This is the same Bank of America that first downcases the merchant name (on my checking account statement) then upcases each letter that isn't preceded by another letter. So "Lowe's Home Improvement" is "Lowe'S Home Improvement". That's a really Mickey Mouse error for someone to make, and it worries me to think of those things I cannot see so obviously...
However, morals don't go very far in the business world
Having been in the "business world" for 15 years now, I can assure you that morals *do* go quite far. Some people choose not to, but they typically lose in the end.
Look, it's not worth trying to hook them all up and get the equivalent of two or three modern hard drives' space. But pull them apart and get the cool rare-earth magnets out of them.
That has *nothing* to do with capitalism. Nothing. Capitalism is competing in a market, which has been shown time and time again to be the only way to grow an economy, create good products, etc.
What you have in the summary is a company buying legislation from a government in order to get that government to shoulder some of the company's expenses, i.e. intellectual property rights enforcement. That's the opposite of capitalism, it's either fascism (look up the definition before you reply) or socialism.
Well, here are some differences, then. This is in TN, where the state mandates the same testing everywhere. Furthermore, it's connected to a protestant church, so the teachers actually have to be paid market wages or something similar (no vows of poverty) and the church receives no outside financial support beyond what they get on Sunday morning. Same with the other church I mentioned.
The bottom line is that they have figured out how to provide a very high quality education for less than half of what the local school system spends per child. You are correct that there are a few other expenses that the public schools have, but those really aren't that big, and don't include everything that you mentioned.
There are plenty of great private schools around here that aren't attached to churches that charge about the same, so it's not the case that this has anything to do with the church secretly funding the school. As I said, it really is working the other way around since the school uses the church facilities and helps with maintenance. Given that the school has twice as many kids as the church has attendees, you can figure that most of us don't even go to church there, so there's little reason for the church to support a school that other people attend.
Regardless of all that, our public school system here sucks, royally, it's no secret, and everybody wants to fix it. The NEA, of course, thinks more money will fix it. It won't, or it would already be fixed.
Okay, for the hundredth time (next time, read the replies before making an ass of yourself here):
Is your private school a parochial school perhaps? If so, your per pupil expense is higher than 4k... the churches subsidize your school.
While that might be the case in some, or most, this school receives no money from the church. Really, it can't, as there are now about twice as many students as there are Sunday attenders at the church. If anything, the school is subsidizing the church by helping pay for the building.
I know this isn't the only case like this. I am familiar with a school where the church has 8 people on Sunday morning but the school has a hundred students - the church would close if it weren't for the school.
Parochial school teachers need not be certified... I say again - THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE TEACHERS!!!
This school requires certification, it's not uncommon.
eriously disabled physically, emotionally, or mentally? Not welcome in the parochial schools ("Sorry, we just don't have the resources...") So they go to public school.
Yeah, and they're stuck in the "special ed" classes, which after federal grants are a money-maker for some schools. I remember a story in Newsweek years ago about the Catholic schools in Chicago, and the interesting thing about it was that they had *more* "at risk" children than the public schools, and still tested higher. Completely turns your little argument on its head.
As for testing - the kids here all have to pass year-end state-mandated tests, same as public schools.
You and I probably agree on the voucher issue, although for different reasons. I would simply like a tax break for the tuition; I realize that vouchers would simply cause the cost of private schools to rise in the same way that subsidies for college education has been a wash.
I don't want to dismantle public schools at all. I went to public schools, and despite the quality of some of the teachers (which is why I laugh out loud when you talk about "certifications" and all that) I turned out okay.
But I'm not going to get involved in your pathetic fantasy world (and NEA dream) where the only thing stopping the public schools from delivering quality education is even more money. Money isn't the issue.
The school receives no outside funding - it is fully self-sufficient. I'm not sure why food should be added in since both public and private schools charge more for it. As for transportation, that's an added expense, but surely not $4500/year/kid.
We have some pretty good computers that have been donated by various companies. Plus they run Linux, so that helps.
You are correct that some of the other things are missing, but again, it can't make up the 2:1 difference.
My kids go to a private school for about $4000/year each. Right now, the public schools in this area are spending $8500/kid/year, and claiming that they need more money to bring the schools up to par (our schools are among the worst in the state). I probably don't have to tell you that the private school kids test far above the public schools, even though the school also accepts a number of "at risk" kids each year through a scholarship program.
