You're a damned liar. Here in the northeast, if 20% of the people were "on the street", the streets would be paved with corpsicles.
Wikipedia claims 633,782 or about 0.21% in the US, which includes those temporarily housed by organizations like the Salvation Army.
The 10% income level is $5000/year cash, not counting benefits if any. The 20% income is $11000/year. (townhall.com) That's per person, not per family, and does not include income hidden from the government.
To quote Stan Freberg, "Laugh on you. Whole Island solid concrete." Dense housing like projects and other apartments, so beloved of leftists, have negligible capacity for any food but mushrooms.
Most supermarket chains have house brands that are cheaper than name brands. If you're eating Twix, you should be able to find a less expensive form of caloric appetite suppressant.
Discarded paper, wetted and stuffed into cracks, can reduce air leaks. More clothing can help you keep warn in a cold room; don't be ashamed to pick up clothing off the street or go dumpster diving.
You didn't mention your living arrangements, but for many people their greatest expense is rent. If you can find someone trustworthy to live with, you can cut expenses substantially.
If you aren't excreting some vitamins, your body is absorbing every last bit in your food, which indicates your body is desperately short on those vitamins and grabbing onto every bit it can get.
Some foods are fortified, but none that I know of are highly fortified. Those that are fortified have nowhere near the roughly 50 (last time I looked) nutrients that are considered essential. They can't safely be highly fortified because people vary widely in their food consumption, and someone who eats a lot could easily OD on something that is safe only in moderate quantities, like oil soluble vitamins. Women need more iron than men, and excess iron is a health risk, how are you going to account for that?
Things that have been added as supplements for more than 50 years are a pretty limited list: some B vitamins, iron, vitamin D, and maybe calcium.
For a guess, the area is sparsely populated, so a few well-off people can skew the statistics. Note, however, that it's not the deep green of the most prosperous areas, but the medium green of incomes near $65,000.
Wealth is the target for the biggest thieves of all, the government. Big, successful cities are the ripest plums, have the highest concentration of money to steal. Not having the intelligence to recognize when they're bleeding the rich victims too much, or the moral stature to care, "liberal" ("progressive") governments eventually cause today's Detroit.
The working poor tend to vote conservative. The nonworking poor, those receiving government booty, vote left to continue leeching off others.
The natural tendency of the relatively well off to vote conservative is counteracted by the fact that high income is helped by lots of education, and college is rife with leftist propaganda which wears down otherwise rational but gullible students.
If they're suing IBM then their action is futile and self-damaging. Money in any decision will go to 3 places, all of which hurt those suing. 1. Government 2. Lawyers 3. All stockholders in proportion to the shares they own. #3 means that IBM's money, which is owned by the stockholders, is transferred to the stockholders: no net gain, + administration costs, + time wasted in the lawsuits.
If they're suing the chief officers, the COs have little money compared to IBM, unless the COs have insurance against this sort of thing, in which case insurance companies get hurt to satisfy the greed of the plaintiffs. Furthermore, they have the additional legal hurdle that the company is presumed responsible for its actions, not the employees, in civil cases.
It's possible to make inferences without the article making an explicit recommendation. If someone tells you that it's dangerous to walk blindfolded in heavy traffic, can't you infer that you shouldn't do it?
Nice. Way to casually and offhandedly dismiss a major pioneer of human behavior and one of the most ingenious, influential, and consequential people of the 20th century. His work has had massive direct effects in not only mental health, but the social sciences, propaganda, marketing, and many other areas.
I notice that you didn't say his work had good effects.
Here in Oz the doctor bills the government directly. It's the doctors and hospital admins who are monitored for fraud by cheap automated statistical analysis.
Hooray for Australia! It's discovered a hidden technique to suppress any innovation that a bureaucrat doesn't like.
The 10 Commandments are a basis of many of our laws
Oh, bullshit. 4 of the commandments are "worship me". Another is "don't be jealous". Where are those encoded into law?
