Actually, the literature mostly agrees on the fact that the atomic bomb was not a significant factor in the surrender of the Japanese ['The Second World War' John Keegan iirc]. The Japanese exited the war because the Russians entered it. They were to fight a two front war and were faced with an enemy that they didn't think would be merciful (the Japanese weren't throughout the war in the South Pacific, China, or Russia). To them, the nukes were really not all that different from 200 B-17s starting a firestorm using incendiary and high explosive bombs on cities made of paper and wood.
That is, if you spend 50% of your income on purchases subject to sales tax (as the poor are likley to do since things like food is a larger part of your budget) you pay a greater percentage of your income in sales tax than people who are more affluent. The wealthy spend a smaller percentage of their income on things subject to sales tax and are thus taxed at a lower rate...
...So sales tax is inherently regressive...
I dunno what sales tax systems you look at, but the state sales tax in Texas is usually not exercised on items like food or other necessities (though 'luxury' food items may be). We also have a weekend in August where there is no sales tax on an expanded set of items to allow people to buy things related to going back to school tax free, including clothes.
Sales tax is not inherently regressive any more than a gun is inherently a tool of evil. It is what it is. If you really want to know more about a sales tax that works and what is wrong with our income tax system, check out The Fairtax [amazon] book by Neal Boortz and John Linder (congressman).
The problem with licensing that most gun advocates see is simple. Pretty much everywhere that forced registration or licensing to own a gun shortly thereafter confiscated the weapons of the formerly lawful armsbearers in a gun ban.
Why are there these people that feel like every other living soul in the world HAS to accept what they believe, otherwise they should be killed/crucified/outcasted/suffer for eternity in the afterlife?
It isn't that they have to accept what those of faith believe. It's more that if they do not, those beliefs include that they are likely to go to 'hell.' At least from a Christian viewpoint, it is only a likelihood that you are charged to save them from by revealing to them the truth.
Another note on the Christian hell: It is described with fire imagery, but isn't usually really concieved of as a lake of physical torment. It contains some of the same elements, however.
privation (from God)
destruction (no longer human)
pain (human purpose is to love God and you have lost yourself and your purpose)
Forgiveness must be accepted. The gates of Heaven are locked by individuals from the outside. People reject God. God rejects noone.
Aren't these the people that killed thousands during the Crusades? Aren't these the people that are killing thousands now in the name of Allah? Are all the religions and dieties that man-kind have believed in one way or another so damn righteous as to demand that their followers mame all others in their name?This is something people are capable of in spite of whatever their beliefs are. Are all (modern) southern American whites the same ones who enslaved Africans? Not exactly.
I just don't understand why people can't accept that others can believe different things than they do. If the whole world was just more accepting of others and respected others' beliefs even if they disagreed, the world would be a much, much better place. Not to mention that millions of innocent people wouldn't have had to die in ages past.This is true with or without religion in the picture. Most religions push ideas that are far more in line with this than what history is filled with. Human failure to be in line with ideals is also a common theme in these religions.
The federal government has told the states that it WILL NOT be there until 72 hours after the event. Not only that, but even then only if they are called in. The mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana both did tremendously bad jobs.
They were slow to get the feds involved, and played at finger pointing instead of solutions. They were not organized or set up to deal with, as a state, evacuating the coastal areas. Unfortunately, poor or not, this is a state's responsibility.
Later, when Rita hit, Texas managed to evacuate people because they had plans. They were setup to use school buses and vans. They had yearly meetings in communities about who was disabled or needed a ride, they made lists. Etc.
My wife works for Texas Public Health and it is made very clear to states that they are responsible for storm preparedness.
I thought, hmm. Sheep. Then I thought maybe I should put together a few cartoons featuring Jesus, you know, snorting coke off a hooker's tits or eating out President Bush's asshole.
This is ridiculous. The criticism of radical Islamic individuals killing people in a cartoon form is a reasonable thing. What you're talking about is just obscenity.
