Hmmm.. So your argument is that because the internet crosses state and international boundaries the Fed is free to regulate it. The problem with this is that the commerce clause is about regulating TRADE as it crosses the boundaries between the states and other countries. The Fed can regulate, tax and otherwise control things that cross the state's border, but what happens within the state is the business of the state. The Fed has been justifying a LOT of things using the Commerce Clause, which are really pushing us into some very grey areas.
So, my reading says that the Fed can regulate buying/selling (commerce) that crosses the state line over the internet, but if the state wants to regulate ISP's within it's borders, it is free to do so w/o Federal involvement as long as the state doesn't stray beyond it's constitutional power. A state can force the collection of Sales Taxes on internet sales, they can asses fees and taxes on internet service, and if they want they can prohibit public entities from being ISP's.
The Federal government has slowly been increasing it's reach using the commerce clause as justification. THIS is what needs to stop.
Oh, and your Interstate Highway system example wasn't exactly the same as this. Interstates where built using Federal funds in cooperation with the states for the expressed purpose of interstate commerce. I don't see the Federal government doing the same with the internet, which is nearly 100% privately funded infrastructure with very little continued Federal involvement in it's design, construction or operation. Plus, if a state wanted to weigh commercial trucks as they entered and left and levy fines for being overweight, they are free to do that. Just like they are free to say to 18 wheelers "You cannot drive down this public road" and "You can only go this fast."
You want to give a stab at my question? OR Are you saying the 10th amendment doesn't apply here? Do feel free to enlighten me with your take on history.
This is why we need a federal government to put the hammer down. To hell with 'states rights'!
You are correct. This is yet another liberal attempt to squash states rights with federal mandates.... (or madness if you like)
This kind of usurping of states authority has got to stop and we need to go back to "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
So if you support such nonsense, WHERE in the Constitution does it grant the Federal Government the power to regulate internet providers?
As I've told others... This is about FRACKING not drilling, so be sure to carefully consider what you read from that Google search. There is inherent risks in drilling a well, Fracking that well does not add to the risks. We've drilled wells for 100+ years now and they are considered safe. Why do we now blame fracking? It's DRILLING you need to blame, it's just that is not as powerful PR tool when you couch it the correct way eh?
Yea, so where is a study that proves the link between fracking and polluting ground water? I have one where they specifically looked for it over a year and found nothing.
Here's a hint... I'll be surprised if you can find anything that proves that fracking does anything to ground water... There are a whole lot of theories and a whole lot of people looking, but nobody has found the proof.
Oh, and here's another hint so you can avoid getting tripped up. I'm discussing FRACKING, not drilling, here. Don't get confused by the two operations. Drilling, which we have safely done for 100+ years now, DOES have various risks. Fracking, does nothing to add to the existing risks when drilling a well, it just adds to the cost and possibly what we can extract from the well...
Which agrees with my point that FRACKING does not add to the danger of drilling a well. Read what I said carefully because I'm not saying that drilling is 100% without environmental impact, we've been doing that for more than 100 years and although considered safe, there are risks with drilling, even a water well. What I AM saying is that fracking does not ADD to the risks of drilling and should not be touted as some huge risk to ground water when it's not.
But that 1-2% number of yours is basically the risk of drilling, not fracking. Now if you wan to argue that drilling carries risk, that you can prove easily and I'm not arguing that. I'm saying FRACKING is not causing any increase in risk for an already drilled well. It's a fine point I know, but it's important to make the distinction, because the public doesn't feel that drilling is a huge dangerous health hazard because we've been doing it for more than 100 years and it's not all that dangerous. Fracking doesn't add to the enviromental danger of drilling, it just increases the recoverable supplies from the wells that we drill....
I believe that last time there was over production and they cut back, they actually lost market share. So what incentive do they have to do it again this time? They are still profiting. Also, many people seem to believe that this is the US paying them to fuck over Russia for what Putin is doing in Ukraine. The embargo sure hurts Russia, but lower oil prices increase the pain by a lot.
