Yes, intent does. The Constitution strictly forbids religious tests. If an Administration is attempting to use its powers to implement a religious test, then it has violated the First Amendment.
He assumes that because, like many economic illiterates... Real economies don't work that way.
You're quite assured about a profession that its own members admit has failed us (citation below). "Real economists" have assured us that free trade is our friend, that increased productivity is how we get more prosperity, and many other things that sound convincing but have not delivered. And regardless of how far our standard of living drops they preach the same. Free trade has lowered the standards of living by being a race to the bottom, as anyone with a good dose of sense can see. Much the same way that supply and demand would dictate that importing masses of workers by definition devalues the existing workers. Lastly although increased productivity is good in theory if the fruits of that aren't shared then to those left out it's the same as no gains in productivity. But what do I know, I still think all lives matter so I'm just a hopeless deplorable.
The Yucatan peninsula went from 1.2 million people, with scientists, politicians, and surprisingly advanced civilization at the time, to just over 100k in less than 100 years.
Over 10x that many people have moved to the US, legal and otherwise, in much less than the past 100 years. I think we have better tools to deal with the problem than the Mayans did.
I know that you're being snarky, but you have reason to be. The Obama administration changed the rules to allow importing of food *without* labeling country of origin. Want some leaded pre-cooked chicken nuggets from China? Well step right up.
People need to stop bickering over D and R as if either mattered. Both will sell you down the river, they just use different excuses as to why.
I'm not sure how the Brits view BBC in terms of objectivity, also unsure how the Canadians view CBC, but NPR definitely has a bias. Mostly of the style where they report on half the story for almost the entire time while leaving the other half either unsaid or at most a short comment or two.
It is really, really hard for many to swallow the concept that we are are the "United States of America" and not the "Federal State of America."
Probably because 2 out of 3 times when states rights bump up against federal rights the feds win. It probably has something to do with the final verdict for the Federal Government coming from the Federal Supreme Court.
Gary Johnson might not have been a very good candidate, but one good point he made was the U.S. has the best policies in place to cause drug users to die. Trillions of dollars spent, and they can't even keep the drugs out of prisons.
To be fair few institutions are as poorly run as prisons. Prison gangs are literally formed and run in the prison system. So many rapes happen in prison that when you factor those in more men are raped than women (citation below). Prisons should be rethought from the ground up as they aren't working. Unfortunately any helpful proposal is likely to suffer from the ever present "disparate impact" which makes the ridiculous assumption that anything that might impact different groups unequally must be a banned -ist (ie sexist, racist, etc).
I don't often agree (like almost never) with drinkypoo, but this is spot on. Entrepreneurship is down in the US, and it's getting worse because of taxes and overregulation. I've had several family and friends who've owned small businesses, and remember my dad saying that he couldn't have afforded to start his company in the regulatory environment of the early-2000s...much of it Michigan state rules. I'm not anti-regulation, by a longshot, but I'd argue that a lot of it is bureaucratic nonsense.
I would add to this that most innovation comes from smaller companies. While GE and the like pay no taxes thanks to loopholes and special privileges small and medium businesses pay through the nose. When we hear about corporate taxes being too high it's easy to think of GE or some other multi-national that scams the public by paying nothing and think taxes should be higher. However the other side of the story is that the smaller companies that actually do new stuff often get snuffed out due to high taxes and regulations. Dropping the current tax structure in favor of something new that puts smaller companies as well as multi-nationals on similar footing really should be a priority.
Apple likes to ban things and hasn't figured out that when the country is fairly evenly split no matter what side you take you lose customers. They quickly reversed course last time after the hysteria over confederate flags. Target is suffering from this as we speak but will likely not change course having painted themselves into a corner.
I think Alt-Right means anything that isn't 100% politically correct and supported by the complete staff of the HuffPost. Not unlike the comedian who joked about being asked if he's ever used drugs like cocaine, crack, or caffeine.
