I assume you're telling the truth, which means your employer is breaking the law and that quoted statement is literally the legal standard for making that determination. You should stop being a chump and get what you are legally entitled to.
I had an employer do that to me once. I wasn't savvy enough to know better but eventually the IRS asked me for some money that I didn't feel I owed and that led them to ask me and the employer some pointed questions: the essential question was "are you a free agent really, or in name only". For me, it was in name only. I ended up owing nothing and I'm pretty sure the employer paid some back taxes.
Good luck. Don't be a chump. If you are a programmer then you have lots of options in the economy today. It's a seller's market, go extract your due from the economy.
That shows that the labor force participation rate declined by one percent over five years during a period of time when we are retiring a historical population boom.
I assume that you, like me, are shocked that the decline is so small. Only 0.2% per year during exceptional retirement times? Wow! I join you in congratulating the people who run this economy so well that we can retire the Baby Boomers while at the same time having historically low unemployment.
Well, it was a campus police officer which is in the gray area. The reason it's a "cop" instead of a "security guard" is because the institution is run by the government instead of a private organization. Otherwise it's the same as a security guard. "Who pays" for that "cop" is a matter of how you think about the funding of public colleges -- and remember that private colleges get a lot of "public" money, too. I think you've made a distinction with no difference.
That you like it that way is a good reason to put it in that position. It is not a reason why you like it. (The original comment was "*why* anyone still thinks that menu/task bars should be on the bottom(?)"). You still think that. Wonderful. But that doesn't address the question of why you think that.
Your feeble ability to understand (or willingness to acknowledge) this distinction must be crippling for your day-to-day activities.
Nope. You still haven't answered the question, which was "why" not "what". It's just baffling that you are either unwilling or incapable of answering a question which makes you apparently very angry. Is it that you are unwilling? You know the reason why, but won't say it? Or do you not know why, yet are strangely angered by the question?
Good luck getting through life. If this is a common problem for you then I bet you often have a tough go of it.
Huh. It's weird for you to have used such strong language to avoid answering the question, which let me boil it down for you was why? Stating that you want it at the bottom isn't an answer.
So, no, it wasn't clear enough for us because it wasn't clear at all. Try again and be less vulgar this time.
"It's a well-defined culture that places emphasis on design, on style, on trendiness, on being different just for the sake of being different, of putting appearance over usability, and of the practitioner having an unhealthily large ego."
Oh, you youngin's.
I heard that same bullshit about software before the word hipster was ever first uttered.
It's not different just to be different, it's different to be better. Like all software changes always forever.
Congress said Obama didn't have any real Presidential powers during his first term because his election was a fluke, nor during the second term because he was a lame duck.
"And all this is not the case in the examples of Denmark, Icelands etc."
In Denmark, the legislature passed a law compelling the state religion to grant same-sex marraiges. That is "leaders of government being leaders of the state religion." That is theocracy. Whether the government leaders are elected isn't relevant.
Every nation can make what claim at a certain time? that they were the greatest nation in all of history? When did New Zealand lead the world? India? Papua? Cuba? Brazil? Argentina? South Africa? Only Rome, China, UK, and America have any plausible claim like that.
Winning the second world war is in the top ten things America did in the last century, but not in the top three. "Pax Americana" is number one: our might is so awesome that the world has seen unprecedented peace. And we did all that without the metric system.
If the leaders of the government are the leaders of the official state religion, then that's theocracy, and that describes Denmark and Iceland, where the legislatures control the religion. For instance, in America you can't pass a law requiring a church to perform same-sex marriages, but in Denmark you can, as this American pastor was aghast to find out
That's because in Denmark they have civilian control over the state Church. That's a theocracy.
I should have added this to the list of retorts I hear every single time:
"Especially if you consider that the head of Anglicanism, which is the Monarch, has no power at all."
This is plain nonsense. If the Queen has no power at all, then she isn't the Queen. Can just any old person live in her tax-supported house and do her official state duties? Yes? No, of course not. She's the queen, nobody else is the queen. She is the head of state and the head of the religion, and nobody else is. She has the power and nobody else has that power.
And no, not all European countries are monarchies. It's substantially less than half, but the quantity doesn't change how ridiculous it is to have a monarchy:
Anyway, that's what I meant: theocracy is stupid, monarchy is stupid, America is neither, and that is two big ways that America is better than some other countries. And all of that is just a tangential insult to my original point, which is that saying "only one country" in reference to America is a silly way to talk about the world's and history's most important country.
Denmark has an official state religion; that's a theocracy. Iceland's constitution reads "The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the State Church in Iceland and, as such, it shall be supported and protected by the State"; that's a theocracy.
