And like most conservatives, Rush only focuses on one part of the tax puzzle when weeping for the troubles the rich encounter and how the poor are such lucky duckies for paying "so little" in taxes.
As long as you ignore payroll taxes and various state taxes. At the state level, the poor generally end up paying a *greater* portion of their income compared to the rich.
The percent of wealth controlled by the upper ten percent has more than double in the past 20 years. I really don't think they need any help.
>>Hawash's neighbors became suspicious after the September 11 terrorist attacks and called the FBI, according to the affidavit. One of the neighbors said Hawash, who worked for Intel, was "spending more time at home following September 11, 2001" and "was not as friendly as usual."
Given the rampant anti-Arab sentiment after 9/11, is this any surprise?
How is the RIAA/MPAA going to shutdown Usenet? By the time they get around to demanding the removal of a file from everyone of thousands of news server, the articles have probably already expired on their own.
There's no single server they can go after. No single company. Posters are largely anonymous.
The buttons on the side were wrteched for any game that required you to press them repeatedly. Very difficult to push. My thumbs would hurt after games...
Way to guarantee only self-made millionaires will win elections there. If only the rich are allowed to spend more, only the rich will get elected.
The rich already are allowed to spend more. A candidate can already pour an unlimited amount of their own funds into their campaign. My proposal would give an incentive not to.
And how do they explain that one to the FEC? Are they a real bank in and of themselves? Did they subject themselves to a credit check? Is the interest you're giving yourself realistic?
I'm not kidding. Go browse through FEC reports online. The multi-millionaire candidates rarely give to their campaign. They loan it. Check out Jon Corzine's FEC Filings for example. Pop open any of the quarterlies and jump to the last few pages. You'll see loan after loan from Jon Corzine.
You go around and ask for donations for the sake of giving yourself more money to pay yourself back (with interest, even) and see how far you get. Especially after the election has come and gone.
You get quite far if you're elected. You likely won't make *all* of it up, but any contributions you get is effectively money going straight to your pocket. Your campaign becomes a money-laundering operation for legalized bribery.
Why didn't this get a mention in Slashback as well? I haven't seen anysignof this facinating story on slashdot yet. I'm sure everyone would find it to be of interest.
>>There have been plenty of self-funded multimillionaire candidates. As much as I agree that this is the right thing, it's going to be a very hard sell to pass a law in which the government says "You may not spend your own money for public speech".
Easy. Make it an all or nothing situation. If you're going to spend more than the limit on your own campaign, you campaign may not take donations of any kind. Every expense must be paid for by your campaign. If you take any donation, the limit applies.
Most multi-millionaire candidates don't *give* money to their campaigns, they just *loan* it. Then after they get elected, they can worry about paying themselves back. If there was no chance of ever getting repaid, I imagine a lot of them would go the donations route instead.
What comics are you reading right now?
on
Ask Warren Ellis
·
· Score: 1
Nathan Fillon, who played Captain Reynolds, signed for a pilot on another show in the fall. So I think that pretty much puts the final nail in the coffin.
But I think you're overestimating the importance of this. Fox already has these episodes in the can. It has nothing to lose by releasing them on DVD.
Staking the success of a brand new season on DVD sales would be a huge risk.
1. The "Butterfly Ballot" was chosen by an experienced DEMOCRAT; used successfully, without incident, in several other areas of the country; was published beforehand in the local newspaper; passed a review of BOTH parties without challenge.
Incidently, the "Democrat" in question has since returned to her original party affiliation: Republican. She switched parties so she could be in that position.
So, you would have favored simply recounting and recounting until the vote turned out how you like it?
There are RULES to an election -- including deadlines and not trying to have the counters use ESP to guess what people intended.
The USSC's decision was contradictory. It ruled that the Florida Supreme Court's standards for recount were unconstitutional... and then accepted results counted under standard even more unconstitutional than the FSC's.
The deadline was always a red herring. I suggest you read up on what happened with Hawaii's electoral votes in the Kennedy-Nixon election. They still hadn't determined who Hawaii's votes should go to when the electors were voting. They didn't get a final vote count until January. And guess what? Our democracy didn't fall apart.
Slashdot Mirror
And like most conservatives, Rush only focuses on one part of the tax puzzle when weeping for the troubles the rich encounter and how the poor are such lucky duckies for paying "so little" in taxes.
As long as you ignore payroll taxes and various state taxes. At the state level, the poor generally end up paying a *greater* portion of their income compared to the rich.
The percent of wealth controlled by the upper ten percent has more than double in the past 20 years. I really don't think they need any help.
I had the Warcraft 2 CD in there when I started Quake up one time. I remember thinking "What the fuck has Trent been smoking?"
Might explain why no one ever seems to read the article before posting... (-1 Offtopic)
or anyone else's comments... (-1 Redundant)
or their own comment for that matter... (-1 Troll)
This article might be on to something...
>>Hawash's neighbors became suspicious after the September 11 terrorist attacks and called the FBI, according to the affidavit. One of the neighbors said Hawash, who worked for Intel, was "spending more time at home following September 11, 2001" and "was not as friendly as usual."
