You know lots of these rural people don't even know their physical location? That's not a joke. I deal with them every day. They have a P.O. Box for getting letters and they only know their physical location from rough driving directions.
Sounds like my father's parents. I know how to get there, but the only reason I could even tell you which county they live in is because they've told me....
If people would just use their brains, we could eliminate so much plastic waste. We've gone way off the deep-end with putting everything in "disposable" plastic containers.
Of course, most of those "disposable" plastic containers would be trivially recyclable if there weren't laws forbidding recycling of things that had been in contact with...food....
My leaving my front door unlocked does not mean you aren't guilty if breaking and entering if you open the door, walk in, and take something that isn't yours.
Actually, in many (if not most) places, it does mean exactly that. Illegal entry you may have done. Theft, petty or not so petty, likewise. The "Breaking" part? Nope. That has a legal meaning, and walking into an open front door does NOT count....
Taxing online retailers == more local shops open up == less megacorps == more spending power for the middle class.
Well, I can accept the first part of this statement (Taxing online retailers == more local shops open up).
I could even buy the next piece (== less megacorps) though there's not really a good reason to believe it's a foregone conclusion.
It's the last piece (== more spending power for the middle class.) I have a problem with. No, there's not really a good reason to believe that more Mom&Pop stores gives the middle-class more spending power. Rather the reverse. I'm old enough to remember the days of buying everything locally. We didn't stop buying locally because we wanted to pay more for things, we stopped because buying locally was more expensive, usually.
Going back to the days of the Mom&Pop store will likely mean an increase in prices for most everything, and LESS spending power for the middle class....
There is a lot of truth in that. Infrastructure projects in China happen amazingly fast, and their ability to bulldoze through any local opposition is a big reason for that.
NIMBYism doesn't scale. Sure, you don't want the new sewage plant in your neighborhood, but neither does anyone else, and if it doesn't get built your toilet doesn't flush. Someone has to have the authority to make hard unpopular decisions, with decisiveness and finality. Very few democracies do that well.
Fortunately, there's always someone willing to be the "President-For-LIfe", or "Der Fuhrer", or whatever. Even better, there's always someone who yearns to be ruled by Der Fuhrer (or President-for-life, or Chairman, or whatever)....
If you read newspapers and such from the beginning of the USA to the present, you can see the change from the USA as a union of States to the current form. Back in the day, "United States" was plural - "these United States", but now "United States" is singular - "the United States"....
Caveat: if the population were ten times as high, it would be both useful and make sense.
Alternately, if we had a holyhelluvalot of nuclear power, it MIGHT make sense, since it would allow us to turn most of the planet back to wilderness. Solar won't do it, because it requires large amounts of land covered by panels, which implies wires, switching stations, repair roads, etc...
Time after time we see how little the US and the average citizen cares about their education system. After decades of neglect, we're now reaping what was sown.
This is almost an irrelevancy.
Then have more and smarter people researching.
And this was the money shot. When all's said and done, China has four times our population. Absent something significant (WW3 scale), in the long run, they'll tend to always have more people researching, and they'll tend to be the dominant nation in the world.
Mind you, I expect they'll find a way to screw that up if they try hard enough, but the odds are in their favour, and will remain so, no matter what we do.
We really need to stop ALL new coal plants, or re-openings, from occurring. That should include ALL NATIONS.
I'll bite - how?
Are you suggesting that (re)opening a coal plant be considered an act of war? If so, do you support the notion of bombing the crap out of any nation that tries to (re)open a coal plant? Good luck with convincing anyone that bombing someone far away is a good solution to pollution or AGW...
Or do you just want a treaty signed by every nation on the planet? So far, there have been two treaties that were universally signed/ratified, only one of which actually requires signatories to do anything. Good luck with that, too.
Because we all know that no Russian (or Republican or Democrat, for that matter) would ever LIE about who was behind a political ad....
Note that there is plenty of room for a First Amendment challenge to this as well. It's been established for a long time that ANONYMOUS political speech is protected by the First....
No, Federalism does NOT mean "Washington does whatever it wants and bills the States".
Federalism is "Washington does ONLY what the Constitution says it can, and everything else is up to the States".
Note that most of the current Federal Budget consists of things that the Constitution does NOT mention as Federal Powers (Social Security and Medicare alone being most of the Federal budget...).
What we'd have left at the Federal level would be the military, INS/Customs, and arguably the Interstate Highway System. Which would reduce the Federal budget by a factor of five or six,...
Perhaps if they knew what they were missing, they might.
On the other hand, they might not see the level of freedom we take for granted as either necessary or desirable.
Do note the number of people here who spend time trying to abridge the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth Amendments (usually with some variant of "For the Children" as their rallying cry). So it's not like we don't have a similar impetus to regulate the lives of strangers....
I've never really understood the notion that being "pelted with ads" was a major problem. Possibly because I'm quite capable of tuning ads out, and don't necessarily feel an incredible urge to buy something (or vote for someone) based on any ads I might pay attention to.