But the worse offender is the UK. Britain's official state religion is Anglicanism, the Church receives tax money, and the head of the church is the ruling Monarch. Church leaders have reserved seats in the legislature. That's absolutely a theocracy.
Now, let me be super duper clear because some people just can't hear me say this without retorting how Americans are so religious and blah blah blah whatever, or how other theocracies are so terrible because yadda yadda.
Yeah, that's all true, but at least America doesn't have an official religion, doesn't give tax dollars to an official church, doesn't give church leaders legislative powers, and doesn't make the President of the USA the head of any church (how crazy would that be?). Furthermore, no, I'm not equating the UK to, say, Iran; all I'm saying is that they are both theocracies, and theocracy is bad, not that they are all equally bad.
(Furthermore, my insult was not only about theocracies but monarchies, and there are a bunch of monarchies still hanging on all across Europe.)
Second of all, by "one country" you mean "the most important and powerful country that has ever existed through all of history, including Rome". So, yeah, okay fine, not intended to be looked at beyond that country.
Also, if we are going to keep pretending that Europe is more than one country, then I insist that Europeans recognize the USA as fifty countries. Then, any time they complain that Americans don't know the King of whichever European theocracy, they can prove they aren't hypocrites by naming the governors of all fifty of our States from memory. When they fail, we will mock them as stupid and unworldly.
Finally, I challenge your unstated major premise that most people in the world don't know what an inch is. Unlike you, I doubt people are so poorly informed. Maybe they are -- presumably you are, or you wouldn't be carping -- but I doubt everyone else is.
I don't understand your attempt at pedantry. Density is spacial efficiency. If you make something smaller, you make it more efficient in the dimension of size.
Wut? In what school district is science not a requirement? My public school district required, um, I think three years of science, and the choices were pre-biology, biology, chemistry, and physics. That means biology and one of chem or phys was required. I haven't called around but I'm pretty sure that's typical, practically universal.
Slashdot Mirror
Instead of choosing between an old iPhone OS and a slow iPhone, you could always just upgrade to a Palm Treo.
Dude, Slashdot is news for nerds; this is news and it's the nerd angle on the story. It's center-bullseye Slashdot material.
"I'm a free agent in name only"
I assume you're telling the truth, which means your employer is breaking the law and that quoted statement is literally the legal standard for making that determination. You should stop being a chump and get what you are legally entitled to.
I had an employer do that to me once. I wasn't savvy enough to know better but eventually the IRS asked me for some money that I didn't feel I owed and that led them to ask me and the employer some pointed questions: the essential question was "are you a free agent really, or in name only". For me, it was in name only. I ended up owing nothing and I'm pretty sure the employer paid some back taxes.
Good luck. Don't be a chump. If you are a programmer then you have lots of options in the economy today. It's a seller's market, go extract your due from the economy.
That shows that the labor force participation rate declined by one percent over five years during a period of time when we are retiring a historical population boom.
I assume that you, like me, are shocked that the decline is so small. Only 0.2% per year during exceptional retirement times? Wow! I join you in congratulating the people who run this economy so well that we can retire the Baby Boomers while at the same time having historically low unemployment.
Same with Hypercard. And MacDraw. And CyberDog. And Graphing Calculator.
What, is my beard getting too long?
Well, it was a campus police officer which is in the gray area. The reason it's a "cop" instead of a "security guard" is because the institution is run by the government instead of a private organization. Otherwise it's the same as a security guard. "Who pays" for that "cop" is a matter of how you think about the funding of public colleges -- and remember that private colleges get a lot of "public" money, too. I think you've made a distinction with no difference.
Adam & Eve dot com has everything you need, all high quality
Monoprice? or is there a new better option?
It's not racist to recognize the likely ethnicity behind a given name.
That you like it that way is a good reason to put it in that position. It is not a reason why you like it. (The original comment was "*why* anyone still thinks that menu/task bars should be on the bottom(?)"). You still think that. Wonderful. But that doesn't address the question of why you think that.
Your feeble ability to understand (or willingness to acknowledge) this distinction must be crippling for your day-to-day activities.
Nope. You still haven't answered the question, which was "why" not "what". It's just baffling that you are either unwilling or incapable of answering a question which makes you apparently very angry. Is it that you are unwilling? You know the reason why, but won't say it? Or do you not know why, yet are strangely angered by the question?
Good luck getting through life. If this is a common problem for you then I bet you often have a tough go of it.
Huh. It's weird for you to have used such strong language to avoid answering the question, which let me boil it down for you was why? Stating that you want it at the bottom isn't an answer.
So, no, it wasn't clear enough for us because it wasn't clear at all. Try again and be less vulgar this time.
Before a thousand people answer you, are you honestly too fucking stupid to answer that yourself, or are you just trying to troll?