If money were the answer, our public school system here would be turning out einsteins.
That's not misleading the seller, nor is it fraud. You charge 3% commission and give the buyer 2/3 of the commission. There's nothing wrong with that. The DOJ even says that it's illegal to try to stop such, and KY settled with them in a similar case.
People like you are just mad because the gravy train is coming in to a station.
Get over it.
The reason that America hasn't been subsequently attacked had nothing to do with punishing the silly, stupid Taleban in Afghanistan, or fomenting a war in Iraq. The perps were a group calling themselves Al Qaeda, and they haven't been touched.
You're kidding, right? Al Qaeda has been touched badly by us - we've imprisoned some of their top leaders, killed others, and those left are hiding in Pakistan. Contrast this to the previous condition where they were openly running terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, and able to carry out a couple of good attacks. I agree with you that a lot of luck was involved, along with a lot of planning and some plain stupidity on the part of our law enforcement. But we've done a good job of dismantling their infrastructure. Without the distraction of Iraq, we would probably be doing a better job of it.
The blog post is correct, and reliable. When the legislation was passed, there was much hand-wringing since the DOJ had just settled with KY over similar illegal legislation. Again, this is in the blog post.
The Realtors were gushing about this in the media when it was passed, as they don't want to see their commissions eaten into. There are some agents making a killing by taking only a 1% commission on mostly new home sales - they don't have to do much work, anyway, so it doesn't hurt to only make 1% and give the other 2% back to the buyer.
Um, NAR was really proud of the fact that they got this legislation passed. It had *nothing* to do with fraud - it had everything to do with people cutting into their commissions by offering rebates.
Here in TN, the NAR just bought a piece of legislation making it illegal (you read that right: illegal) to give a purchaser a rebate. They have a lot of power, and they'll use it.
Probably no time soon. The recent population boom wasn't caused by an increased birth rate, but rather by increased longevity. Birth rates are down in most of the first world, to the point that Japan is worried about a dropping population.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and try to get them to remove you from their mailing list - spammers learn from them.
This is the same Bank of America that first downcases the merchant name (on my checking account statement) then upcases each letter that isn't preceded by another letter. So "Lowe's Home Improvement" is "Lowe'S Home Improvement". That's a really Mickey Mouse error for someone to make, and it worries me to think of those things I cannot see so obviously...
Go complain to the HRC that you're offended by traffic shaping.
Having been in the "business world" for 15 years now, I can assure you that morals *do* go quite far. Some people choose not to, but they typically lose in the end.
Look, it's not worth trying to hook them all up and get the equivalent of two or three modern hard drives' space. But pull them apart and get the cool rare-earth magnets out of them.
5) Sunburn? Well, we only see the sun about 2 months a year, and honestly it's not bright enough to burn an albino.
6) Snow? HELL YES!
That has *nothing* to do with capitalism. Nothing. Capitalism is competing in a market, which has been shown time and time again to be the only way to grow an economy, create good products, etc.
What you have in the summary is a company buying legislation from a government in order to get that government to shoulder some of the company's expenses, i.e. intellectual property rights enforcement. That's the opposite of capitalism, it's either fascism (look up the definition before you reply) or socialism.
Well, here are some differences, then. This is in TN, where the state mandates the same testing everywhere. Furthermore, it's connected to a protestant church, so the teachers actually have to be paid market wages or something similar (no vows of poverty) and the church receives no outside financial support beyond what they get on Sunday morning. Same with the other church I mentioned.
The bottom line is that they have figured out how to provide a very high quality education for less than half of what the local school system spends per child. You are correct that there are a few other expenses that the public schools have, but those really aren't that big, and don't include everything that you mentioned.
There are plenty of great private schools around here that aren't attached to churches that charge about the same, so it's not the case that this has anything to do with the church secretly funding the school. As I said, it really is working the other way around since the school uses the church facilities and helps with maintenance. Given that the school has twice as many kids as the church has attendees, you can figure that most of us don't even go to church there, so there's little reason for the church to support a school that other people attend.
Regardless of all that, our public school system here sucks, royally, it's no secret, and everybody wants to fix it. The NEA, of course, thinks more money will fix it. It won't, or it would already be fixed.
Okay, for the hundredth time (next time, read the replies before making an ass of yourself here):
While that might be the case in some, or most, this school receives no money from the church. Really, it can't, as there are now about twice as many students as there are Sunday attenders at the church. If anything, the school is subsidizing the church by helping pay for the building.
