Yes, it is. It is a continuation of the budget that was already passed. You should be happy about it too, since it has effectively cut spending when you take into account inflation. The federal budget has grown less under Obama that is has under any other president since the end of WWII.
Especially if they are spending entirely differently
Between Ted Kennedy dying and the Coleman/Franken Senate race recount, the D's actually had a filibuster proof majority for ~24 working days during those two year. The rest of the time, they required Republican vote(s) to get anything through. With what little time they had, they chose to pursue health care reform instead of passing a new budget.
That aside, they *did* pass a budget. They passed a continuing resolution which extended Bush's last budget; so we've been operating on George W. Bush's last budget since FY2009.
Actually I'm in Arizona, and yes the word "dole" very much applies due to what we term anchor baby syndrome. Parent(s) here illegally, kid is here legally and is entitled to medicaid (here we call it AHCCCS - which provides comprehensive care by the way, and is better than the health care that 90% of americans have with zero premiums, zero deductable, and copays no higher than $5.) which also makes one or both parents automatically eligible for that program as well as food stamps and cash assistance. Used to be that we deported them, but Obama signed an executive order saying that we can't.
You have been misinformed. Those here illegally do not qualify for medicaid and other social services as a result of having a child here. The children do qualify for various forms of assistance, but the parents are only entitled to emergency care, of which every human being on our soil does regardless of legal or financial status.
I hope don't think the meager assistance afforded to a child is enough for an entire family to live off of.
I live in Central California and grew up around families of mixed legality and based on my experience, your narrative of the lazy welfare sucking migrants is pure fantasy.
Leaving all of the disputed details aside, it is still true that low skilled immigrants place a lower burden on the welfare state than citizens of the same socioeconomic class.
There is absolutely no data to support the "anchor baby" narrative that scares nativists so much, while there is in fact data that disputes it.
. This is ignoring the fact that illegal immigrants are far far FAR more likely to depend on the dole system and become a liability rather than an asset.
I don't know what country you're from (judging by your use of the term "dole", I would guess Britain), but here in the U.S. "illegal immigrants" do not qualify most major social services, though studies have shown that 60% of them pay into them through payroll taxes. Studies have also shown that low skilled immigrants in the U.S. are less of a burden on the welfare state than citizens of the same socio-economic class.
Setting aside any judgement of whether or not it can be ultimately viewed as morally right, committing violence against the government will never be ruled legal, period.
No. It's about being able to own a handgun for the purpose of protecting your home. The supreme court in 2008 and again in 2010 proclaimed it so.
You can disagree with the supreme court's decision, like I do, but its opinion is the law of the land, while ours are just the opinion of a couple of assholes on the internet.
There exist sensors that can be placed into the helment and detect hits that are potentially damaging. The cost is actually nominal. The NFL should make these mandatory.
Comparatively, Reagan's "Trick Down Economy" policies led to the prosperity of the 1990's.
How can you believe this?
Reagan's trickle down policies took effect ~1980, a full ten years before the 1990's even started and after that initial tax cut taxes were increased several times, including a large increase in capital gains, which according to supply-side'rs is a death knell to job creation.
In 1993, before the real prosperity started, Clinton and the Democrats forced through (with *no* Republican votes) an increase in the top marginal tax rate.
I love the concept of Waze. I was an area manager and made several hundred major fixes to the maps in my area (including building a missing 15 mile stretch of highway from scratch), but because my area is rural the social aspects of it were just not there. Also the routing engine was terrible when it came to my daily commute. There are two possible routes; one is 40 miles and the other is 43 miles. Both take about the same time. Waze would NOT route over one of the routes no matter how many times I drove it.
If I lived in an urban area I think my waze experience would have been better.
And has nothing at all do to with having a more capable connector with the capacity for much higher data transfer speeds
No, it doesn't.
even though it represents a tremendous amount of extra work for them.
You honestly believe that inventing an entirely new connector takes less work that taking an existing standard form factor and adding pins to suit your needs?
