ALL weapons are military derivatives you dolt. One of the purposes of the military is to inflict violence and cause disruption. Weapons are critical to that mission. Weapons are also critical for keeping the peace, which is why the 2nd amendment guarantees we can have them. It's not a privilege, it's a right.....unless you believe the bill of rights is a bill of privileges.
We already have laws in place to address the concerns you list. Accountability is higher with firearms than with almost any other product. Intentional acts are prosecuted. Accidental acts are prosecuted. As well as everything in between.
You aren't after safety and accountability because we already have that. You don't like the fact that people have guns at all
Why can't you be honest about what you really want?
Uhh, no. Doesn't science also include the things he laid out as well? ie: higher yield in drought conditions, disease resistance, pest resistance, etc.
Not knowing doesn't mean we stop all progress. It means we need to take calculated risks -- and that's exactly what is going on right now with GMO.
I think it's immoral to know with 100% certainty that we can feed X million more starving people but not do it because there is some, yet unknown, amount of risk of "bad things" happening. Nothing in life is risk free and anyone with half a brain can see the obvious benefits of feeding X million more people.
Agreed that we must proceed cautiously and carefully. But we don't stop moving forward because of fear.
Because they are acting grown up, you dolt. They are responsible for creating shareholder value, not funding government or societal organizations based on what *you* think they should pay. They pay what the law says they have to pay and nothing more. There is nothing wrong with that.
Acting like a grown up is recognizing that other people may have a different viewpoint than you do. I know it's hard to grasp but many people in the world believe giving more money to government is about the worst thing that can be invested in. Based on the performance of numerous governments all over the world, they have a point.
That you refuse to see it says more about you and less about them growing up.
WTF? The link that YOU provided clearly shows it's at least $27bil. Or did you not count "investments" in electric vehicles?
I suppose you can define "green" however the hell you want to but outside of the spin machine, normal people can see - exactly - what is going on. Solyndra. A123. etc....
Go look at the pinnacle of the new green economy: Greensburg, KS. Remember that place? Yea, we don't either because we all knew it was a big joke.
If you had a golden goose that nobody else had would you:
a) Sell it to someone else and watch them profit immensely from it
-or-
b) keep it and print all of the money you needed
Common sense should tell you the answer. It's the same with make money quick offers. If they really made any money, then why is the guy offering to teach it to you?
This is rule #1 for me when I consider investments. Why is the other guy selling?
Right. So because they already face this risk......you think they'll be happy to accept MORE risk of liability? That is not realistic. Companies won't participate if there is unlimited liability. They participate now because it's NOT unlimited liability. ie: they have a fighting chance in court and do win consistently.
No company in their right mind would venture into the waters without changes in liability law. The risk/reward is not worth it if you are sued out of business for every transgression that occurs with your product.
For anyone in business, this is no-brainer and an easily identified risk. If you don't see the problem then you are not looking at it close enough (or don't understand "how the world works")
Interesting. Thanks for the reply as I did not know there were distro taps along some of the transmission lines. I bet those are grandfathered in somehow as the DOT has pretty specific rules about what's going through those transmission lines. To my knowledge, they always require mercaptans in case they have a rupture or other pipeline issue.
you forgot to add in interest -- which (in theory) compensates me for the time value of money and corresponding inflation. What you describe is exactly why people typically don't lend money with 0% interest rates.
No, they are not pure methane. The DOT requires gas companies to put methyl mercaptan (mentioned above) in the gas stream specifically so we can smell leaks. As far as I know, all natural gas that is distributed in the US has mercaptans. If you've smelled "natural gas", propane, or butane, you are smelling the mercaptans as those gases are odorless.
Natty gas with H2S in it (aka: sour gas) smells like rotten eggs. However, at around 100ppm, you quit smelling it and you start dying instead. At 1000 ppm, one inhalation and you are dead.
No, debt is not the exception because it is repaid in whatever currency the contract requires. ie: if your debt is in dollars, then you pay back the debt in dollars.
You are correct that "Inflation reduces the purchasing power of the dollar" but it also works on the other side too. ie: the debt is worth less to the person who is owed money.
You are 100% correct. They are Administrators who.....wait for it.......work for the government. In other words, they "administrate" for the government on behalf of the taxpayers.
Why don't you try again and start over from the beginning.....
I also suspect that there's a pretty decent chance my ride to work will be a bicycle, rather than a car
That sucks for you. So because your country (and mine) can't come up with a reasonable energy policy, you have to live like a late 1950's Chinese worker. Ok.....and you are not outraged at this?
I don't know what state you live in but where I live, even the poor have better transportation than bikes. Is it possible that the people you've entrusted to govern you have put you in this position? I ask because it's not a lack of energy that is forcing you into this position. We have plenty of "energy" -- nat gas, crude, coal, nuke, etc. However, you specifically cite cost as the main issue.
I want to know why you think it costs so much? Followup: is this cost worth it for what you are getting out of the deal?