I know this isn't the only case like this. I am familiar with a school where the church has 8 people on Sunday morning but the school has a hundred students - the church would close if it weren't for the school.
This school requires certification, it's not uncommon.
Yeah, and they're stuck in the "special ed" classes, which after federal grants are a money-maker for some schools. I remember a story in Newsweek years ago about the Catholic schools in Chicago, and the interesting thing about it was that they had *more* "at risk" children than the public schools, and still tested higher. Completely turns your little argument on its head.
As for testing - the kids here all have to pass year-end state-mandated tests, same as public schools.
You and I probably agree on the voucher issue, although for different reasons. I would simply like a tax break for the tuition; I realize that vouchers would simply cause the cost of private schools to rise in the same way that subsidies for college education has been a wash.
I don't want to dismantle public schools at all. I went to public schools, and despite the quality of some of the teachers (which is why I laugh out loud when you talk about "certifications" and all that) I turned out okay.
But I'm not going to get involved in your pathetic fantasy world (and NEA dream) where the only thing stopping the public schools from delivering quality education is even more money. Money isn't the issue.
we can throw it in a lake when he's finished? That's a *lot* of sodium.
Not according to the DOJ:
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/real_estate/rebates.htm
And they apparently have at least one court siding with them.
The school is self-sufficient - no outside subsidation.
The school receives no outside funding - it is fully self-sufficient. I'm not sure why food should be added in since both public and private schools charge more for it. As for transportation, that's an added expense, but surely not $4500/year/kid.
We have some pretty good computers that have been donated by various companies. Plus they run Linux, so that helps.
You are correct that some of the other things are missing, but again, it can't make up the 2:1 difference.
My kids go to a private school for about $4000/year each. Right now, the public schools in this area are spending $8500/kid/year, and claiming that they need more money to bring the schools up to par (our schools are among the worst in the state). I probably don't have to tell you that the private school kids test far above the public schools, even though the school also accepts a number of "at risk" kids each year through a scholarship program.
If money were the answer, our public school system here would be turning out einsteins.
That's not misleading the seller, nor is it fraud. You charge 3% commission and give the buyer 2/3 of the commission. There's nothing wrong with that. The DOJ even says that it's illegal to try to stop such, and KY settled with them in a similar case. People like you are just mad because the gravy train is coming in to a station. Get over it.
You're kidding, right? Al Qaeda has been touched badly by us - we've imprisoned some of their top leaders, killed others, and those left are hiding in Pakistan. Contrast this to the previous condition where they were openly running terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, and able to carry out a couple of good attacks. I agree with you that a lot of luck was involved, along with a lot of planning and some plain stupidity on the part of our law enforcement. But we've done a good job of dismantling their infrastructure. Without the distraction of Iraq, we would probably be doing a better job of it.
The blog post is correct, and reliable. When the legislation was passed, there was much hand-wringing since the DOJ had just settled with KY over similar illegal legislation. Again, this is in the blog post.
The Realtors were gushing about this in the media when it was passed, as they don't want to see their commissions eaten into. There are some agents making a killing by taking only a 1% commission on mostly new home sales - they don't have to do much work, anyway, so it doesn't hurt to only make 1% and give the other 2% back to the buyer.
That's now illegal in TN.
Um, NAR was really proud of the fact that they got this legislation passed. It had *nothing* to do with fraud - it had everything to do with people cutting into their commissions by offering rebates.
http://rerclaw.blogspot.com/2007/06/tennessee-governor-signs-anti-rebate.html
Note that "TAR" is the TN version of NAR.
Here in TN, the NAR just bought a piece of legislation making it illegal (you read that right: illegal) to give a purchaser a rebate. They have a lot of power, and they'll use it.
Like, tall, fat, or both?
Oh don't worry, you can record a video of your one year old son dancing to some music. Sure.
And then we'll sue you and crush you like the bug that you are in court.
Sincerely, the RIAA
Am I the only one who is surprised that the nsa uses coldfusion?
Probably no time soon. The recent population boom wasn't caused by an increased birth rate, but rather by increased longevity. Birth rates are down in most of the first world, to the point that Japan is worried about a dropping population.
These cases always involve the individual record companies.
Right, and that line of reasoning works with closed-source products. For open-source, there is *no* excuse, and their lawyer(s) should face sanctions.