does not lower your own taxes. It never does. Government just finds something new to spend the money on. And the new money sink is never the thing you wanted.
If there's a security risk, then why should America want that? Because we're going to miss out on all that lucrative trade with Libya and Somalia and Yemen?
If your country's slogan is "Death to America!" then maybe we can do without your tourist business. Please visit Canada instead.
Yeah, because making sensible, balanced choices is absolutely impossible. If a bureau has 1000 regulators, the only possible choices are increasing it to 2000 or going down to zero. No way could you eliminate 1% of the regulations and go to 990 regulators. Because... um, Ayn Rand or Somalia or business leaders all being comic book supervillains or some other strawman. This stuff is super insightful. Kudos.
Those aren't really facts either. Predictions don't become facts just because they're very likely. Facts are about things that are, not things that aren't (yet).
Yeah, if you're going to parrot carefully lawyered talking points, you more or less have to repeat them verbatim. I hope they're not paying you to get it wrong.
Any evidence that was altered by ransomware would get challenged by a defense attorney. Maybe they decided they didn't need to pay ransom for evidence that had built-in reasonable doubt.
What's wrong? This is simply government-directed communication on science issues. Didn't you want government involved in everything? Seriously, what could go wrong?
If something could go wrong, does that mean we should rethink having the government so involved?
Before guessing the racial disparity is from unequal access, rule out Vitamin D. Low Vitamin D levels are associated with higher rates of some cancers. Darker skin causes slower Vitamin D production from exposure to sunlight.
Not sure who you're talking about. I never supported Trump. I'm starting to wish I had though, because the things he's doing are better than expected. He's been the opposite of a disappointment so far.
So your point is that representative government imperfectly represents the will of the people, even in a very small state like Wyoming. Ok, thanks for that.
Why would we think non-voters would prefer something different than voters?
Solar power will probably be cheaper in some sunny places like California, Arizona, and Nevada. Other places are too far north or have cloud cover. Solar may never work in those places.
I am just going to wait for the squeals of pain when snowflakes like you realize that you have voted in someone who doesn't give a shit for anyone except his wealthy buddies.
It's going to be hilarious.
You know that doesn't actually happen, right? When Obama turned into President Dronestrike and then later became the guy overseeing NSA Spying on everyone, it took like 2 hours for his supporters to decide the shit they protested against didn't matter very much and Obama was just a bystander, powerless to do anything despite his transcendent greatness. Or they'd just change the subject and turn a blind eye.
Trump fans will do the same. (Not me though. I never liked Trump -- because he's a celebrity and celebrities seem to mostly be complete douchebags. But his cabinet picks and some of his policy statements are much better than I expected so far.)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I was hoping for a paragraph or three somewhere.
Can someone link to a concise discussion of what this does and some use cases? Thanks.
does not lower your own taxes. It never does. Government just finds something new to spend the money on. And the new money sink is never the thing you wanted.
If there's a security risk, then why should America want that? Because we're going to miss out on all that lucrative trade with Libya and Somalia and Yemen?
If your country's slogan is "Death to America!" then maybe we can do without your tourist business. Please visit Canada instead.
By the same token, that's also how you can tell whether your town's witches are actively casting their cancer spells.
Yeah, because making sensible, balanced choices is absolutely impossible. If a bureau has 1000 regulators, the only possible choices are increasing it to 2000 or going down to zero. No way could you eliminate 1% of the regulations and go to 990 regulators. Because ... um, Ayn Rand or Somalia or business leaders all being comic book supervillains or some other strawman. This stuff is super insightful. Kudos.
About the same time something like this becomes a product, they'll probably have surgical procedures that make them unnecessary.
Those aren't really facts either. Predictions don't become facts just because they're very likely. Facts are about things that are, not things that aren't (yet).
Predictions of the future are not facts.
Yeah, if you're going to parrot carefully lawyered talking points, you more or less have to repeat them verbatim. I hope they're not paying you to get it wrong.
do you know how many people from Trump's list of seven countries are responsible for terror-related deaths of Americans since 1975? Zero. Zip. Nada.
This is false. Christopher Stevens was killed by Libyan terrorists in Benghazi in 2012.
Any evidence that was altered by ransomware would get challenged by a defense attorney. Maybe they decided they didn't need to pay ransom for evidence that had built-in reasonable doubt.
Yeah, government power is disturbing. Maybe there should be less government wielding less power?
Clearly the interviewer was trolling.
What's wrong? This is simply government-directed communication on science issues. Didn't you want government involved in everything? Seriously, what could go wrong?
If something could go wrong, does that mean we should rethink having the government so involved?
It means "make the EPA smaller". The same way "Defense cuts" mean the Defense Department budget would be smaller, so they'd be able to do less.
It's completely obvious to everyone.
You wanted government to be involved in everything everyone does. How's that working out for you?
Except no one is blocked except politics-encumbered agencies. If you're not tax-funded, this doesn't apply.
You people want government involvement in everything. Congrats on that. How's that working out for you?
Before guessing the racial disparity is from unequal access, rule out Vitamin D. Low Vitamin D levels are associated with higher rates of some cancers. Darker skin causes slower Vitamin D production from exposure to sunlight.
Not sure who you're talking about. I never supported Trump. I'm starting to wish I had though, because the things he's doing are better than expected. He's been the opposite of a disappointment so far.
So your point is that representative government imperfectly represents the will of the people, even in a very small state like Wyoming. Ok, thanks for that.
Why would we think non-voters would prefer something different than voters?
Why do you think anyone is interested in whether you approve of Wyoming's choices?
Solar power will probably be cheaper in some sunny places like California, Arizona, and Nevada. Other places are too far north or have cloud cover. Solar may never work in those places.
Yeah, I'm sure people in farming states will starve to death.
Another super persuasive argument.
I am just going to wait for the squeals of pain when snowflakes like you realize that you have voted in someone who doesn't give a shit for anyone except his wealthy buddies.
It's going to be hilarious.
You know that doesn't actually happen, right? When Obama turned into President Dronestrike and then later became the guy overseeing NSA Spying on everyone, it took like 2 hours for his supporters to decide the shit they protested against didn't matter very much and Obama was just a bystander, powerless to do anything despite his transcendent greatness. Or they'd just change the subject and turn a blind eye.
Trump fans will do the same. (Not me though. I never liked Trump -- because he's a celebrity and celebrities seem to mostly be complete douchebags. But his cabinet picks and some of his policy statements are much better than I expected so far.)