Interesting quote. It's still a strawman to the extent that you added substantially to what he said and also that he represents a single data point. My bigger point is that that the habit of demonizing those who disagree with you in religion or environmental policy won't get you the type of change you want. This is why BLM is destined to never get far because they are so focused on making it all about them and them alone that they won't get the help that's needed. All lives matter could tackle police violence, BLM cannot. The sooner than the environmentally conscious decide to stop calling half the country names and start working on policies that are more broadly accepted the faster they will get what they want.
I remember the O-zone panic of the 90's and how, by not calling everyone names, lots of change was made in a short amount of time. That can happen again but not if you don't adopt a more mature attitude than Beavis & Butthead.
Don't worry about it, we don't need to take care of anything in the environment. Jesus gave us the Earth to rape for profit. I mean, how can we possibly affect the planet? It's so big! Even if we do end up fucking it up, we only move up the start date for the end times, and God will bail us out with the rapture. Not only will we be super rich, but then we get to go to heaven! Bonus!
Strawman much. I've known a large number of Christians over the years, none of whom you described.
Most Americans support estate taxes on millionaires, most Americans do not support mass illegal immigration, and if the option "none of the above" was allowed it would have won the last election. Unfortunately most Americans are not as well connected as moneyed interests who buy (AKA fund) elections. If we had a functioning democracy, instead of the oligarchy that we currently have, I'm sure things would be both much different and better.
The news is so partisan that they only need to keep track of half of the facts. I find that reality doesn't fit neatly into the right / left paradigm, or Dem / Rep if you prefer, but many like to act as if this binary representation doesn't have substantial quantization error.
Obligatory yes the last guy did it too. STFU and focus on the current abomination in office, maligning the last guy doesn't help anything more than you losing sleep at night.
As a sort of compromise we could look at putting both Trump and the Clintons (plus ban Chelsea from public office) in jail. That would solve the need for it to be bi-partisan, it would send a strong message to others in the future, and it would have *enormous* support. That deal could actually happen.
It is heavy-handed social engineering. Prior to the Tesla, these cars were kind of an "oddball" thing. But with the Tesla, it kind of just let wealthy car buyers get a huge discount on something that is sold as a luxury vehicle in the rest of the world.
Is it social engineering or does Denmark want only the wealthy to drive? It would help reduce traffic and improve parking if the pesky peons aren't allowed on the roads.
Government relies on income and sales taxes to disproportionate degree. With robots taking over, there won't be enough money to support social programs or even local government. We will quickly get to unified world government, but it will be controlled by multinationals that own these robots.
I'd love to see a wealth tax at some point, say starting at 200x the average wage or something along those lines. Enough to allow a person a reasonable retirement but beginning to be a luxury tax above a certain threshold. Inheritance taxes (ie death taxes) also desperately need to return. The surest way to reduce the "I've got mine F--- the rest" is to force each generation to earn their own way. If the 1% didn't have trust funds then suddenly opportunity would become more of an interest to them instead of only focusing on already entrenched interests. One should have to earn the rich card, not have it handed to them.
And... that'll be seen as being America's fault! Well done America!
To be honest there are vast numbers of people, many in the US, who will blame America no matter what is done. It's partly why many Americans, myself included, have stopped caring what we do with regards to the rest of the world. It's not that I wish them ill generally but if we're going to be criticized regardless then we might as well look after ourselves. When you feel that your political class cares more about others than it's own citizens then something is seriously wrong.
Do you think the EU-China climate bloc is just going to let the US off the hook for paying for their towards a carbon-less future? The US will pay, and it will pay dearly...
You're funny. You count China as if they are a bastion of green glory. I suspect that you are aware of just how bad their pollution is. Yet somehow you give them a pass. The sooner the US pulls out of various accords and agreements the better. If we were to focus on getting our situation right instead of worrying about everyone else we would be much better off. Somehow I think that when the supercop leaves the world will go back to fighting - and then and only then might they miss the US.
I suspect international courts in 20 years will be really receptive to the idea when willful ignorance played such a big part in the US's choices around climate change denial.
