I am no longer sure Snowden had any evidence of the government breaking any laws (or 4th Amendment protections).
I'm curious how the koolaid tastes;-) Seriously though, the 4th Amendment is against 'search and SEIZURE'. Their collection of data is most definitely 'seizure'. Sure they can claim they aren't searching it, but when they have it in their position, they have most definitely 'seized' it.
Something can be both 'legal' and later found to be unconstitutional. It's how our justice/legal system works. Laws aren't generally pre-judged for constitutionality (see all the anti-abortion stuff going on).
At some point someone is harmed by the law and then they can sue. If the 'law' is kept secret, then nobody can know they were harmed. This is the exact excuse the Gov't used previously - there was no evidence of harm so nobody can sue. Now we have evidence of 4th amendment violations (irregardless of the Gov't claiming they aren't in violation).
Obama's premature prize was a clear FU to Bush and his Administration; that's why Obama got it, with the hope that he'd not follow the same path. Unfortunately that latter part didn't work out.
re #5 it's an inflammatory article. rich and poor urban people subsidize rich and poor rural people. i.e. you need to subsidize the rural lines because it simply costs more per person because of density.
Really, you have acres of farm land in the middle of a city? or do you get subsidies (like the Farm Bill for instance) that keeps your cost of milk down?
I've got news for you. The number of vacation homes is wildly dwarfed by real people actually living in the rural areas. It's a fraction of a percent of the cost and not worth worrying about.
The article itself is wildly inflammatory. 'Poor' urban people pay for 'rich' rural. Guess what, 'everybody' urban pays for 'everybody' rural. NYC funds quite a nice amount and I wouldn't call NYC'ers 'poor'. Sure some are, but not even a large percentage.
only nit is the Soc Sec cap - it's not 'well into the 6 figures' but right about 106,000 I believe. So almost everybody in six figures doesn't pay as much as I (and I think you) believe they should.
If we had the national so-called "fair tax" (a kind of consumption tax; i.e., sales tax), poor people would pay none at all, because the "prebate" would cover all their purchases
It's funny, because the 'tax them but rebate them' crap is wide open to just removing the rebate and leaving them stuck in the lurch. And frankly we already do this this 'prebate' you talk about with the Earned Income Tax Credit. Which the GOP has been opposed to for decades. linky
Take an 10 ice cubes 1 inch thick and place them on a sloped board 1/2" under the surface of the water. Now push them into the water and notice the level rise.
The article is talking about how this sheet is resting on the bottom, hence it's not floating and isn't yet fully accounted for in the current sea level.
Based on the context (the 'danger' part) I think it means that it's resting on the ground with is sloping away from shore. So that if it slips it will slip into the ocean causing sea level rise since there more ice above water than would be if it was floating.
You simply cannot go from cancer free to death by esophageal cancer in this timeframe.
Correct, natural esophageal cancer takes time. When induced by massive amounts of radiation? the rules likely change.
You're probably correct and this is merely a coincidence. However, since we have ample evidence of TEPCO lying through it's teeth all through this disaster, claiming that they would lie about his death isn't exactly a far fetched idea.
actually, with the Google Car, you could actually drive by the screen as it gives you a 3rd person view of the car and it's surroundings in real time. Obviously not a recommended thing or realistic at this point, but the concept would work me thinks.
If you want absolutes, the Constitution isn't the place to look. It's intentionally vague on pretty much everything. Why? Because the Founders understood they couldn't think of everything and left lots of wiggle room to flesh out the details later.
That obviously has both good and bad possibilities. It's up to us to start voting in people who actually care about the job and not the re-election. And yes that will take more than a few cycles to accomplish, but it needs to start now or we're going to be in serious serious trouble.
Now, if they are doing the same for UPS/FedEx/etc, then there might be a slightly larger concern
Wait, so if the government were tracking all packages going through a private mail company, that would be a cause for concern, but the government tracking all packages sent through a government mail service, that's ok?
What exactly is the difference? The government system is 'my' system not theirs to do with as they wish.
sadly today, probably, yes, you do need to explain it.
The only thing sadder than our govt's secret slide into an Orwellian police state is that if they had just asked for the permissions, the public likely would have said no problemo! sigh.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. Obama's prize was a giant middle finger to Bush. Shame we didn't catch on to that.
I am no longer sure Snowden had any evidence of the government breaking any laws (or 4th Amendment protections).
I'm curious how the koolaid tastes ;-) Seriously though, the 4th Amendment is against 'search and SEIZURE'. Their collection of data is most definitely 'seizure'. Sure they can claim they aren't searching it, but when they have it in their position, they have most definitely 'seized' it.