Why is it so okay to be so intolerant of Christians? Not all of them, in my experience very few of them, promote hate or bigotry. The extremes of any group get publicity and are often beyond the lines of acceptable behavior, but that is why they are labeled 'extremes' and put on parade in the media, for ratings. You have a difference of opinion with Christians, fine. They believe that homosexuality is sinful and ultimately harmful to those who practice it. As long as they 'hate the sin and love the sinner' as is widely preached, what is different between this and any other difference of opinion? How can you be so hateful and intolerant of some group for their hate and intolerance? Hypocrisy.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." - G.K. Chesterton
People who post stupidity like this refuse to admit the deck is completely stacked against poor people
What need is there for attacking me? I freely admit that the deck is stacked against poor people. I was merely pointing out that this can be viewed as a merely perk for the rich or an investment benefit for anyone willing to make the positive decision to invest for the future. Obviously, since the benefit is by percentage, the rich benefit more.
There is no doubt that capitol gains taxes allow a few people to pay somewhat less than they might otherwise. What people rarely appreciate is that nearly everyone should be investing regularly and thus benefiting. Instead, most people are making poor financial decisions like '90 days same as cash', Rent-to-Own, Credit Card debt, etc. There is a reason people are so happy to loan most anyone money: they win and you don't. People make these decisions to support lifestyles beyond their means, when they should be debt-free and investing to build wealth.
The truth is that it isn't (generally) easy to be wealthy, physically fit, etc. People aren't willing to put in the hard work and sacrafice that is required.
Also, almost any tax cut would be for the rich since ~10% of people pay ~90% of the taxes.
I agree. I think a lot of companies aren't listening to users and customers in this vein. They don't realize that convergence has tradeoffs. Foremost, it makes a good UI impossible to design, battery life sucks, and deadlines and feature bloat collaborate to make them buggy devices as well. People don't want more features/convergence all the time. Often, great performance/service or better quality for a good price is what they want. I guess thats harder to market than, "XYZ NEW FEATURES" or "iPOD KILLER."
but you have to have evidence to support your claims
Commonly, scientists make claims that are not supported by evidence or are weakly supported. Many 'scientific' claims about prehistory are little more than fancy guesswork. Other times they discover how bees fly and say that they have ended a totally unrelated debate. Plenty of people on both sides of this one could be called 'wackjobs.'
I can only assume your comment means that ID asserts something science has evidence against. This isn't really true. ID asserts that nature has a designer, AFAIK. It is often pushed in the wrong ways, by the wrong people, and into the wrong places (science class). Scientific theory of particles to people evolution only asserts that random connected events 'could' have produced our world. This means that you can claim ID is not necesary for our existence. You cannot claim that it is proven false.
That's all well and good, but the problem is, they're asking the wrong questions. They question things that have been demonstrated and explained ad nauseum, again and again because they don't like the answer (i.e. it doesn't suit their pre-conceived idea of a god or a creator).
What pray tell, are those questions that have been explained ad nauseum?
For creationism to be "right" it needs to, for once, generate a testable, disproveable hypothesis and stop falling back on the old "anything we can't explain is God's will" argument.
First and foremost, God's will is for you to love him with all your heart, mind, and soul. Christian doctrine tells us that man has Fallen. Man commited the sin of pride, the cardinal sin, of prefering your own will to God's.
To address your statement: Creationism, in a Christian sense, mostly goes hand in hand with a belief in a Creator. You're asking for a 'testable hypothesis', which is science. Science is a method for learning about the world around us. Science cannot tell us about religion. They have been pitted against each other in modern culture but for no reason. They are not at odds. Faith in a Creator does not preclude participation in an experimental method to determine strongly supported theories of the universe. The method does not speak to things not open to experimentation in our world. It can't. Creationism is a belief, not a theory inferred from evidence. Your request is - as I understand it - nonsense.