Given the rampant anti-Arab sentiment after 9/11, is this any surprise?
How is the RIAA/MPAA going to shutdown Usenet? By the time they get around to demanding the removal of a file from everyone of thousands of news server, the articles have probably already expired on their own.
There's no single server they can go after. No single company. Posters are largely anonymous.
>> Actually, that 'Enron lackey' just got pushed out of his post by Rumsfield.
Not because of Enron, however. White antagonized Rumsfeld over a cancelled defense project.
The buttons on the side were wrteched for any game that required you to press them repeatedly. Very difficult to push. My thumbs would hurt after games...
>>No. They're so f'ing stupid, they think their opinion is important. Just because they sell records.
Their opinion is just as important as your's, mine or the President.
If you don't like freedom of speech, move to a country that doesn't tolerate it like China and stop pretending to be an American.
>> I don't recall anybody denying either of those.
Rumsfeld did.
If you like rampant pixelization. It was very obvious and distraction throughout the movie.
A digital version with the *SAME* resolution as film would be better than film but that's not the situation right now.
Way to guarantee only self-made millionaires will win elections there. If only the rich are allowed to spend more, only the rich will get elected.
The rich already are allowed to spend more. A candidate can already pour an unlimited amount of their own funds into their campaign. My proposal would give an incentive not to.
And how do they explain that one to the FEC? Are they a real bank in and of themselves? Did they subject themselves to a credit check? Is the interest you're giving yourself realistic?
I'm not kidding. Go browse through FEC reports online. The multi-millionaire candidates rarely give to their campaign. They loan it. Check out Jon Corzine's FEC Filings for example. Pop open any of the quarterlies and jump to the last few pages. You'll see loan after loan from Jon Corzine.
You go around and ask for donations for the sake of giving yourself more money to pay yourself back (with interest, even) and see how far you get. Especially after the election has come and gone.
You get quite far if you're elected. You likely won't make *all* of it up, but any contributions you get is effectively money going straight to your pocket. Your campaign becomes a money-laundering operation for legalized bribery.
Why didn't this get a mention in Slashback as well? I haven't seen any sign of this facinating story on slashdot yet. I'm sure everyone would find it to be of interest.
had configuration file settings that allowed you to adjust the weapon decay and monster respawn rates. You could play with neither if you wanted.
>>There have been plenty of self-funded multimillionaire candidates. As much as I agree that this is the right thing, it's going to be a very hard sell to pass a law in which the government says "You may not spend your own money for public speech".
Easy. Make it an all or nothing situation. If you're going to spend more than the limit on your own campaign, you campaign may not take donations of any kind. Every expense must be paid for by your campaign. If you take any donation, the limit applies.
Most multi-millionaire candidates don't *give* money to their campaigns, they just *loan* it. Then after they get elected, they can worry about paying themselves back. If there was no chance of ever getting repaid, I imagine a lot of them would go the donations route instead.
Are they any good? What would you recommend?
I got the impression that dead humans weren't the *only* source of food for humans in the Matrix; it's was just a major component.
Have a print out of the first Kirk/Spock fan fic. Fan art of Spike and Angel from Buffy getting it on.
The possibilities are endless.
Nathan Fillon, who played Captain Reynolds, signed for a pilot on another show in the fall. So I think that pretty much puts the final nail in the coffin.
But I think you're overestimating the importance of this. Fox already has these episodes in the can. It has nothing to lose by releasing them on DVD.
Staking the success of a brand new season on DVD sales would be a huge risk.
There are superficial similarities in so far as they are both space westerns.
Otherwise, that's it. The themes, the characters and the antagonists are completely different.
>>During Clinton's tenure, the FBI paid snipers to shoot and kill the wife and infant son of a suspect (ruby ridge).
Clinton wasn't President during Ruby Ridge. Bush Sr. was.
1. The "Butterfly Ballot" was chosen by an experienced DEMOCRAT; used successfully, without incident, in several other areas of the country; was published beforehand in the local newspaper; passed a review of BOTH parties without challenge.
Incidently, the "Democrat" in question has since returned to her original party affiliation: Republican. She switched parties so she could be in that position.
So, you would have favored simply recounting and recounting until the vote turned out how you like it?
There are RULES to an election -- including deadlines and not trying to have the counters use ESP to guess what people intended.
The USSC's decision was contradictory. It ruled that the Florida Supreme Court's standards for recount were unconstitutional... and then accepted results counted under standard even more unconstitutional than the FSC's.
The deadline was always a red herring. I suggest you read up on what happened with Hawaii's electoral votes in the Kennedy-Nixon election. They still hadn't determined who Hawaii's votes should go to when the electors were voting. They didn't get a final vote count until January. And guess what? Our democracy didn't fall apart.
the "idiot" pulls a gun out and caps your ass.
This is called escalation.
Lesson over. Class dismissed.
It's not spent all at once of course.
I'd be willing to bet that we've spent a trillion dollars total since 1980 on Star Wars-type programs.
Anyone who think Fox News is actually "Fair and Balanced" is either lobotomized or lying through their teeth. It's that simple.