The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
In other words, it doesn't have to be in the constitution to exist. It's pretty fucking clear, based on the writings of the founders and the other amendments, that this was a right that was assumed to exist at a level so fundamental that the founders didn't even bother to write it in.
Congress DID pass a law allowing the FCC to regulate interstate and international communications (as which ISPs undoubtedly qualify). More than one, in fact.
Counterpoint: Illegal !=Criminal. Speeding is illegal, but it is not criminal. Littering is illegal, but it is not criminal. In many states, cannabis is illegal, but it is not criminal. Defamation is illegal, but it is not criminal. Same with libel and slander. And so on and so forth.
So they come here, work jobs that simply do not pay their taxes, so that they undercut the legal workers, including other immigrants.
Seems like that's a problem caused by greedy, unethical employers. A hike in the minimum wage coupled with real efforts to prosecute employers who break immigration law would be a much more effective solution.
... Let's break up all of the media conglomerates. Times corporation? Your times has come! AT&T? Let's try A, and T, and T. Comcast? I'm out of jokes, but you're on the list, along with Time Warner, Sinclair, I Heart Media, and so on and so forth.
It seems like whenever there's an economic expansion of any kind, people are desperate to put their money in anything regardless of the chance of success. This particular time will be very interesting to look back on, because you basically have multiple different bubbles all going on at the same time and they all feed on each other. I feel old, but I really don't see cryptocurrency as anything more than a scam.
Bubbles are what you get when you have too many investment dollars chasing too few good investment opportunities. It's a sign that the economic system is tilted too much in favor of capital vs. labor. .
Gas station companies tend to try to maintain a margin in the $0.15-$0.25 per gallon range. Mom & Pop stores live by different rules, of course, but the big players (like Marathon) try to keep a steady margin in that range over their full portfolio of stores. That means some will be lower, but others will be higher.
Source: 20 years in the finance/accounting side of the cstore industry.
It depends on how busy they are and how many pumps they have. If it takes three minutes to fill a tank with 20 gallons, the store has 15 other pumps in constant use, and they make $0.20/gallon, that works out to $1800 in profit.
There are other things to consider, though. One is that fuel is not where the profit is - it's inside sales. If customers pull up and see the pumps aren't working, they're going to go elsewhere for their fuel and, more importantly, for their high margin inside purchases like cigarettes, chips, and soda. Another is reputation. If people don't trust that they can fill up at your store, they won't stop. It's often better to allow some one-time cash loss in the present to prevent permanent sales loss in the future.
In a proper free market economy, one that's relatively free of distortion, profit essentially gets driven down to nothing.
Fortunately for those seeking to profit, there is no such thing as a "proper free market". A truly free market is unstable - it will always devolve into a state of equilibrium in which big players have incumbent advantages that allow them to suppress competition, and thus raise prices such that they profit. That's why it's so essential to have governance capable of maintaining a level playing field, breaking up trusts, and curtailing the worst excesses of the market.
"Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers treat all data on the Internet equally, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication."
Nope. If they were throttling all data of any sort, you might have an argument. But throttling a particular type of data is very much against the Net Neutrality principle of treating all data the same, regardless of what that data comprises.
Laws must come from Congress, yes. But they are enforced by the executive (of which the FCC is a part). Laws frequently leave the details to the experts in the executive. In this case, Congress passed two laws (the second being a revision of the first) that give the FCC broad powers to regulate interstate and international communications networks. You can argue that Congress would be better served to give more concrete parameters, but the fact that they didn't in no way means that the FCC doesn't have authority.
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to go with "presenting a non-sequitur to distract from the point being made too well for me to argue against".
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
In other words, it doesn't have to be in the constitution to exist. It's pretty fucking clear, based on the writings of the founders and the other amendments, that this was a right that was assumed to exist at a level so fundamental that the founders didn't even bother to write it in.
Congress DID pass a law allowing the FCC to regulate interstate and international communications (as which ISPs undoubtedly qualify). More than one, in fact.
You think standing matters to ICE or Border Patrol?
How credulous can you be?