No, the reason you flip a coin is because, while it is in the air, your choice of heads or tails is indicative of your real preference, even if on a subconscious level.
Slashdot is utterly retarded when it comes to financial discussions. Seems like the only point of view represented is that of the occupy crowd and that view has a limited understanding of how the world works.
Facts:
1) Nobody is giving Knight a "do over". They are and were held to every single trade they made. Erroneous or not
2) Knight almost went bankrupt -- as they should have. They were only saved by receiving another round of money from investors (that dilluted the current shareholders by about 70%). In other words, the owners of Knight took a huge loss -- again, as they should have. The general public wasn't affected at all unless you were the person SELLING to Knight and even then, you most likely sold your stock to them at a higher price than you would have otherwise.
3) Knight had NOTHING to do with high frequency trading. That's not what the firm does or was trying to do.
But don't let these facts get in the way of a good wall street bashing narrative.....
There are PLENTY of things that are real issues and need attention but slashdot is tilting at windmills on this.
So you are suggesting that the guy who throws the first punch risks death? Good! Most of us don't go around getting into random bar fights. In fact, we actively try to avoid fighting at almost all cost unless absolutely necessary (defense only).
There's a lot of tough guys around and the stand your ground law is aimed at those idiots for a reason. Tough guys should rightfully be fearful of getting shot if they decide to throw that random punch in a bar and start some shit.
However, I will also add that guns and bars don't mix. Period, no exceptions. That's why it's illegal to have a gun in a bar. Even in Texas.
I haven't seen this mentioned yet but in the US, the standard for conviction on criminal charges of any kind is "beyond a reasonable doubt" as established by a jury of your peers.
Does ANYONE honestly believe there is no reasonable doubt here? Of course there is. And that is why I think he will be found not guilty.
I don't have a dog in the hunt so I don't have to pick a side. I just call it like I see it and by any measure, it's going to be hard to prove murder 2nd degree "beyond a reasonable doubt".
Slashdot Mirror
ALL weapons are military derivatives you dolt. One of the purposes of the military is to inflict violence and cause disruption. Weapons are critical to that mission. Weapons are also critical for keeping the peace, which is why the 2nd amendment guarantees we can have them. It's not a privilege, it's a right.....unless you believe the bill of rights is a bill of privileges.
We already have laws in place to address the concerns you list. Accountability is higher with firearms than with almost any other product. Intentional acts are prosecuted. Accidental acts are prosecuted. As well as everything in between.
You aren't after safety and accountability because we already have that. You don't like the fact that people have guns at all
Why can't you be honest about what you really want?
Beautiful reference. Long overdue on /.
See that's the problem with your types. When you jerk your knees too hard, you miss details that matter.
The Lapine is Canada's version of The Onion. You linked to satire, you dipshit. Might as well post a link to Mad Magazine while you're at it.
Uhh, no. Doesn't science also include the things he laid out as well? ie: higher yield in drought conditions, disease resistance, pest resistance, etc.
Not knowing doesn't mean we stop all progress. It means we need to take calculated risks -- and that's exactly what is going on right now with GMO.
I think it's immoral to know with 100% certainty that we can feed X million more starving people but not do it because there is some, yet unknown, amount of risk of "bad things" happening. Nothing in life is risk free and anyone with half a brain can see the obvious benefits of feeding X million more people.
Agreed that we must proceed cautiously and carefully. But we don't stop moving forward because of fear.
No, he's right. The terms you are looking for are "gun trust". Now go read up.....
There are (2) ways to possess and own NFA Class 3 restricted firearms: one is the route you mention above (paperwork). The other is via a gun trust.
Because they are acting grown up, you dolt. They are responsible for creating shareholder value, not funding government or societal organizations based on what *you* think they should pay. They pay what the law says they have to pay and nothing more. There is nothing wrong with that.
Acting like a grown up is recognizing that other people may have a different viewpoint than you do. I know it's hard to grasp but many people in the world believe giving more money to government is about the worst thing that can be invested in. Based on the performance of numerous governments all over the world, they have a point.
That you refuse to see it says more about you and less about them growing up.
WTF? The link that YOU provided clearly shows it's at least $27bil. Or did you not count "investments" in electric vehicles?
I suppose you can define "green" however the hell you want to but outside of the spin machine, normal people can see - exactly - what is going on. Solyndra. A123. etc....
Go look at the pinnacle of the new green economy: Greensburg, KS. Remember that place? Yea, we don't either because we all knew it was a big joke.
Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner!
If you had a golden goose that nobody else had would you:
a) Sell it to someone else and watch them profit immensely from it
-or-
b) keep it and print all of the money you needed
Common sense should tell you the answer. It's the same with make money quick offers. If they really made any money, then why is the guy offering to teach it to you?
This is rule #1 for me when I consider investments. Why is the other guy selling?
Right. So because they already face this risk......you think they'll be happy to accept MORE risk of liability? That is not realistic. Companies won't participate if there is unlimited liability. They participate now because it's NOT unlimited liability. ie: they have a fighting chance in court and do win consistently.