Slashdot Mirror
...the first time one of these tech company executives is sent to jail for ignoring a court order...
Or perhaps they'll wait till they find themselves being audited by the IRS (or your local equivalent, wherever you live) every single year....
Sounds like my father's parents. I know how to get there, but the only reason I could even tell you which county they live in is because they've told me....
Of course, most of those "disposable" plastic containers would be trivially recyclable if there weren't laws forbidding recycling of things that had been in contact with...food....
Hear, hear! You're welcome.
And to be congratulated that you knew you didn't know the correct spelling....
Actually, in many (if not most) places, it does mean exactly that. Illegal entry you may have done. Theft, petty or not so petty, likewise. The "Breaking" part? Nope. That has a legal meaning, and walking into an open front door does NOT count....
Well, I can accept the first part of this statement (Taxing online retailers == more local shops open up).
I could even buy the next piece (== less megacorps) though there's not really a good reason to believe it's a foregone conclusion.
It's the last piece (== more spending power for the middle class.) I have a problem with. No, there's not really a good reason to believe that more Mom&Pop stores gives the middle-class more spending power. Rather the reverse. I'm old enough to remember the days of buying everything locally. We didn't stop buying locally because we wanted to pay more for things, we stopped because buying locally was more expensive, usually.
Going back to the days of the Mom&Pop store will likely mean an increase in prices for most everything, and LESS spending power for the middle class....
Does that include all those pensions they're supposed to be (and would be required to be, if they were a business) setting aside money for?
Fortunately, there's always someone willing to be the "President-For-LIfe", or "Der Fuhrer", or whatever. Even better, there's always someone who yearns to be ruled by Der Fuhrer (or President-for-life, or Chairman, or whatever)....
That's been a function of gasoline taxes forever....
If you read newspapers and such from the beginning of the USA to the present, you can see the change from the USA as a union of States to the current form. Back in the day, "United States" was plural - "these United States", but now "United States" is singular - "the United States"....
For "shareholders", read "owners".
And I'm curious - would you invest in a company that promised to never deliver any kind of return for the money you invested? If not, why not?
No. And no.
Caveat: if the population were ten times as high, it would be both useful and make sense.
Alternately, if we had a holyhelluvalot of nuclear power, it MIGHT make sense, since it would allow us to turn most of the planet back to wilderness. Solar won't do it, because it requires large amounts of land covered by panels, which implies wires, switching stations, repair roads, etc...
Just desserts. The expression is more about chocolate cake than the Sahara....
This is almost an irrelevancy.
And this was the money shot. When all's said and done, China has four times our population. Absent something significant (WW3 scale), in the long run, they'll tend to always have more people researching, and they'll tend to be the dominant nation in the world.
Mind you, I expect they'll find a way to screw that up if they try hard enough, but the odds are in their favour, and will remain so, no matter what we do.
So, any copy of a newspaper from the period needs to be destroyed as well? How about the actual court records?
I'll bite - how?
Are you suggesting that (re)opening a coal plant be considered an act of war? If so, do you support the notion of bombing the crap out of any nation that tries to (re)open a coal plant? Good luck with convincing anyone that bombing someone far away is a good solution to pollution or AGW...
Or do you just want a treaty signed by every nation on the planet? So far, there have been two treaties that were universally signed/ratified, only one of which actually requires signatories to do anything. Good luck with that, too.
And proven oil reserves now are larger than they've ever been. We've been finding more oil faster than we've been burning it.
So far.
Downtown New Orleans (20mph)....
Teat. Or "tit" if you want to be rude about it....
Because we all know that no Russian (or Republican or Democrat, for that matter) would ever LIE about who was behind a political ad....
Note that there is plenty of room for a First Amendment challenge to this as well. It's been established for a long time that ANONYMOUS political speech is protected by the First....
No, Federalism does NOT mean "Washington does whatever it wants and bills the States".
Federalism is "Washington does ONLY what the Constitution says it can, and everything else is up to the States".
Note that most of the current Federal Budget consists of things that the Constitution does NOT mention as Federal Powers (Social Security and Medicare alone being most of the Federal budget...).
What we'd have left at the Federal level would be the military, INS/Customs, and arguably the Interstate Highway System. Which would reduce the Federal budget by a factor of five or six,...
Perhaps if they knew what they were missing, they might.
On the other hand, they might not see the level of freedom we take for granted as either necessary or desirable.
Do note the number of people here who spend time trying to abridge the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth Amendments (usually with some variant of "For the Children" as their rallying cry). So it's not like we don't have a similar impetus to regulate the lives of strangers....
This. The comment field in PasswordSafe is a wonderful place to store the made-up answers to those questions....
I've never really understood the notion that being "pelted with ads" was a major problem. Possibly because I'm quite capable of tuning ads out, and don't necessarily feel an incredible urge to buy something (or vote for someone) based on any ads I might pay attention to.
In EVERY direction. And don't stop at 10....