The spirit of most law falls into two classes: don't hurt, steal from, or annoy other people, and pay whatever the government wants. All this is necessary for a moderately successful government, and any relation to the Ten Commandments is a matter of necessity, not history.
Your "wide belief" is bogus. It's just as reasonable that for many religions the original god-stories were the equivalent of modern ghost stories. Passed on from generation to generation, dullards took them literally and bound them up with oral history, and POOF! a religion exists.
Fortunately, several major religions are new enough that we actually have some evidence of how they came about. The non-theistic religions of Buddhism and Confucianism were each developed from the words of a single teacher about 25 centuries ago. Christianity is a pack of whole-cloth lies based on then-current fiction and piled on top of Judaism. Mohammedism is the jumbled words of a warrior pasted onto something like Judaism. Compared to those 4, the formation of pastafarianism lies in the middle: created as a literate joke it's inferior to the intentions of the first two and superior to the latter two.
Some people from Illinois consider Abraham Lincoln almost to be a god; they sure seem to worship him. John Wilkes Booth is certainly part of the Abraham Lincoln religion, but erecting a monument to Booth would be offensive to them any many others, and rightfully so.
The second commandment forbids not only idols, but statues of any sort whatsoever. That's not so much offensive as preposterous; but sculptors ought to find it offensive that their profession is prohibited.
Whether you believe or not, is not the issue. The issue is that religious rules posted on government property encourage such things as a Texas judge who jailed a juror for requesting a secular alternative to the juror's oath.
States generally in their constitutions have some indication that the purpose of the government is the furtherance of public good, rule of law, etc. The Ten Commandments in some degree agrees with that, and definitely does not come into opposition to that. To the contrary, Satanism directly and proudly promotes evil, damage, and chaos; Satanism conflicts with the constitutions.
This is not to say that the Ten Commandments should be posted on government property; it shouldn't. Satanism on government property is the blatant promotion of perversion given implicit government approval, and obviously should not be permitted..
Slashdot Mirror
You're a damned liar. Here in the northeast, if 20% of the people were "on the street", the streets would be paved with corpsicles.
Wikipedia claims 633,782 or about 0.21% in the US, which includes those temporarily housed by organizations like the Salvation Army.
The 10% income level is $5000/year cash, not counting benefits if any. The 20% income is $11000/year. (townhall.com) That's per person, not per family, and does not include income hidden from the government.
If you can get a job for that time, you can afford to eat restaurant food. If you can't get paid for that time, your time is worth $0.
Potatoes cost 60 cents a pound and keep much better than McDonalds food.
Canned chili can be had at $1 for 15 ounces.
To quote Stan Freberg, "Laugh on you. Whole Island solid concrete." Dense housing like projects and other apartments, so beloved of leftists, have negligible capacity for any food but mushrooms.
Most supermarket chains have house brands that are cheaper than name brands. If you're eating Twix, you should be able to find a less expensive form of caloric appetite suppressant.
Discarded paper, wetted and stuffed into cracks, can reduce air leaks. More clothing can help you keep warn in a cold room; don't be ashamed to pick up clothing off the street or go dumpster diving.
You didn't mention your living arrangements, but for many people their greatest expense is rent. If you can find someone trustworthy to live with, you can cut expenses substantially.
If you aren't excreting some vitamins, your body is absorbing every last bit in your food, which indicates your body is desperately short on those vitamins and grabbing onto every bit it can get.
Some foods are fortified, but none that I know of are highly fortified. Those that are fortified have nowhere near the roughly 50 (last time I looked) nutrients that are considered essential. They can't safely be highly fortified because people vary widely in their food consumption, and someone who eats a lot could easily OD on something that is safe only in moderate quantities, like oil soluble vitamins. Women need more iron than men, and excess iron is a health risk, how are you going to account for that?