The notion of listening to "international courts" is a slippery slope. Is some 3rd world country going to sue for one hundred trillion dollars and get it - maybe. Politics can drive such absurdities. However I think much of the US will say come and try and take it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, intent does. The Constitution strictly forbids religious tests. If an Administration is attempting to use its powers to implement a religious test, then it has violated the First Amendment.
Someone forgot to tell that to Bernie Sanders.
Any criminal smart enough to reprogram a V2V system would be smart enough to embezzle from a bank rather than rob one.
Or just become a bankster and get bailed out if your market bets don't pan out. Zero downside and completely supported by the government.
He assumes that because, like many economic illiterates ... Real economies don't work that way.
You're quite assured about a profession that its own members admit has failed us (citation below). "Real economists" have assured us that free trade is our friend, that increased productivity is how we get more prosperity, and many other things that sound convincing but have not delivered. And regardless of how far our standard of living drops they preach the same. Free trade has lowered the standards of living by being a race to the bottom, as anyone with a good dose of sense can see. Much the same way that supply and demand would dictate that importing masses of workers by definition devalues the existing workers. Lastly although increased productivity is good in theory if the fruits of that aren't shared then to those left out it's the same as no gains in productivity. But what do I know, I still think all lives matter so I'm just a hopeless deplorable.
Citations:
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/e...
The Yucatan peninsula went from 1.2 million people, with scientists, politicians, and surprisingly advanced civilization at the time, to just over 100k in less than 100 years.
Over 10x that many people have moved to the US, legal and otherwise, in much less than the past 100 years. I think we have better tools to deal with the problem than the Mayans did.
People need to stop bickering over D and R as if either mattered. Both will sell you down the river, they just use different excuses as to why.
Citation:https://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2016/03/07/chicken-raised-and-slaughtered-in-china-moves-one-step-closer-to-your-dinner-plate/#498614f1167a
I'm not sure how the Brits view BBC in terms of objectivity, also unsure how the Canadians view CBC, but NPR definitely has a bias. Mostly of the style where they report on half the story for almost the entire time while leaving the other half either unsaid or at most a short comment or two.
It is really, really hard for many to swallow the concept that we are are the "United States of America" and not the "Federal State of America."
Probably because 2 out of 3 times when states rights bump up against federal rights the feds win. It probably has something to do with the final verdict for the Federal Government coming from the Federal Supreme Court.
Gary Johnson might not have been a very good candidate, but one good point he made was the U.S. has the best policies in place to cause drug users to die. Trillions of dollars spent, and they can't even keep the drugs out of prisons.
To be fair few institutions are as poorly run as prisons. Prison gangs are literally formed and run in the prison system. So many rapes happen in prison that when you factor those in more men are raped than women (citation below). Prisons should be rethought from the ground up as they aren't working. Unfortunately any helpful proposal is likely to suffer from the ever present "disparate impact" which makes the ridiculous assumption that anything that might impact different groups unequally must be a banned -ist (ie sexist, racist, etc).
Citation: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
I don't often agree (like almost never) with drinkypoo, but this is spot on. Entrepreneurship is down in the US, and it's getting worse because of taxes and overregulation. I've had several family and friends who've owned small businesses, and remember my dad saying that he couldn't have afforded to start his company in the regulatory environment of the early-2000s...much of it Michigan state rules. I'm not anti-regulation, by a longshot, but I'd argue that a lot of it is bureaucratic nonsense.
I would add to this that most innovation comes from smaller companies. While GE and the like pay no taxes thanks to loopholes and special privileges small and medium businesses pay through the nose. When we hear about corporate taxes being too high it's easy to think of GE or some other multi-national that scams the public by paying nothing and think taxes should be higher. However the other side of the story is that the smaller companies that actually do new stuff often get snuffed out due to high taxes and regulations. Dropping the current tax structure in favor of something new that puts smaller companies as well as multi-nationals on similar footing really should be a priority.
Citations:
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2... http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/2...
I think Alt-Right means anything that isn't 100% politically correct and supported by the complete staff of the HuffPost. Not unlike the comedian who joked about being asked if he's ever used drugs like cocaine, crack, or caffeine.