Counterpoint: Illegal !=Criminal. Speeding is illegal, but it is not criminal. Littering is illegal, but it is not criminal. In many states, cannabis is illegal, but it is not criminal. Defamation is illegal, but it is not criminal. Same with libel and slander. And so on and so forth.
So they come here, work jobs that simply do not pay their taxes, so that they undercut the legal workers, including other immigrants.
Seems like that's a problem caused by greedy, unethical employers. A hike in the minimum wage coupled with real efforts to prosecute employers who break immigration law would be a much more effective solution.
+1 Fucking Gets It. Not a mod today, but I would up-mod the hell out of this post, AC and all.
The true sign of a first class mind: he judges ideas by who has them, rather than by their own merit.
... Let's break up all of the media conglomerates. Times corporation? Your times has come! AT&T? Let's try A, and T, and T. Comcast? I'm out of jokes, but you're on the list, along with Time Warner, Sinclair, I Heart Media, and so on and so forth.
It seems like whenever there's an economic expansion of any kind, people are desperate to put their money in anything regardless of the chance of success. This particular time will be very interesting to look back on, because you basically have multiple different bubbles all going on at the same time and they all feed on each other. I feel old, but I really don't see cryptocurrency as anything more than a scam.
Bubbles are what you get when you have too many investment dollars chasing too few good investment opportunities. It's a sign that the economic system is tilted too much in favor of capital vs. labor. .
The CAFE standards are unachievable on vehicles that meet modern safety standards.
This is demonstrably incorrect. I own a car that gets 40+mpg and has a 5 star safety rating.
Gas station companies tend to try to maintain a margin in the $0.15-$0.25 per gallon range. Mom & Pop stores live by different rules, of course, but the big players (like Marathon) try to keep a steady margin in that range over their full portfolio of stores. That means some will be lower, but others will be higher.
Source: 20 years in the finance/accounting side of the cstore industry.
And they're more reliable.
It depends on how busy they are and how many pumps they have. If it takes three minutes to fill a tank with 20 gallons, the store has 15 other pumps in constant use, and they make $0.20/gallon, that works out to $1800 in profit.
There are other things to consider, though. One is that fuel is not where the profit is - it's inside sales. If customers pull up and see the pumps aren't working, they're going to go elsewhere for their fuel and, more importantly, for their high margin inside purchases like cigarettes, chips, and soda. Another is reputation. If people don't trust that they can fill up at your store, they won't stop. It's often better to allow some one-time cash loss in the present to prevent permanent sales loss in the future.
Not so sure about cheaper. More fun, though, to be sure.
Better yet, only change once per year, but make it a big change - like six hours ahead.
It was the Jews that invented the idea that there is one God ...
Incorrect. That would be the Zoroastarians of ancient Persia.
In a proper free market economy, one that's relatively free of distortion, profit essentially gets driven down to nothing.
Fortunately for those seeking to profit, there is no such thing as a "proper free market". A truly free market is unstable - it will always devolve into a state of equilibrium in which big players have incumbent advantages that allow them to suppress competition, and thus raise prices such that they profit. That's why it's so essential to have governance capable of maintaining a level playing field, breaking up trusts, and curtailing the worst excesses of the market.
Well it sounds more ominous then the term "Good marketing".
"Good marketing" should be considered a very ominous term, indeed.
It is telling that one has to point to someone who died 15 years ago to give an example of a good Republican.
The problem is not the "courage" of the leaders, it is foolishness of the base.
It can be two things.
"Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers treat all data on the Internet equally, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication."
Nope. If they were throttling all data of any sort, you might have an argument. But throttling a particular type of data is very much against the Net Neutrality principle of treating all data the same, regardless of what that data comprises.
Do they have the right to regulate intrastate connections?
Very obviously yes. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise in good faith.
Laws must come from Congress, yes. But they are enforced by the executive (of which the FCC is a part). Laws frequently leave the details to the experts in the executive. In this case, Congress passed two laws (the second being a revision of the first) that give the FCC broad powers to regulate interstate and international communications networks. You can argue that Congress would be better served to give more concrete parameters, but the fact that they didn't in no way means that the FCC doesn't have authority.