Did they loos OPEC market share or just market share of the world supply? It's important because the USA has now developed a LOT of domestic energy production. If what you say is the reason, then OPEC is done and we are facing a long, long time frame for Oil being really low cost (baring any disruption in supply). One can hope, but I seriously doubt the other members of OPEC have the stomach for $50/bbl oil to last very long.
Post an example of where Fracking has destroyed a water supply...
I recognize that it is impossible to prove a negative, but the scientific evidence is all pointing the other way here. Not to mention common sense if you understand how this process works..... Fracking takes place thousands of feet down, below impermeable rock, well below any water supply. What gets pumped down there is not coming back up except though the well head it went down. Anybody telling you otherwise has no proof, that I know of anyway.
Do YOU have any evidence for your position beyond the wild claims of the environmentalists who started this lie?
Did you read the link? Look, there is ZERO connection with Fracking and contamination of ground water.... They've looked for it, and haven't found it. But it's hard to prove a negative...
I wondered when Saudi Arabia decided not to cut production, dooming OPEC to low prices and ticking off the likes of Russia and other producers with marginal economies, if they where not actually working a long term strategy here. Why are they not cutting production?
First, they repress many of the world's trouble makers by dropping prices to 1/3rd their original. Yes, they hurt some emerging producers who are good guys, but these are pretty small. Russia's economy is in free fall due to this and this will greatly diminish their military and economic ability world wide. Other "bad guys" are getting hurt too.
Second, The will succeed in jumpstarting their largest consumer's economy. The USA has suffered under the burden of higher taxes and higher fuel prices (which amounts to a tax on just about everything.) Yea, there will be segments that suffer, energy production companies and those who own the production facilities will be hurt, but over all your average consumer will have more to spend and moving goods will be cheaper as fuel prices drop.
Third, energy production companies who where looking at $100+ oil for as far as the eye could see just 6 months ago, are now looking at $45 or less. Much of their production is now netting below production costs so NOBODY will be drilling new wells and a whole bunch of companies will be hurting. For the most speculative of them they will go bankrupt in fairly short time. This will greatly depress the USA's ability to develop these resources and reduce future supplies and take years to rebuild the industry.
I'm not saying this is what the Saudi's are up to, but the theory does fit the pieces I'm seeing fall together..
As fracking destroys water supplies and replaces them with barium-laced debt fluids.
I hope this is an attempt at a joke...
There is zero proof that fracking does anything bad to water supplies beyond using some of it (about 40,000 Gal/well). Fracking takes place well below domestic water supplies and is no more of a hazard than the drilling was in the first place. People who think otherwise are mis-informed or lying.
If this is the best he can do, I'm going out on a limb here and predicting he will be convicted on all counts....
BTC is just a cauldron of crime and deceit, it's basically used to launder money, hide assets and pay for illegal goods... Oh yea, now and then somebody does something perfectly legal using it...
Why on EARTH are you trying to roll your own router? AT HOME, none the less... Who needs that kind of trouble? And NEVER put your network firewall on the same hardware as a network server... It's a recipe for disaster.
Just go buy some compatible hardware and run OpenWRT or something. I have a Netgear WNDR4300 as a border router/firewall with OpenWRT loaded on it. They are routinely sold on E-bay for $40 or less each, I think I paid $35. Where I wouldn't recommend this exact model because you will end up building your own firmware, this device works just fine for my purposes. Configuration wasn't exactly straight forward enough for your average consumer product, but I managed to get my router running, with wireless, within a few hours.
OpenWRT comes with many optional packages you can load. I cannot vouch for any of them, but the base install is rock stable on my hardware. There is a file server package, where you can serve up USB based storage or share a USB printer, but I don't use either because I have a separate purpose built server for that kind of thing that runs OpenMediaVault NAS with a software raid array, though I think I'd recommend FreeNAS if you want a BSD based system to play with. Both are free for the price of the hardware.