As for chargers, all of them will work since Apple has always shipped USB chargers, and all of the other USB chargers will work with the new phone too.
This is simply not true. Only one end of the chargers Apple uses is USB. The other end is proprietary, and Apple charges a $4-per-connector royalty fee for any accessory that uses their proprietary connector.
If they would have made their new connector compatible with micro usb by taking the form factor and adding proprietary features they desired, people could use their existing micro usb cables (which over the last few years has become THE defacto standard for all non-apple devices) to charge their iphones. Instead, when the cable that comes with the phone goes bad or gets left at home, and an iphone user has to buy a compatible cable to charge their phones, and Apple gets another $4.
Go to a store with an electronics section and find the mobile phone chargers. You'll find there are two classes or chargers; chargers that charge everything and chargers that charge everything but idevices. The chargers that charge everything but idevices will cost about $5 less.
Apple having these proprietary connectors is all about milking their captive market out of every last dime they have.
If you don't mind being nickle and dimed like that, that's fine, but don't delude yourself into thinking Apple's connector is about anything other than sucking money out of it's customer's wallets.
Slashdot Mirror
Claiming that the education failures in the U.S.A. are because there isn't enough funding
This is not exactly what the post you replied to claims.
You just described the placebo effect.
I want a nuclear powered electric car.
What? George W. Bush's last budget wasn't reasonable?
A continuing resolution is not a budget.
Yes, it is. It is a continuation of the budget that was already passed. You should be happy about it too, since it has effectively cut spending when you take into account inflation. The federal budget has grown less under Obama that is has under any other president since the end of WWII.
Especially if they are spending entirely differently
What does that mean? Care to elaborate?
Between Ted Kennedy dying and the Coleman/Franken Senate race recount, the D's actually had a filibuster proof majority for ~24 working days during those two year. The rest of the time, they required Republican vote(s) to get anything through. With what little time they had, they chose to pursue health care reform instead of passing a new budget.
That aside, they *did* pass a budget. They passed a continuing resolution which extended Bush's last budget; so we've been operating on George W. Bush's last budget since FY2009.
Actually I'm in Arizona, and yes the word "dole" very much applies due to what we term anchor baby syndrome. Parent(s) here illegally, kid is here legally and is entitled to medicaid (here we call it AHCCCS - which provides comprehensive care by the way, and is better than the health care that 90% of americans have with zero premiums, zero deductable, and copays no higher than $5.) which also makes one or both parents automatically eligible for that program as well as food stamps and cash assistance. Used to be that we deported them, but Obama signed an executive order saying that we can't.
You have been misinformed. Those here illegally do not qualify for medicaid and other social services as a result of having a child here. The children do qualify for various forms of assistance, but the parents are only entitled to emergency care, of which every human being on our soil does regardless of legal or financial status.
I hope don't think the meager assistance afforded to a child is enough for an entire family to live off of.
I live in Central California and grew up around families of mixed legality and based on my experience, your narrative of the lazy welfare sucking migrants is pure fantasy.
Leaving all of the disputed details aside, it is still true that low skilled immigrants place a lower burden on the welfare state than citizens of the same socioeconomic class.
There is absolutely no data to support the "anchor baby" narrative that scares nativists so much, while there is in fact data that disputes it.
. This is ignoring the fact that illegal immigrants are far far FAR more likely to depend on the dole system and become a liability rather than an asset.
I don't know what country you're from (judging by your use of the term "dole", I would guess Britain), but here in the U.S. "illegal immigrants" do not qualify most major social services, though studies have shown that 60% of them pay into them through payroll taxes. Studies have also shown that low skilled immigrants in the U.S. are less of a burden on the welfare state than citizens of the same socio-economic class.
In what context do you see the supreme court ruling on whether or not is acceptable to commit violence against our own government?
Don't forget shooting up old cars. That's what my gun nut coworker friend gave as an example when the topic of the purpose machine guns came up!
We should be able to have machine guns because shooting up old cars is fun.
This is what we are dealing with.
It makes me sad.