There is no doubt that ID is the like. I do not support ID in science class, as it is not science. I do support science. I like science. If I were to throw out a problem with teaching particles to people evolution that science currently has no answer for, it would be that there has been observation of speciation and some circumstantial, 'Where else?'-type evidence for particles to people evolution. Speciation, however, is AFAIK always the mutation of the genetic material to less information, not more. Particles to people evolution requires observation and experimentation that show spontaneous generation of new genetic material. This is IMO, a bigger problem than how bees fly. This all just ties up my argument above, however, even this does not prove belief in a Creator is logically false. It just offers better evidence for particles to people evolution. As science always does, it tells us something about the world around us, but nothing of beyond it.
However, I'm sure a higher intelligence could have made bees with the ability to create worm holes and use their collective hive mind to hunt down intergalactic pollen throughout the universe rather than the mundane little beings that they are.
Omnipotence does not mean that nonsense is possible. People commonly attribute such things to God without realizing that combining words into statements of nonsense and implying that an omnipotent spirit should be able to achieve some nonsense is fallacy. AFAIK, wormholes require incredible amounts of energy that tiny bees living off of nectar -> honey probably can't produce.
Another common fallacy is present here. If you accept that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and all Good, it is likely nonsense to speak of what He 'could have made.' An all Good Creator - IMHO - must have made the best possible of all worlds, for anything else would hardly be all Good.
The director of open source programs at Google, Chris DiBona, posted this to the SummerofCodeAcceptedNH list in response to the idea of a WoC:
Nope. We decided that it wouldn't be as effective an exercise.
Chris
On 10/23/05, --------- wrote:
>>
>> Hi -----,
>>
>> Is there some prospect of Google hosting "Winter of Code"?
>>
>> Any views on this?
>>
>> ------.
This isn't really accurate. Most people didn't get started until late June or early July. The approvals weren't even given out until June 24th. After that, you had to contact and get in touch with your mentor to get some direction/traction with the project. So it's more on the order of 8 weeks. That makes $14/hr.
Not to mention that the workload on the projects varied.
Huh? So I can use a database of various RF transmitters to determine Where In The World I Am?
Not so you know where you are, but so the device knows where it is. Think localized services for mobile network enabled devices. Adverts, sales, movie times, local interest info...
Place Lab isn't a particularly new thing and using the wifi access points isn't terribly accurate. Your calculated position has a tendency to 'jump' as much as 100 feet in the Place Lab system.
He, as already stated above, only objects to the government forcing the ID check. I don't think he could protest the airline checking the ID against a non-transferrable purchase. Secret directives against travel by the government are Mr. Gilmore's issue.
Or, dare I say it, do the Libertarian solution: start his own airline without ID checks.
The government requires it! Did you read any of it? I'm glad to have your generalizations about Libertarians though. Sigh.
a-singularity Who knew Sartre was right? Hell is other people.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the literature mostly agrees on the fact that the atomic bomb was not a significant factor in the surrender of the Japanese ['The Second World War' John Keegan iirc]. The Japanese exited the war because the Russians entered it. They were to fight a two front war and were faced with an enemy that they didn't think would be merciful (the Japanese weren't throughout the war in the South Pacific, China, or Russia). To them, the nukes were really not all that different from 200 B-17s starting a firestorm using incendiary and high explosive bombs on cities made of paper and wood.
I dunno what sales tax systems you look at, but the state sales tax in Texas is usually not exercised on items like food or other necessities (though 'luxury' food items may be). We also have a weekend in August where there is no sales tax on an expanded set of items to allow people to buy things related to going back to school tax free, including clothes.
Sales tax is not inherently regressive any more than a gun is inherently a tool of evil. It is what it is. If you really want to know more about a sales tax that works and what is wrong with our income tax system, check out The Fairtax [amazon] book by Neal Boortz and John Linder (congressman).
The problem with licensing that most gun advocates see is simple. Pretty much everywhere that forced registration or licensing to own a gun shortly thereafter confiscated the weapons of the formerly lawful armsbearers in a gun ban.