Keep it simple, cheap and reliable.... Buy good hardware and all of the solutions I'm using will be very reliable and about as cheap as you can get.
OR...
Just go buy some industry standard router thingy (Cisco comes to mind) and learn how to use that. Skip all this other stuff.. I used to run a Cisco router as a border firewall, but I'll warn you that stuff gets pretty complex unless you already know how it works...
Radio Shack carries CRAP for components and has continued to carry less and less stuff I need and more and more over-priced items for the "I need it now!" crowd. I'm not surprised that they are going belly up when you can get the same thing in 2 days from Amazon and sometimes at a cheaper price.
99% of the people bashing the windows 8 interface haven't used it for more than an hour. They go crazy when anything changes. I try not to do that because it reminds me of how old people react to everything, and I never want to get that way.
Well, I guess I'm a 1%er here. I started using Win 8 when it first arrived and although it is not my primary OS, I do have to manage a number of systems that run it. Personally, I still HATE, HATE, HATE that metro user interface and the fact that it's not just an option, you have to run it. Win 8 is a certified pain in the.... to manage too. I'm happy to hear Win 10 is doing away with this Metro mistake....
You are mistaken. Even if the IRS COULD track every transaction, they wouldn't know enough.
Given our current set of tax regulations it would be generally impossible for the IRS to figure out your tax liability by watching all your transactions. In many cases there are multiple options for the tax treatment of a transactions which may result in different tax liabilities. There are even non-financial transactions (ones that don't involve money changing hands) that can drive differing tax bills. And you cannot just say you will take the minimum liability every time because some times you WANT to pay more now for the opportunity to pay less later (Like a ROTH IRA). There is no way for the IRS to figure these choices out for you.
This regulation difficulty plus the *fact* that it is totally impossible to track every transaction made by US citizens/tax payer world wide, makes it impossible for the IRS to just calculate your tax burden directly.
Other countries have different ways to levy taxes than the USA. Where they may have the ability to track transactions and their regulations allow them to automatically collect taxes, such an option will not work here without a lot of very disruptive tax law changes. IMHO the tax code here is WAY too complex and needs to be simplified, but until that's done, there will be no "automatic" way to calculate and collect taxes and products like TurboTax will be viable. However, woe is the politician that attempts to overhaul the tax system, their opponents will howl about how unfair their simplification is or how it ignores this pet tax break or two and nothing will get done.
The "Be Prepared" motto isn't just for Boy Scouts, and it is not just about having what you need at hand, it's also about KNOWING what to do and being mentally prepared to do it quickly when required.
The government makes the tax laws and could, in theory, check that everyone has paid correctly.
They simply do not have enough information to do what you suggest. Unless they could track *every* transaction every taxpayer made, even when in cash, there is no way to be sure they could catch everything correctly.
Also, *some* people make money but don't get a paycheck so there is nothing to deduct money from.
If you want to go to College to "find yourself" feel free, but I think there might be cheaper ways than making student load payments for 20 years. It's the DEBT that is the problem here, not the experience or education that college provides and IMHO strapping yourself with massive debt though student loans is a REALLY stupid move that will haunt you for decades. Education is a great thing, but sensible people don't pay more for something than they have too, even if that something is education.
Many models don't function properly when installed in Mom's basement.
I've never tried that exact configuration with mine (Model Wife SN 0001). But I had some short term success when I was forced to install in in-law's basement when moving with Child (Model Girl, SN 0001). Both remained functional for the 3 months it took to secure a more private basement of my own, even if I didn't far that well.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm.. So your argument is that because the internet crosses state and international boundaries the Fed is free to regulate it. The problem with this is that the commerce clause is about regulating TRADE as it crosses the boundaries between the states and other countries. The Fed can regulate, tax and otherwise control things that cross the state's border, but what happens within the state is the business of the state. The Fed has been justifying a LOT of things using the Commerce Clause, which are really pushing us into some very grey areas.