Setting aside any judgement of whether or not it can be ultimately viewed as morally right, committing violence against the government will never be ruled legal, period.
You are correct. I was being to narrow there.
Natural right? I have a natural right to bash someone's skull in with a rock if I want their coconut.
Doesn't mean that right should exist should exist in a civilized society.
No. It's about being able to own a handgun for the purpose of protecting your home. The supreme court in 2008 and again in 2010 proclaimed it so.
You can disagree with the supreme court's decision, like I do, but its opinion is the law of the land, while ours are just the opinion of a couple of assholes on the internet.
For a group who are supposed to hold the moral high ground because of their job, you should expect it to be considerably lower.
With what psychologists have discovered about those with a "moral identity", you should expect it to be considerably higher.
There exist sensors that can be placed into the helment and detect hits that are potentially damaging. The cost is actually nominal. The NFL should make these mandatory.
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscience/2011/January/Helmet-Device-Could-Help-in-Concussion-Detection/
If you need a youtube videos to explain it, then you don't really understand it.
The 2003-2008 housing bubble formed after Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999. There were no housing bubbles while Glass-Steagall was in place.
Many times with very bad unintended consiquences. The great depression comes to mind. The ression of 2007 being another.
Only in the bizzaro opposite-world your mind occupies.
name a regulation applied to capitalism that made things better. I will prove you wrong in every case.
The two ACs above came up with perfect examples, but I'll throw one more in that you are sure to disagree with...
The Glass-Steagall Act.
Comparatively, Reagan's "Trick Down Economy" policies led to the prosperity of the 1990's.
How can you believe this?
Reagan's trickle down policies took effect ~1980, a full ten years before the 1990's even started and after that initial tax cut taxes were increased several times, including a large increase in capital gains, which according to supply-side'rs is a death knell to job creation.
In 1993, before the real prosperity started, Clinton and the Democrats forced through (with *no* Republican votes) an increase in the top marginal tax rate.
he best you can expect under Republicans is slower growth of government.
Haha. Good one.
See your own quote about looking at what they say rather than what they do.
forget the Samsung brainwashin...there are a number of devices that can compete with the S3 easily enough that cost half of it, e.g. the Nexus.
If you are referring to the Galaxy Nexus, that's made by Samsung too.
I love the concept of Waze. I was an area manager and made several hundred major fixes to the maps in my area (including building a missing 15 mile stretch of highway from scratch), but because my area is rural the social aspects of it were just not there. Also the routing engine was terrible when it came to my daily commute. There are two possible routes; one is 40 miles and the other is 43 miles. Both take about the same time. Waze would NOT route over one of the routes no matter how many times I drove it.
If I lived in an urban area I think my waze experience would have been better.
And has nothing at all do to with having a more capable connector with the capacity for much higher data transfer speeds
No, it doesn't.
even though it represents a tremendous amount of extra work for them.
You honestly believe that inventing an entirely new connector takes less work that taking an existing standard form factor and adding pins to suit your needs?
As for chargers, all of them will work since Apple has always shipped USB chargers, and all of the other USB chargers will work with the new phone too.
This is simply not true. Only one end of the chargers Apple uses is USB. The other end is proprietary, and Apple charges a $4-per-connector royalty fee for any accessory that uses their proprietary connector.
If they would have made their new connector compatible with micro usb by taking the form factor and adding proprietary features they desired, people could use their existing micro usb cables (which over the last few years has become THE defacto standard for all non-apple devices) to charge their iphones. Instead, when the cable that comes with the phone goes bad or gets left at home, and an iphone user has to buy a compatible cable to charge their phones, and Apple gets another $4.
Go to a store with an electronics section and find the mobile phone chargers. You'll find there are two classes or chargers; chargers that charge everything and chargers that charge everything but idevices. The chargers that charge everything but idevices will cost about $5 less.
Apple having these proprietary connectors is all about milking their captive market out of every last dime they have.
If you don't mind being nickle and dimed like that, that's fine, but don't delude yourself into thinking Apple's connector is about anything other than sucking money out of it's customer's wallets.