I don't know. I've ridden facing backwards and it wasn't so bad. Although it was with windows on the side so it was obvious to our minds which direction we were headed. I don't recall anyone getting sick.
Not in the way you are implying (maybe other ways). You see, the post wasn't meant to be taken literally. If you go back to the first woman is space, during that specific period of time there were only women in space and no men. But it loses something when I have to explain it. Now, as for your first question, I could retort with an equally juvenile response, but it wouldn't add anything to the conversation.
This is an outrage. I say we need to get a woman up into space as soon as possible. What? Women have been to space? OK, then I think we need to have a female pilot a spacecraft. Oh, that's been done too. Now it is time for a female mission commander. Already been done? What we really need is to have a female mission commander and a female ISS commander at the same time. No! that's been done too? Arrrgghhh. We need to setup a time when only females are in space and no men. Only then can we be equals.
For the US, I think fruit flies were first, then some monkeys that died, then some that lived, and some mice, and a whole bunch of other stuff before people.
The Michigan State Senate has a 26-to-12 Republican majority and in the House a 59-to-50 Republican majority. With control of both the executive and legislative branches of government, it is certainly Republicans who are accountable for revoking the freedom to purchase a Tesla in Michigan.
So wait, 49 of the 50 democrat reps vote for this and all 12 democrat senators vote for this and it's a Republican thing?
I interpreted your comment to mean individuals. It is clear now that you mean the entirety of the middle and lower classes. That doesn't strike me as meaningful in the context of "hardest hit" which is perhaps why I was (or maybe still am) confused.
Progressive means rich people pay more than poor people (not just absolutely, but as a percentage of their means). Taxes on consumption tend towards being progressive naturally, and you can exempt basic needs to make them more progressive.
Not sure what "taxes on consumption" you are talking about. Sales tax, the way it is typically implemented, is NOT progressive. Sure rich people will pay more because they buy more expensive stuff. But most of the wealthy (spoiled heirs aside) are able to support an extravagant lifestyle and still put money away. Poor people are spending 100% of their income on consumption. If the statistics that show the middle class shrinking (in favor of the lower-middle and lower classes) are correct then the middle class is also spending a very high percentage of their income.
A tax on consumption hits those hardest who consume the most: the middle and lower classes.
And it does nothing to stop or slow the growth of wealth accumulation.
To be clear, the middle and lower class do not consume the most. The wealthy do. Their consumption is just not as high a proportion of their wealth or income. I don't think it would be a good idea to tax wealth, but it doesn't matter what I think because politicians will always build in some loophole that allows the truly wealthy to hide their money.
Where I live there are several other companies offering to sell electricity to me. One company owns the infrastructure, other companies sell electricity and compete on rates, and other deals like free nights or weekends. I pay significantly less here than I did where I lived before. On the other hand, when I firsts got DSL, I had the option of several different ISPs. That is no longer the case.
I don't even get to choose between a cable and phone company. I get to choose between ATT and satellite. Three blocks in any direction and they get the choice. This is a recently build neighborhood too. There was a deal struck between ATT and the developer. Bad on me that I didn't investigate that prior to moving in.
Maybe they are on to something. Maybe we should go backwards to the old flight attendant rules...
"During Pan Am’s heyday in the 1960s, there were strict requirements for stewardesses: They had to be at least 5-foot-2, weigh no more than 130 pounds, and retire by age 32. They couldn’t be married or have children, either. As a result, most women averaged just 18 months on the job."
I won't dispute your commitment to safety, but I really have a hard time believing that your union gives a rip about passenger safety. They may be concerned about your safety, your livelihood, your work-life balance (which they should be), but I really can't believe that they care about passenger safety except where it affects those things.
According to a former slashdot story, that is absolutely where the estrogen is coming from. The primary point of the story was that tap water processing plants do absolutely nothing to filter it out. This is why I don't drink tap water.
Right. Only rain water and grain alcohol. God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural... fluids.
I like how the title of the article is "Jitters over US surveillance..." implying that the surveillance itself isn't the problem, we just need to get comfortable with it.
Mostly though because so many conservatives have a "we have always done it that way" attitude.... think the system must be good "because its traditional".
I think you may have inadvertently stumbled upon the textbook definition of conservative. Congrats.
On the other hand FTFA:Mr. Pena of C.A.G. Acceptance said, “It is impossible to cause a vehicle to shut off while it is operating,”... While PassTime, the device’s maker, declined to comment on Ms. Smith’s case, the company emphasized that its products were designed to prevent a car from starting, not to shut it down while it was in operation.
Your theory relies on the ability to actually repo the car. That is largely what the device is for. Report the location of the vehicle and make it harder for anyone to move it before the tow truck gets there. In addition it actually allows the flexibility of an intermediate penalty before actually retaking possession of the vehicle.
Please write to your governments and have these sorts of people punished. Please send aid money to Africa where Africans (not foreigners) can deal with it themselves.
Wait, are you a Prince? Do you need my help to reclaim your inheritance?
It is more of a touch and go as opposed to the full stop landing the standard aircraft have to make and the loading of water happens much quicker. The downside is that when they do that they don't get retardant, just water.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know. I've ridden facing backwards and it wasn't so bad. Although it was with windows on the side so it was obvious to our minds which direction we were headed. I don't recall anyone getting sick.
Are you really that stupid?