So, my reading says that the Fed can regulate buying/selling (commerce) that crosses the state line over the internet, but if the state wants to regulate ISP's within it's borders, it is free to do so w/o Federal involvement as long as the state doesn't stray beyond it's constitutional power. A state can force the collection of Sales Taxes on internet sales, they can asses fees and taxes on internet service, and if they want they can prohibit public entities from being ISP's.
The Federal government has slowly been increasing it's reach using the commerce clause as justification. THIS is what needs to stop.
Oh, and your Interstate Highway system example wasn't exactly the same as this. Interstates where built using Federal funds in cooperation with the states for the expressed purpose of interstate commerce. I don't see the Federal government doing the same with the internet, which is nearly 100% privately funded infrastructure with very little continued Federal involvement in it's design, construction or operation. Plus, if a state wanted to weigh commercial trucks as they entered and left and levy fines for being overweight, they are free to do that. Just like they are free to say to 18 wheelers "You cannot drive down this public road" and "You can only go this fast."
You want to give a stab at my question? OR Are you saying the 10th amendment doesn't apply here? Do feel free to enlighten me with your take on history.
This is why we need a federal government to put the hammer down. To hell with 'states rights'!
You are correct. This is yet another liberal attempt to squash states rights with federal mandates.... (or madness if you like)
This kind of usurping of states authority has got to stop and we need to go back to "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
So if you support such nonsense, WHERE in the Constitution does it grant the Federal Government the power to regulate internet providers?
THAT stinks.....
As I've told others... This is about FRACKING not drilling, so be sure to carefully consider what you read from that Google search. There is inherent risks in drilling a well, Fracking that well does not add to the risks. We've drilled wells for 100+ years now and they are considered safe. Why do we now blame fracking? It's DRILLING you need to blame, it's just that is not as powerful PR tool when you couch it the correct way eh?
Yea, so where is a study that proves the link between fracking and polluting ground water? I have one where they specifically looked for it over a year and found nothing.
Here's a hint... I'll be surprised if you can find anything that proves that fracking does anything to ground water... There are a whole lot of theories and a whole lot of people looking, but nobody has found the proof.
Oh, and here's another hint so you can avoid getting tripped up. I'm discussing FRACKING, not drilling, here. Don't get confused by the two operations. Drilling, which we have safely done for 100+ years now, DOES have various risks. Fracking, does nothing to add to the existing risks when drilling a well, it just adds to the cost and possibly what we can extract from the well...
Which agrees with my point that FRACKING does not add to the danger of drilling a well. Read what I said carefully because I'm not saying that drilling is 100% without environmental impact, we've been doing that for more than 100 years and although considered safe, there are risks with drilling, even a water well. What I AM saying is that fracking does not ADD to the risks of drilling and should not be touted as some huge risk to ground water when it's not.
But that 1-2% number of yours is basically the risk of drilling, not fracking. Now if you wan to argue that drilling carries risk, that you can prove easily and I'm not arguing that. I'm saying FRACKING is not causing any increase in risk for an already drilled well. It's a fine point I know, but it's important to make the distinction, because the public doesn't feel that drilling is a huge dangerous health hazard because we've been doing it for more than 100 years and it's not all that dangerous. Fracking doesn't add to the enviromental danger of drilling, it just increases the recoverable supplies from the wells that we drill....
I believe that last time there was over production and they cut back, they actually lost market share. So what incentive do they have to do it again this time? They are still profiting. Also, many people seem to believe that this is the US paying them to fuck over Russia for what Putin is doing in Ukraine. The embargo sure hurts Russia, but lower oil prices increase the pain by a lot.
Did they loos OPEC market share or just market share of the world supply? It's important because the USA has now developed a LOT of domestic energy production. If what you say is the reason, then OPEC is done and we are facing a long, long time frame for Oil being really low cost (baring any disruption in supply). One can hope, but I seriously doubt the other members of OPEC have the stomach for $50/bbl oil to last very long.
