Why do the vast, vast majority of people who win the lottery declare bankruptcy shortly thereafter?
People aren't poor because they don't have access to capital.
They're poor because they don't exercise self-control and initiative.
A small slice of the population are truly victims (born with genetic defects, refugees, etc), but even those people have more favorable living conditions in countries that have free market economies. Well over 80% of US folks believe private charities provide better these people than the government which just wants a permanent underclass to rule over.
The claims are hazy here because AFAIK all neanderthal remains are contested or discredited.
It's like asking, "Was the metabolism of the winged horse higher or lower than unicorns? Well, ah, they interbred. Actually could you give us some grant money in the noble pursuit of answering this critical question?"
Who is the FCC to legislate that for someone else?
This will get overruled.
The government should stop trying to tightly couple everyone as a pretext for reducing risk to zero as a pretext for trying to control everyone and everything.
You do realize there was thing identical situation where the East Anglia Institute in the UK not only fudged the corrections to "hide the decline" in global tempratures... they were trying to keep out the people who were publishing research as they saw it.
And their problem was they couldn't find a way to discredit their opponents!
The IPCC has discredited their own reports several times as well.
People are not going to believe these global warming claims when there are so many shenanigans going on.
"Since the vast bulk of these outfits were right wing the bulk of inquiries fell upon the right wing."
Lois Lerner disclosed the IRS had a policy explicitly against the presidents opponents. In other words the political enemies are don't "just happen" to be the people who lose, they were targeted by the political views to lose. In other words, the Democrats were using the government to silence the Tea party because they are the Tea party.
"people who want money for doing nothing good at all"
I guess I misunderstood you. When you said "just force all blood donors to get tested for..." you're not really imposing anything extra on the donors since they don't know about it.
That seems like an odd way to phrase it originally, but it's OK to be odd.
I encourage you to not use the phrase "as a species" in a courtroom. Or to a cop.
No defendant has control over his parents, his children, his peers, etc. Only his or her own choices.
So there is no way to assign criminality to "the whole" without assigning it to each individual. If you can't assign it to each individual (because choice wasn't involved, smokey fatalism, etc) they you can't assign it to the whole.
Sure, people die every day, but when you find yourself on your death bed, you will be a LOT less interested in the decisions made by others and a lot more interested in the choices you made.
Everything else is academics, speculation, etc. and of no qualitative importance.
"If they are violating safety regulations, its a problem."
Whoa... whoa... this is the mentality that sends kids to detention for nibbling pop tarts in the shape of guns.
Safety regulations are the problem. Do you know who was in charge of lopping heads off during the French Reign of Terror? The Committee on Public Safety.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do the vast, vast majority of people who win the lottery declare bankruptcy shortly thereafter?
People aren't poor because they don't have access to capital.
They're poor because they don't exercise self-control and initiative.
A small slice of the population are truly victims (born with genetic defects, refugees, etc), but even those people have more favorable living conditions in countries that have free market economies. Well over 80% of US folks believe private charities provide better these people than the government which just wants a permanent underclass to rule over.
The claims are hazy here because AFAIK all neanderthal remains are contested or discredited.
It's like asking, "Was the metabolism of the winged horse higher or lower than unicorns? Well, ah, they interbred. Actually could you give us some grant money in the noble pursuit of answering this critical question?"
-2.9% growth
Maybe this is practical and maybe it isn't, but are you OK with the government deciding what is practical and what isn't?
Who are you to decide that for someone else?
Who is the FCC to legislate that for someone else?
This will get overruled.
The government should stop trying to tightly couple everyone as a pretext for reducing risk to zero as a pretext for trying to control everyone and everything.
what should be illegal is passing laws without the consent of any legislature !!
Then why are there so many shenanigans here?
1) Heavily fudged East Anglia Institute records 2) Discredited IPCC papers (discredited by the IPCC 3) Discredited NOAA records
If it was a scientific fact, then why are the scientists working so hard to cook the books?
You do realize there was thing identical situation where the East Anglia Institute in the UK not only fudged the corrections to "hide the decline" in global tempratures ... they were trying to keep out the people who were publishing research as they saw it.
And their problem was they couldn't find a way to discredit their opponents!
The IPCC has discredited their own reports several times as well.
People are not going to believe these global warming claims when there are so many shenanigans going on.
You're saying the only fix is murder.
Is everyone here posting from prison?
Thanks. I'm trying to learn from those who share.
Were you a SW engineer? What tech stack were you in?
+1: For giving a non-elitest, truthful answer. Wish I had the points.
Why not just present evidence (nad you know let kids learn something) and let people make up their own minds?
In the US you're not even allowed to refer to criticism of evolution.
That is the epitome of censorship.
Grounded in reality like Dr. Who, Lord of the Rings, East Anglia Institute, etc?
... but somehow Creationism is not "reality"?
To me this looks like another case of "the government wants to push its opinion down throats because people don't trust it."
+1: Wish I had mod points.
I thought there was another good question about whether the government should be deciding what is offensive.
I thought free speech was about stopping the government from doing exactly that.
"Since the vast bulk of these outfits were right wing the bulk of inquiries fell upon the right wing."
Lois Lerner disclosed the IRS had a policy explicitly against the presidents opponents. In other words the political enemies are don't "just happen" to be the people who lose, they were targeted by the political views to lose. In other words, the Democrats were using the government to silence the Tea party because they are the Tea party.
"people who want money for doing nothing good at all"
Are you referring to the government?
The NSA didn't have a policy to go after the president's political enemies explicitly by name.
Over 50% of the US population believes Barack Obama directed her to do this.
Washington DC, a train wreck, wants to prevent car wrecks.
I guess I misunderstood you. When you said "just force all blood donors to get tested for ..." you're not really imposing anything extra on the donors since they don't know about it.
...
That seems like an odd way to phrase it originally, but it's OK to be odd.
Or so I hope
I encourage you to not use the phrase "as a species" in a courtroom. Or to a cop.
No defendant has control over his parents, his children, his peers, etc. Only his or her own choices.
So there is no way to assign criminality to "the whole" without assigning it to each individual. If you can't assign it to each individual (because choice wasn't involved, smokey fatalism, etc) they you can't assign it to the whole.
Sure, people die every day, but when you find yourself on your death bed, you will be a LOT less interested in the decisions made by others and a lot more interested in the choices you made.
Everything else is academics, speculation, etc. and of no qualitative importance.
"If they are violating safety regulations, its a problem."
... whoa ... this is the mentality that sends kids to detention for nibbling pop tarts in the shape of guns.
Whoa
Safety regulations are the problem. Do you know who was in charge of lopping heads off during the French Reign of Terror? The Committee on Public Safety.
You didn't get the memo. As soon as you take profit out of the equation (government safety bodies) everything starts working ethically.
Government people don't take kickbacks, bribes, etc. Right?
Assuming I bought into this (an spectacular event in its own right), where did the post-iron elements come from?
You can't thermonuclear past iron, right?