Not in the way you are implying (maybe other ways). You see, the post wasn't meant to be taken literally. If you go back to the first woman is space, during that specific period of time there were only women in space and no men. But it loses something when I have to explain it. Now, as for your first question, I could retort with an equally juvenile response, but it wouldn't add anything to the conversation.
Regards
This is an outrage. I say we need to get a woman up into space as soon as possible. What? Women have been to space? OK, then I think we need to have a female pilot a spacecraft. Oh, that's been done too. Now it is time for a female mission commander. Already been done? What we really need is to have a female mission commander and a female ISS commander at the same time. No! that's been done too? Arrrgghhh. We need to setup a time when only females are in space and no men. Only then can we be equals.
For the US, I think fruit flies were first, then some monkeys that died, then some that lived, and some mice, and a whole bunch of other stuff before people.
The Michigan State Senate has a 26-to-12 Republican majority and in the House a 59-to-50 Republican majority. With control of both the executive and legislative branches of government, it is certainly Republicans who are accountable for revoking the freedom to purchase a Tesla in Michigan.
So wait, 49 of the 50 democrat reps vote for this and all 12 democrat senators vote for this and it's a Republican thing?
you must be trolling.
I interpreted your comment to mean individuals. It is clear now that you mean the entirety of the middle and lower classes. That doesn't strike me as meaningful in the context of "hardest hit" which is perhaps why I was (or maybe still am) confused.
Progressive means rich people pay more than poor people (not just absolutely, but as a percentage of their means). Taxes on consumption tend towards being progressive naturally, and you can exempt basic needs to make them more progressive.
Not sure what "taxes on consumption" you are talking about. Sales tax, the way it is typically implemented, is NOT progressive. Sure rich people will pay more because they buy more expensive stuff. But most of the wealthy (spoiled heirs aside) are able to support an extravagant lifestyle and still put money away. Poor people are spending 100% of their income on consumption. If the statistics that show the middle class shrinking (in favor of the lower-middle and lower classes) are correct then the middle class is also spending a very high percentage of their income.
A tax on consumption hits those hardest who consume the most: the middle and lower classes. And it does nothing to stop or slow the growth of wealth accumulation.
To be clear, the middle and lower class do not consume the most. The wealthy do. Their consumption is just not as high a proportion of their wealth or income. I don't think it would be a good idea to tax wealth, but it doesn't matter what I think because politicians will always build in some loophole that allows the truly wealthy to hide their money.
Where I live there are several other companies offering to sell electricity to me. One company owns the infrastructure, other companies sell electricity and compete on rates, and other deals like free nights or weekends. I pay significantly less here than I did where I lived before. On the other hand, when I firsts got DSL, I had the option of several different ISPs. That is no longer the case.
I don't even get to choose between a cable and phone company. I get to choose between ATT and satellite. Three blocks in any direction and they get the choice. This is a recently build neighborhood too. There was a deal struck between ATT and the developer. Bad on me that I didn't investigate that prior to moving in.
"During Pan Am’s heyday in the 1960s, there were strict requirements for stewardesses: They had to be at least 5-foot-2, weigh no more than 130 pounds, and retire by age 32. They couldn’t be married or have children, either. As a result, most women averaged just 18 months on the job."
No? Don't want to do that?
I won't dispute your commitment to safety, but I really have a hard time believing that your union gives a rip about passenger safety. They may be concerned about your safety, your livelihood, your work-life balance (which they should be), but I really can't believe that they care about passenger safety except where it affects those things.
According to a former slashdot story, that is absolutely where the estrogen is coming from. The primary point of the story was that tap water processing plants do absolutely nothing to filter it out. This is why I don't drink tap water.
Right. Only rain water and grain alcohol. God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural... fluids.
I like how the title of the article is "Jitters over US surveillance..." implying that the surveillance itself isn't the problem, we just need to get comfortable with it.
All presidents get both the blame and credit for things that started before they got into office.
Mostly though because so many conservatives have a "we have always done it that way" attitude. ... think the system must be good "because its traditional".
I think you may have inadvertently stumbled upon the textbook definition of conservative. Congrats.
They both share the 4 pints to the gallon, but there's no weight equivalent.
Am I missing something or are there 8 pints to a gallon?
Changing one state would probably be harder than changing the whole thing.
And it still wouldn't be allowed for tests
On the other hand FTFA:Mr. Pena of C.A.G. Acceptance said, “It is impossible to cause a vehicle to shut off while it is operating,”... While PassTime, the device’s maker, declined to comment on Ms. Smith’s case, the company emphasized that its products were designed to prevent a car from starting, not to shut it down while it was in operation.
one or both of them are full of something.
Your theory relies on the ability to actually repo the car. That is largely what the device is for. Report the location of the vehicle and make it harder for anyone to move it before the tow truck gets there. In addition it actually allows the flexibility of an intermediate penalty before actually retaking possession of the vehicle.
FTFA: "Mr. Pena of C.A.G. Acceptance said, “It is impossible to cause a vehicle to shut off while it is operating."
One of them is full of it
Please write to your governments and have these sorts of people punished. Please send aid money to Africa where Africans (not foreigners) can deal with it themselves.
Wait, are you a Prince? Do you need my help to reclaim your inheritance?
It is more of a touch and go as opposed to the full stop landing the standard aircraft have to make and the loading of water happens much quicker. The downside is that when they do that they don't get retardant, just water.
United Airlines crash in Sioux City, Iowa, 1989.
UAL232 in Sioux City