Here's a tip....
Post an example of where Fracking has destroyed a water supply...
I recognize that it is impossible to prove a negative, but the scientific evidence is all pointing the other way here. Not to mention common sense if you understand how this process works..... Fracking takes place thousands of feet down, below impermeable rock, well below any water supply. What gets pumped down there is not coming back up except though the well head it went down. Anybody telling you otherwise has no proof, that I know of anyway.
Do YOU have any evidence for your position beyond the wild claims of the environmentalists who started this lie?
Did you read the link? Look, there is ZERO connection with Fracking and contamination of ground water.... They've looked for it, and haven't found it. But it's hard to prove a negative...
So, do you have an example to show us?
The story was factual.... I don't usually go with their opinion pieces...
He could build it in the Super Conducting Super Collider. That's already dug out and a giant circle, right?
I don't believe the tunnels where fully finished and as another poster pointed out, it's about 10X what he is looking for in size.
As a resident of Texas, I'd be more than wiling to let him have it though...
Except that it's over 10x too long for the proposed test track.
That and I don't' believe the tunnels where completed all the way around... Anybody know?
I wondered when Saudi Arabia decided not to cut production, dooming OPEC to low prices and ticking off the likes of Russia and other producers with marginal economies, if they where not actually working a long term strategy here. Why are they not cutting production?
First, they repress many of the world's trouble makers by dropping prices to 1/3rd their original. Yes, they hurt some emerging producers who are good guys, but these are pretty small. Russia's economy is in free fall due to this and this will greatly diminish their military and economic ability world wide. Other "bad guys" are getting hurt too.
Second, The will succeed in jumpstarting their largest consumer's economy. The USA has suffered under the burden of higher taxes and higher fuel prices (which amounts to a tax on just about everything.) Yea, there will be segments that suffer, energy production companies and those who own the production facilities will be hurt, but over all your average consumer will have more to spend and moving goods will be cheaper as fuel prices drop.
Third, energy production companies who where looking at $100+ oil for as far as the eye could see just 6 months ago, are now looking at $45 or less. Much of their production is now netting below production costs so NOBODY will be drilling new wells and a whole bunch of companies will be hurting. For the most speculative of them they will go bankrupt in fairly short time. This will greatly depress the USA's ability to develop these resources and reduce future supplies and take years to rebuild the industry.
I'm not saying this is what the Saudi's are up to, but the theory does fit the pieces I'm seeing fall together..
As fracking destroys water supplies and replaces them with barium-laced debt fluids.
I hope this is an attempt at a joke...
There is zero proof that fracking does anything bad to water supplies beyond using some of it (about 40,000 Gal/well). Fracking takes place well below domestic water supplies and is no more of a hazard than the drilling was in the first place. People who think otherwise are mis-informed or lying.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/pennsylvania-fracking-study_n_3622512.html
Blame the dead bank....
If this is the best he can do, I'm going out on a limb here and predicting he will be convicted on all counts....
BTC is just a cauldron of crime and deceit, it's basically used to launder money, hide assets and pay for illegal goods... Oh yea, now and then somebody does something perfectly legal using it...
Why on EARTH are you trying to roll your own router? AT HOME, none the less... Who needs that kind of trouble? And NEVER put your network firewall on the same hardware as a network server... It's a recipe for disaster.
Just go buy some compatible hardware and run OpenWRT or something. I have a Netgear WNDR4300 as a border router/firewall with OpenWRT loaded on it. They are routinely sold on E-bay for $40 or less each, I think I paid $35. Where I wouldn't recommend this exact model because you will end up building your own firmware, this device works just fine for my purposes. Configuration wasn't exactly straight forward enough for your average consumer product, but I managed to get my router running, with wireless, within a few hours.