Something can be both 'legal' and later found to be unconstitutional. It's how our justice/legal system works. Laws aren't generally pre-judged for constitutionality (see all the anti-abortion stuff going on).
At some point someone is harmed by the law and then they can sue. If the 'law' is kept secret, then nobody can know they were harmed. This is the exact excuse the Gov't used previously - there was no evidence of harm so nobody can sue. Now we have evidence of 4th amendment violations (irregardless of the Gov't claiming they aren't in violation).
Obama's premature prize was a clear FU to Bush and his Administration; that's why Obama got it, with the hope that he'd not follow the same path. Unfortunately that latter part didn't work out.
Gitmo would be shut down if he had the power. Talk to the GOP (and some Democrats) about why Gitmo isn't closed yet.
re #5 it's an inflammatory article. rich and poor urban people subsidize rich and poor rural people. i.e. you need to subsidize the rural lines because it simply costs more per person because of density.
Really, you have acres of farm land in the middle of a city? or do you get subsidies (like the Farm Bill for instance) that keeps your cost of milk down?
I've got news for you. The number of vacation homes is wildly dwarfed by real people actually living in the rural areas. It's a fraction of a percent of the cost and not worth worrying about.
The article itself is wildly inflammatory. 'Poor' urban people pay for 'rich' rural. Guess what, 'everybody' urban pays for 'everybody' rural. NYC funds quite a nice amount and I wouldn't call NYC'ers 'poor'. Sure some are, but not even a large percentage.
only nit is the Soc Sec cap - it's not 'well into the 6 figures' but right about 106,000 I believe. So almost everybody in six figures doesn't pay as much as I (and I think you) believe they should.
If we had the national so-called "fair tax" (a kind of consumption tax; i.e., sales tax), poor people would pay none at all, because the "prebate" would cover all their purchases
It's funny, because the 'tax them but rebate them' crap is wide open to just removing the rebate and leaving them stuck in the lurch. And frankly we already do this this 'prebate' you talk about with the Earned Income Tax Credit. Which the GOP has been opposed to for decades. linky
Home experiment:
Take an 10 ice cubes 1 inch thick and place them on a sloped board 1/2" under the surface of the water. Now push them into the water and notice the level rise.
The article is talking about how this sheet is resting on the bottom, hence it's not floating and isn't yet fully accounted for in the current sea level.
We have a bastardized combo of waterfall and agile here. I call it the Drunken Sailor approach.
Saying it's 'OK' because it's like your cable company may not be the best argument...
Based on the context (the 'danger' part) I think it means that it's resting on the ground with is sloping away from shore. So that if it slips it will slip into the ocean causing sea level rise since there more ice above water than would be if it was floating.
You simply cannot go from cancer free to death by esophageal cancer in this timeframe.
Correct, natural esophageal cancer takes time. When induced by massive amounts of radiation? the rules likely change.
You're probably correct and this is merely a coincidence. However, since we have ample evidence of TEPCO lying through it's teeth all through this disaster, claiming that they would lie about his death isn't exactly a far fetched idea.
Well played, well played ;-)
Seems like one big sail...how do they keep it from blowing over sideways?
Hey it's not our fault there hasn't been a War there recently!
Thirty seconds at the opening ceremony with the lights going down would have been catastrophic in terms of reputational hit
Ahh, so it's your reputation you care so much about, not, you know, actual threats.
So the future TAs didn't get much choice in the matter.
Uh they got a choice...when they decided to be a TA at that school.
actually, with the Google Car, you could actually drive by the screen as it gives you a 3rd person view of the car and it's surroundings in real time. Obviously not a recommended thing or realistic at this point, but the concept would work me thinks.
If you want absolutes, the Constitution isn't the place to look. It's intentionally vague on pretty much everything. Why? Because the Founders understood they couldn't think of everything and left lots of wiggle room to flesh out the details later.
That obviously has both good and bad possibilities. It's up to us to start voting in people who actually care about the job and not the re-election. And yes that will take more than a few cycles to accomplish, but it needs to start now or we're going to be in serious serious trouble.
it's still a government agency. It is, or attempts to be, self funding, but it's still government.
Now, if they are doing the same for UPS/FedEx/etc, then there might be a slightly larger concern
Wait, so if the government were tracking all packages going through a private mail company, that would be a cause for concern, but the government tracking all packages sent through a government mail service, that's ok?
What exactly is the difference? The government system is 'my' system not theirs to do with as they wish.
sadly today, probably, yes, you do need to explain it.
The only thing sadder than our govt's secret slide into an Orwellian police state is that if they had just asked for the permissions, the public likely would have said no problemo! sigh.