RG
It isn't that they have to accept what those of faith believe. It's more that if they do not, those beliefs include that they are likely to go to 'hell.' At least from a Christian viewpoint, it is only a likelihood that you are charged to save them from by revealing to them the truth. Another note on the Christian hell: It is described with fire imagery, but isn't usually really concieved of as a lake of physical torment. It contains some of the same elements, however.
- privation (from God)
- destruction (no longer human)
- pain (human purpose is to love God and you have lost yourself and your purpose)
Forgiveness must be accepted. The gates of Heaven are locked by individuals from the outside. People reject God. God rejects noone. Aren't these the people that killed thousands during the Crusades? Aren't these the people that are killing thousands now in the name of Allah? Are all the religions and dieties that man-kind have believed in one way or another so damn righteous as to demand that their followers mame all others in their name?This is something people are capable of in spite of whatever their beliefs are. Are all (modern) southern American whites the same ones who enslaved Africans? Not exactly. I just don't understand why people can't accept that others can believe different things than they do. If the whole world was just more accepting of others and respected others' beliefs even if they disagreed, the world would be a much, much better place. Not to mention that millions of innocent people wouldn't have had to die in ages past.This is true with or without religion in the picture. Most religions push ideas that are far more in line with this than what history is filled with. Human failure to be in line with ideals is also a common theme in these religions.God is a common response to the holes science cannot fill in life (why are we here?) FSM is merely a mockery of thinking any such holes are important.
They were slow to get the feds involved, and played at finger pointing instead of solutions. They were not organized or set up to deal with, as a state, evacuating the coastal areas. Unfortunately, poor or not, this is a state's responsibility.
Later, when Rita hit, Texas managed to evacuate people because they had plans. They were setup to use school buses and vans. They had yearly meetings in communities about who was disabled or needed a ride, they made lists. Etc.
My wife works for Texas Public Health and it is made very clear to states that they are responsible for storm preparedness.
This is ridiculous. The criticism of radical Islamic individuals killing people in a cartoon form is a reasonable thing. What you're talking about is just obscenity.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." - G.K. Chesterton
The Judge is faculty at Santa Clara University. It looks like George "Daddy" Bush appointed him.
h tml [scu.edu]
"On October 1, 1990, Judge Ware was appointed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, where he now serves"
http://www.scu.edu/law/faculty/adjunct/fcty_1231.
What need is there for attacking me? I freely admit that the deck is stacked against poor people. I was merely pointing out that this can be viewed as a merely perk for the rich or an investment benefit for anyone willing to make the positive decision to invest for the future. Obviously, since the benefit is by percentage, the rich benefit more.
Investment
Where did I support people breaking the law?Debt
Where did we disagree here?There is no doubt that capitol gains taxes allow a few people to pay somewhat less than they might otherwise. What people rarely appreciate is that nearly everyone should be investing regularly and thus benefiting. Instead, most people are making poor financial decisions like '90 days same as cash', Rent-to-Own, Credit Card debt, etc. There is a reason people are so happy to loan most anyone money: they win and you don't. People make these decisions to support lifestyles beyond their means, when they should be debt-free and investing to build wealth.
The truth is that it isn't (generally) easy to be wealthy, physically fit, etc. People aren't willing to put in the hard work and sacrafice that is required.
Also, almost any tax cut would be for the rich since ~10% of people pay ~90% of the taxes.
I agree. I think a lot of companies aren't listening to users and customers in this vein. They don't realize that convergence has tradeoffs. Foremost, it makes a good UI impossible to design, battery life sucks, and deadlines and feature bloat collaborate to make them buggy devices as well. People don't want more features/convergence all the time. Often, great performance/service or better quality for a good price is what they want. I guess thats harder to market than, "XYZ NEW FEATURES" or "iPOD KILLER."
Commonly, scientists make claims that are not supported by evidence or are weakly supported. Many 'scientific' claims about prehistory are little more than fancy guesswork. Other times they discover how bees fly and say that they have ended a totally unrelated debate. Plenty of people on both sides of this one could be called 'wackjobs.'