OpenWRT comes with many optional packages you can load. I cannot vouch for any of them, but the base install is rock stable on my hardware. There is a file server package, where you can serve up USB based storage or share a USB printer, but I don't use either because I have a separate purpose built server for that kind of thing that runs OpenMediaVault NAS with a software raid array, though I think I'd recommend FreeNAS if you want a BSD based system to play with. Both are free for the price of the hardware.
Keep it simple, cheap and reliable.... Buy good hardware and all of the solutions I'm using will be very reliable and about as cheap as you can get.
OR...
Just go buy some industry standard router thingy (Cisco comes to mind) and learn how to use that. Skip all this other stuff.. I used to run a Cisco router as a border firewall, but I'll warn you that stuff gets pretty complex unless you already know how it works...
Radio Shack carries CRAP for components and has continued to carry less and less stuff I need and more and more over-priced items for the "I need it now!" crowd. I'm not surprised that they are going belly up when you can get the same thing in 2 days from Amazon and sometimes at a cheaper price.
99% of the people bashing the windows 8 interface haven't used it for more than an hour. They go crazy when anything changes. I try not to do that because it reminds me of how old people react to everything, and I never want to get that way.
Well, I guess I'm a 1%er here. I started using Win 8 when it first arrived and although it is not my primary OS, I do have to manage a number of systems that run it. Personally, I still HATE, HATE, HATE that metro user interface and the fact that it's not just an option, you have to run it. Win 8 is a certified pain in the .... to manage too. I'm happy to hear Win 10 is doing away with this Metro mistake....
You are mistaken. Even if the IRS COULD track every transaction, they wouldn't know enough.
Given our current set of tax regulations it would be generally impossible for the IRS to figure out your tax liability by watching all your transactions. In many cases there are multiple options for the tax treatment of a transactions which may result in different tax liabilities. There are even non-financial transactions (ones that don't involve money changing hands) that can drive differing tax bills. And you cannot just say you will take the minimum liability every time because some times you WANT to pay more now for the opportunity to pay less later (Like a ROTH IRA). There is no way for the IRS to figure these choices out for you.
This regulation difficulty plus the *fact* that it is totally impossible to track every transaction made by US citizens/tax payer world wide, makes it impossible for the IRS to just calculate your tax burden directly.
Other countries have different ways to levy taxes than the USA. Where they may have the ability to track transactions and their regulations allow them to automatically collect taxes, such an option will not work here without a lot of very disruptive tax law changes. IMHO the tax code here is WAY too complex and needs to be simplified, but until that's done, there will be no "automatic" way to calculate and collect taxes and products like TurboTax will be viable. However, woe is the politician that attempts to overhaul the tax system, their opponents will howl about how unfair their simplification is or how it ignores this pet tax break or two and nothing will get done.
Yes.... a million times YES
The "Be Prepared" motto isn't just for Boy Scouts, and it is not just about having what you need at hand, it's also about KNOWING what to do and being mentally prepared to do it quickly when required.
The government makes the tax laws and could, in theory, check that everyone has paid correctly.
They simply do not have enough information to do what you suggest. Unless they could track *every* transaction every taxpayer made, even when in cash, there is no way to be sure they could catch everything correctly.
Also, *some* people make money but don't get a paycheck so there is nothing to deduct money from.
If you want to go to College to "find yourself" feel free, but I think there might be cheaper ways than making student load payments for 20 years. It's the DEBT that is the problem here, not the experience or education that college provides and IMHO strapping yourself with massive debt though student loans is a REALLY stupid move that will haunt you for decades. Education is a great thing, but sensible people don't pay more for something than they have too, even if that something is education.
Many models don't function properly when installed in Mom's basement.
I've never tried that exact configuration with mine (Model Wife SN 0001). But I had some short term success when I was forced to install in in-law's basement when moving with Child (Model Girl, SN 0001). Both remained functional for the 3 months it took to secure a more private basement of my own, even if I didn't far that well.