No company in their right mind would venture into the waters without changes in liability law. The risk/reward is not worth it if you are sued out of business for every transgression that occurs with your product.
For anyone in business, this is no-brainer and an easily identified risk. If you don't see the problem then you are not looking at it close enough (or don't understand "how the world works")
Interesting. Thanks for the reply as I did not know there were distro taps along some of the transmission lines. I bet those are grandfathered in somehow as the DOT has pretty specific rules about what's going through those transmission lines. To my knowledge, they always require mercaptans in case they have a rupture or other pipeline issue.
you forgot to add in interest -- which (in theory) compensates me for the time value of money and corresponding inflation. What you describe is exactly why people typically don't lend money with 0% interest rates.
No, they are not pure methane. The DOT requires gas companies to put methyl mercaptan (mentioned above) in the gas stream specifically so we can smell leaks. As far as I know, all natural gas that is distributed in the US has mercaptans. If you've smelled "natural gas", propane, or butane, you are smelling the mercaptans as those gases are odorless.
Natty gas with H2S in it (aka: sour gas) smells like rotten eggs. However, at around 100ppm, you quit smelling it and you start dying instead. At 1000 ppm, one inhalation and you are dead.
No, debt is not the exception because it is repaid in whatever currency the contract requires. ie: if your debt is in dollars, then you pay back the debt in dollars.
You are correct that "Inflation reduces the purchasing power of the dollar" but it also works on the other side too. ie: the debt is worth less to the person who is owed money.
Yes but inflation is different. The upper classes own assets. Asset values can move up and down during inflation. ie: see gold.
The poor hold money - dollars. Those only go one direction during inflation: down.
The solution is inflation? Scuse me but wtf are you smoking? Inflation screws everyone. Especially the poor and working poor.
You are 100% correct. They are Administrators who.....wait for it.......work for the government. In other words, they "administrate" for the government on behalf of the taxpayers.
Why don't you try again and start over from the beginning.....
Mod up. This is an important and correct point he makes. IQ is a unique type of test and it's worthy to ask why scores keep going up.
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Written a while ago and a little tough to read at times but the lessons in that book are priceless.
I also suspect that there's a pretty decent chance my ride to work will be a bicycle, rather than a car
That sucks for you. So because your country (and mine) can't come up with a reasonable energy policy, you have to live like a late 1950's Chinese worker. Ok.....and you are not outraged at this?
I don't know what state you live in but where I live, even the poor have better transportation than bikes. Is it possible that the people you've entrusted to govern you have put you in this position? I ask because it's not a lack of energy that is forcing you into this position. We have plenty of "energy" -- nat gas, crude, coal, nuke, etc. However, you specifically cite cost as the main issue.
I want to know why you think it costs so much? Followup: is this cost worth it for what you are getting out of the deal?
New british-ism for me: putting? I thought it was pudding. Is this another instance where you brits talk all funny?
Covey leader to Raven: Excellent correction.
I'm not sure why they named a later sequel "Rambo" but whatever. Here in Jerkwater, USA we all know First Blood was the original and by far, the best.
No, the reason you flip a coin is because, while it is in the air, your choice of heads or tails is indicative of your real preference, even if on a subconscious level.
Slashdot is utterly retarded when it comes to financial discussions. Seems like the only point of view represented is that of the occupy crowd and that view has a limited understanding of how the world works.
Facts:
1) Nobody is giving Knight a "do over". They are and were held to every single trade they made. Erroneous or not
2) Knight almost went bankrupt -- as they should have. They were only saved by receiving another round of money from investors (that dilluted the current shareholders by about 70%). In other words, the owners of Knight took a huge loss -- again, as they should have. The general public wasn't affected at all unless you were the person SELLING to Knight and even then, you most likely sold your stock to them at a higher price than you would have otherwise.
3) Knight had NOTHING to do with high frequency trading. That's not what the firm does or was trying to do.
But don't let these facts get in the way of a good wall street bashing narrative.....
There are PLENTY of things that are real issues and need attention but slashdot is tilting at windmills on this.
So you are suggesting that the guy who throws the first punch risks death? Good! Most of us don't go around getting into random bar fights. In fact, we actively try to avoid fighting at almost all cost unless absolutely necessary (defense only).
There's a lot of tough guys around and the stand your ground law is aimed at those idiots for a reason. Tough guys should rightfully be fearful of getting shot if they decide to throw that random punch in a bar and start some shit.
However, I will also add that guns and bars don't mix. Period, no exceptions. That's why it's illegal to have a gun in a bar. Even in Texas.
I haven't seen this mentioned yet but in the US, the standard for conviction on criminal charges of any kind is "beyond a reasonable doubt" as established by a jury of your peers.
Does ANYONE honestly believe there is no reasonable doubt here? Of course there is. And that is why I think he will be found not guilty.
I don't have a dog in the hunt so I don't have to pick a side. I just call it like I see it and by any measure, it's going to be hard to prove murder 2nd degree "beyond a reasonable doubt".