I can only assume your comment means that ID asserts something science has evidence against. This isn't really true. ID asserts that nature has a designer, AFAIK. It is often pushed in the wrong ways, by the wrong people, and into the wrong places (science class). Scientific theory of particles to people evolution only asserts that random connected events 'could' have produced our world. This means that you can claim ID is not necesary for our existence. You cannot claim that it is proven false.
Well then, why can't we equally say.. with exactly as much evidence.. the Universe just is.
You certainly can. It is, however, not science. Welcome to faith.
What pray tell, are those questions that have been explained ad nauseum?
First and foremost, God's will is for you to love him with all your heart, mind, and soul. Christian doctrine tells us that man has Fallen. Man commited the sin of pride, the cardinal sin, of prefering your own will to God's.
To address your statement: Creationism, in a Christian sense, mostly goes hand in hand with a belief in a Creator. You're asking for a 'testable hypothesis', which is science. Science is a method for learning about the world around us. Science cannot tell us about religion. They have been pitted against each other in modern culture but for no reason. They are not at odds. Faith in a Creator does not preclude participation in an experimental method to determine strongly supported theories of the universe. The method does not speak to things not open to experimentation in our world. It can't. Creationism is a belief, not a theory inferred from evidence. Your request is - as I understand it - nonsense.
There is no doubt that ID is the like. I do not support ID in science class, as it is not science. I do support science. I like science. If I were to throw out a problem with teaching particles to people evolution that science currently has no answer for, it would be that there has been observation of speciation and some circumstantial, 'Where else?'-type evidence for particles to people evolution. Speciation, however, is AFAIK always the mutation of the genetic material to less information, not more. Particles to people evolution requires observation and experimentation that show spontaneous generation of new genetic material. This is IMO, a bigger problem than how bees fly. This all just ties up my argument above, however, even this does not prove belief in a Creator is logically false. It just offers better evidence for particles to people evolution. As science always does, it tells us something about the world around us, but nothing of beyond it.
Omnipotence does not mean that nonsense is possible. People commonly attribute such things to God without realizing that combining words into statements of nonsense and implying that an omnipotent spirit should be able to achieve some nonsense is fallacy. AFAIK, wormholes require incredible amounts of energy that tiny bees living off of nectar -> honey probably can't produce.
Another common fallacy is present here. If you accept that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and all Good, it is likely nonsense to speak of what He 'could have made.' An all Good Creator - IMHO - must have made the best possible of all worlds, for anything else would hardly be all Good.
The director of open source programs at Google, Chris DiBona, posted this to the SummerofCodeAcceptedNH list in response to the idea of a WoC: Nope. We decided that it wouldn't be as effective an exercise. Chris On 10/23/05, --------- wrote: >> >> Hi -----, >> >> Is there some prospect of Google hosting "Winter of Code"? >> >> Any views on this? >> >> ------.
This isn't really accurate. Most people didn't get started until late June or early July. The approvals weren't even given out until June 24th. After that, you had to contact and get in touch with your mentor to get some direction/traction with the project. So it's more on the order of 8 weeks. That makes $14/hr. Not to mention that the workload on the projects varied.
Not so you know where you are, but so the device knows where it is. Think localized services for mobile network enabled devices. Adverts, sales, movie times, local interest info...
Place Lab isn't a particularly new thing and using the wifi access points isn't terribly accurate. Your calculated position has a tendency to 'jump' as much as 100 feet in the Place Lab system.
Don't go to a school for undergrad if it's got a good name. That's what grad school is for.
Actually, grad school is about who you work with, not where you go.
Or, dare I say it, do the Libertarian solution: start his own airline without ID checks.
The government requires it! Did you read any of it? I'm glad to have your generalizations about Libertarians though. Sigh.
a-singularity
Who knew Sartre was right? Hell is other people.