"It's a well-defined culture that places emphasis on design, on style, on trendiness, on being different just for the sake of being different, of putting appearance over usability, and of the practitioner having an unhealthily large ego."
Oh, you youngin's.
I heard that same bullshit about software before the word hipster was ever first uttered.
It's not different just to be different, it's different to be better. Like all software changes always forever.
Congress said Obama didn't have any real Presidential powers during his first term because his election was a fluke, nor during the second term because he was a lame duck.
"And all this is not the case in the examples of Denmark, Icelands etc."
In Denmark, the legislature passed a law compelling the state religion to grant same-sex marraiges. That is "leaders of government being leaders of the state religion." That is theocracy. Whether the government leaders are elected isn't relevant.
Every nation can make what claim at a certain time? that they were the greatest nation in all of history? When did New Zealand lead the world? India? Papua? Cuba? Brazil? Argentina? South Africa? Only Rome, China, UK, and America have any plausible claim like that.
Winning the second world war is in the top ten things America did in the last century, but not in the top three. "Pax Americana" is number one: our might is so awesome that the world has seen unprecedented peace. And we did all that without the metric system.
Yeah but then you'd just end up with almost twenty thousand paper rolls full of beads.
Well, you know what they say: carpe dime, or seize the coin.
Some of your jokes are funny, but I'm not amused by a quarter of them.
If the leaders of the government are the leaders of the official state religion, then that's theocracy, and that describes Denmark and Iceland, where the legislatures control the religion. For instance, in America you can't pass a law requiring a church to perform same-sex marriages, but in Denmark you can, as this American pastor was aghast to find out
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...
That's because in Denmark they have civilian control over the state Church. That's a theocracy.
I should have added this to the list of retorts I hear every single time:
"Especially if you consider that the head of Anglicanism, which is the Monarch, has no power at all."
This is plain nonsense. If the Queen has no power at all, then she isn't the Queen. Can just any old person live in her tax-supported house and do her official state duties? Yes? No, of course not. She's the queen, nobody else is the queen. She is the head of state and the head of the religion, and nobody else is. She has the power and nobody else has that power.
And no, not all European countries are monarchies. It's substantially less than half, but the quantity doesn't change how ridiculous it is to have a monarchy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Anyway, that's what I meant: theocracy is stupid, monarchy is stupid, America is neither, and that is two big ways that America is better than some other countries. And all of that is just a tangential insult to my original point, which is that saying "only one country" in reference to America is a silly way to talk about the world's and history's most important country.
Denmark has an official state religion; that's a theocracy. Iceland's constitution reads "The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the State Church in Iceland and, as such, it shall be supported and protected by the State"; that's a theocracy.
But the worse offender is the UK. Britain's official state religion is Anglicanism, the Church receives tax money, and the head of the church is the ruling Monarch. Church leaders have reserved seats in the legislature. That's absolutely a theocracy.
Now, let me be super duper clear because some people just can't hear me say this without retorting how Americans are so religious and blah blah blah whatever, or how other theocracies are so terrible because yadda yadda.
Yeah, that's all true, but at least America doesn't have an official religion, doesn't give tax dollars to an official church, doesn't give church leaders legislative powers, and doesn't make the President of the USA the head of any church (how crazy would that be?). Furthermore, no, I'm not equating the UK to, say, Iran; all I'm saying is that they are both theocracies, and theocracy is bad, not that they are all equally bad.
(Furthermore, my insult was not only about theocracies but monarchies, and there are a bunch of monarchies still hanging on all across Europe.)
If you want a bare bones browser, go get Lynx.
First of all, you mean two countries, right?
Second of all, by "one country" you mean "the most important and powerful country that has ever existed through all of history, including Rome". So, yeah, okay fine, not intended to be looked at beyond that country.
Also, if we are going to keep pretending that Europe is more than one country, then I insist that Europeans recognize the USA as fifty countries. Then, any time they complain that Americans don't know the King of whichever European theocracy, they can prove they aren't hypocrites by naming the governors of all fifty of our States from memory. When they fail, we will mock them as stupid and unworldly.
Finally, I challenge your unstated major premise that most people in the world don't know what an inch is. Unlike you, I doubt people are so poorly informed. Maybe they are -- presumably you are, or you wouldn't be carping -- but I doubt everyone else is.
I don't understand your attempt at pedantry. Density is spacial efficiency. If you make something smaller, you make it more efficient in the dimension of size.
Wut? In what school district is science not a requirement? My public school district required, um, I think three years of science, and the choices were pre-biology, biology, chemistry, and physics. That means biology and one of chem or phys was required. I haven't called around but I'm pretty sure that's typical, practically universal.