group in America. According to some polls, only 3% of them voted for Trump. Our educational system is the problem, not the solution, with a strong vested interest in indoctrination rather than thinking.
Or maybe, just perhaps, those college professors know something you don't. Just a thought.
Yes, they know the world of scholarly journals and ivory towers. Not necessarily the real world. The more we move from hard science to soft science the more their teachings are opinions and beliefs, often politicized ones. If you think professors are beyond such things you have not spent much time around them.
I had an amazing teacher in middle school. He'd teach us exactly that--how to spot propaganda, false advertising claims, etc. It was probably the best set of lessons I ever learned because now I'm impervious to all the crap.
Of course, if he was teaching today they'd try to brand him as a communist or a "leftist" (whatever that means) ...
Actually he would alternately be branded a communist/leftist and a racist/misogynist/[something]-phobe depending on whose propaganda was being scrutinized.
:-)
There, I reject your implication that it is only the right offering false claims.
Its a tradition and if anything he was a non-traditional candidate. He was not a politician who engineered his life for public scrutiny for decades, i.e. move the shady stuff to a "foundation" where plausible deniability can be claimed. Face it, both candidates went to extremes to hide things from the public. His tax return was mostly a campaign prop, he most likely correctly calculated that breaking with tradition would have little to no cost.
I recall him saying his lawyers advised against it when he was pressed for details. He may not have explained "can't" on all occasions but he did on some. And frankly, its a tradition not a requirement, and in a weird election where both candidates had such extremely high negatives it was probably irrelevant. Irrelevant in the sense that there was no cost for breaking tradition.
Just like Trump dodged releasing his taxes by saying he couldn't because he was under audit. Which was also not true: there's no legal impediment to releasing your taxes if you're under audit.
There is no legal impediment to confessing everything when arrested either. However in both these cases when your lawyer advices you to say nothing, to show nothing, its probably good advice. Follow it. Trump made it pretty clear his attorneys said do not release it.
The majority of the voters voted against Clinton. Plus both candidates focused on states to maximize the electoral count, not the popular count. You are just moving the goal post in frustration.
... the investigation stretched into the final days of the election because of her actions. If she had just come clean and been more transparent it would have been all over long ago.
Comey did not cost Clinton the election. One day he's a Democratic hero for announcing she was merely incompetent not criminal, another day he's a villain because he announces there is more evidence to look at. In your frustration you ignore the fact that Hillary's poor judgement got her there, having her own server in first place, delaying and obfuscating in the second place
Hillary lost because she neglected key states. She thought she had a "blue wall" and could spend her time elsewhere. That made voters in hard hit industrial portions of the country feel they were unimportant to her. Face such facts and stop looking for BS excuses. These excuses are just the talking points of the Democratic party establishment trying to save their positions of power, trying to deflect from the fact that they totally f'd up and misread the situation and steered the party in a losing direction. Or you can embrace their BS and continue misreading the situation and face similar results in 2020.
Oh no, there's a possibility. You know, if you're stupid.
Continue with such "inside the liberal bubble group think" and Trump will have a chance at re-election in 2020.
I would love that technicality. We brought manufacturing to the U.S! ...but it's still no increase in American jobs because it's done by robots.
There are some jobs, maintaining and repairing the robots. Some prep or post manufacturing handling may need some people. I believe the robots are designed by Apple so there are those jobs too. Plus the money is being spent in the US rather than China so it stimulates the US economy not the Chinese economy.
I believe Apple is designing their own robots.
With iCloud enabled calls to your iPhone are also routed to iPads or Macs so you can answer via FaceTime. Apple is "integrating" with your phone service provider.
What's your point? Once the call is over with it can't be routed to your Mac or iPad, so there's no reason to keep a log of a call once it is completed.
"Move seamlessly between your devices with Handoff, Universal Clipboard, iPhone Cellular Calls, SMS/MMS messaging, Instant Hotspot, and Auto Unlock."
https://support.apple.com/en-u...
Plus as the AC mentioned there is also calling someone back using the Mac or iPad at a later date.
I'm sorry but the people selling you phone service keeping logs of your phone calls is one thing, the people that just made the phone have no business at all logging that data for any reason. But I guess it's ok though because apple did it and apple can do no wrong.
With iCloud enabled calls to your iPhone are also routed to iPads or Macs so you can answer via FaceTime. Apple is "integrating" with your phone service provider.
China ain't gonna just stand buy and let all their hard work go down the drain. Expect a fight.
We are already in a "fight". The proposals are merely about "fighting back" rather than just "taking it". For example see China adopting US and EU made jet engines but require technology transfer and manufacture in China, while simultaneously planning to switch to domestic jet engine companies in a decade after the necessary expertise is accumulated. If Chinese markets were to become more open to US goods and services (including forgoing the requirement of domestic partnerships), IP was better protected, and a rule of law more fairly applied (see Fellows paper shredder case) then its unlikely factories in China would be a "big" issue.
But don't worry Americans are twenty seven times as fast at sticking all those fiddly things together, even without the years of experience and training the current staff have.
American robots may be. Note that Apple is investing in robots to disassemble iPhones for e-waste and recycling purposes. Assembly would seem a related problem.
Why do posts have to come with
Disclaimer: I didn't vote for Trump?
Because in these "politically correct" "entitled to a safe zone on demand" times anything hinting of Trump support is "hard evidence" that a person is a racist and a misogynist. There is no possibility that a person might think a Trump proposal might actually have merit or at least be the least worse or two bad proposals.
Disclaimer: I voted, but not for Trump nor Hillary.
The additional costs would also include the new plant. I believe the Chinese government built their factories for them as an incentive to get them in China in the first place.