I remember the O-zone panic of the 90's and how, by not calling everyone names, lots of change was made in a short amount of time. That can happen again but not if you don't adopt a more mature attitude than Beavis & Butthead.
Don't worry about it, we don't need to take care of anything in the environment. Jesus gave us the Earth to rape for profit. I mean, how can we possibly affect the planet? It's so big! Even if we do end up fucking it up, we only move up the start date for the end times, and God will bail us out with the rapture. Not only will we be super rich, but then we get to go to heaven! Bonus!
Strawman much. I've known a large number of Christians over the years, none of whom you described.
Is the TSA taking into account just how much this could cost American travelers in time and luggage fees?
No. They were too busy thinking about all the new jobs and new expensive equipment they can justify.
Citations:
http://www.businessinsider.com...
The news is so partisan that they only need to keep track of half of the facts. I find that reality doesn't fit neatly into the right / left paradigm, or Dem / Rep if you prefer, but many like to act as if this binary representation doesn't have substantial quantization error.
Obligatory yes the last guy did it too. STFU and focus on the current abomination in office, maligning the last guy doesn't help anything more than you losing sleep at night.
As a sort of compromise we could look at putting both Trump and the Clintons (plus ban Chelsea from public office) in jail. That would solve the need for it to be bi-partisan, it would send a strong message to others in the future, and it would have *enormous* support. That deal could actually happen.
... and countless people are risking prison time to try to undo arguably the worst mistake in recent American history.
That would be not nominating Bernie for the win?
It is heavy-handed social engineering. Prior to the Tesla, these cars were kind of an "oddball" thing. But with the Tesla, it kind of just let wealthy car buyers get a huge discount on something that is sold as a luxury vehicle in the rest of the world.
Is it social engineering or does Denmark want only the wealthy to drive? It would help reduce traffic and improve parking if the pesky peons aren't allowed on the roads.
Government relies on income and sales taxes to disproportionate degree. With robots taking over, there won't be enough money to support social programs or even local government. We will quickly get to unified world government, but it will be controlled by multinationals that own these robots.
I'd love to see a wealth tax at some point, say starting at 200x the average wage or something along those lines. Enough to allow a person a reasonable retirement but beginning to be a luxury tax above a certain threshold. Inheritance taxes (ie death taxes) also desperately need to return. The surest way to reduce the "I've got mine F--- the rest" is to force each generation to earn their own way. If the 1% didn't have trust funds then suddenly opportunity would become more of an interest to them instead of only focusing on already entrenched interests. One should have to earn the rich card, not have it handed to them.
And ... that'll be seen as being America's fault! Well done America!
To be honest there are vast numbers of people, many in the US, who will blame America no matter what is done. It's partly why many Americans, myself included, have stopped caring what we do with regards to the rest of the world. It's not that I wish them ill generally but if we're going to be criticized regardless then we might as well look after ourselves. When you feel that your political class cares more about others than it's own citizens then something is seriously wrong.
This is the 21st century version of Rome pulling out of Britain.
I forget, what happened after the end of Pax Romana?
I don't think that market economics are enough to stop global warming. It requires a political component...
I think it requires a technical component. Man's greatest achievements have been enabled by science and technology, not politics.
Do you think the EU-China climate bloc is just going to let the US off the hook for paying for their towards a carbon-less future? The US will pay, and it will pay dearly...
You're funny. You count China as if they are a bastion of green glory. I suspect that you are aware of just how bad their pollution is. Yet somehow you give them a pass. The sooner the US pulls out of various accords and agreements the better. If we were to focus on getting our situation right instead of worrying about everyone else we would be much better off. Somehow I think that when the supercop leaves the world will go back to fighting - and then and only then might they miss the US.
I suspect international courts in 20 years will be really receptive to the idea when willful ignorance played such a big part in the US's choices around climate change denial.
The notion of listening to "international courts" is a slippery slope. Is some 3rd world country going to sue for one hundred trillion dollars and get it - maybe. Politics can drive such absurdities. However I think much of the US will say come and try and take it.