Things that have been added as supplements for more than 50 years are a pretty limited list: some B vitamins, iron, vitamin D, and maybe calcium.
One of the researchers describing the Polynesian binary system is named Bender.
For a guess, the area is sparsely populated, so a few well-off people can skew the statistics. Note, however, that it's not the deep green of the most prosperous areas, but the medium green of incomes near $65,000.
Wealth is the target for the biggest thieves of all, the government. Big, successful cities are the ripest plums, have the highest concentration of money to steal. Not having the intelligence to recognize when they're bleeding the rich victims too much, or the moral stature to care, "liberal" ("progressive") governments eventually cause today's Detroit.
The working poor tend to vote conservative. The nonworking poor, those receiving government booty, vote left to continue leeching off others.
The natural tendency of the relatively well off to vote conservative is counteracted by the fact that high income is helped by lots of education, and college is rife with leftist propaganda which wears down otherwise rational but gullible students.
Have fun with your 2 MHz clock rate.
If they're suing IBM then their action is futile and self-damaging. Money in any decision will go to 3 places, all of which hurt those suing. 1. Government 2. Lawyers 3. All stockholders in proportion to the shares they own. #3 means that IBM's money, which is owned by the stockholders, is transferred to the stockholders: no net gain, + administration costs, + time wasted in the lawsuits.
If they're suing the chief officers, the COs have little money compared to IBM, unless the COs have insurance against this sort of thing, in which case insurance companies get hurt to satisfy the greed of the plaintiffs. Furthermore, they have the additional legal hurdle that the company is presumed responsible for its actions, not the employees, in civil cases.
Nothing good comes of this for anyone.
I don't poop quasars.
It's possible to make inferences without the article making an explicit recommendation. If someone tells you that it's dangerous to walk blindfolded in heavy traffic, can't you infer that you shouldn't do it?
I notice that you didn't say his work had good effects.
Hooray for Australia! It's discovered a hidden technique to suppress any innovation that a bureaucrat doesn't like.
If video games, ipods, ipads, laptops, cell phones, name brand fancy clothes are life to you, your life is as shallow as dew.
Oh, bullshit. 4 of the commandments are "worship me". Another is "don't be jealous". Where are those encoded into law?
The spirit of most law falls into two classes: don't hurt, steal from, or annoy other people, and pay whatever the government wants. All this is necessary for a moderately successful government, and any relation to the Ten Commandments is a matter of necessity, not history.
Your "wide belief" is bogus. It's just as reasonable that for many religions the original god-stories were the equivalent of modern ghost stories. Passed on from generation to generation, dullards took them literally and bound them up with oral history, and POOF! a religion exists.
Fortunately, several major religions are new enough that we actually have some evidence of how they came about. The non-theistic religions of Buddhism and Confucianism were each developed from the words of a single teacher about 25 centuries ago. Christianity is a pack of whole-cloth lies based on then-current fiction and piled on top of Judaism. Mohammedism is the jumbled words of a warrior pasted onto something like Judaism. Compared to those 4, the formation of pastafarianism lies in the middle: created as a literate joke it's inferior to the intentions of the first two and superior to the latter two.
Some people from Illinois consider Abraham Lincoln almost to be a god; they sure seem to worship him. John Wilkes Booth is certainly part of the Abraham Lincoln religion, but erecting a monument to Booth would be offensive to them any many others, and rightfully so.
The gods of theistic religions tend to act like petulant, primitive children. Guess who most religions were invented by?
The second commandment forbids not only idols, but statues of any sort whatsoever. That's not so much offensive as preposterous; but sculptors ought to find it offensive that their profession is prohibited.
Whether you believe or not, is not the issue. The issue is that religious rules posted on government property encourage such things as a Texas judge who jailed a juror for requesting a secular alternative to the juror's oath.
States generally in their constitutions have some indication that the purpose of the government is the furtherance of public good, rule of law, etc. The Ten Commandments in some degree agrees with that, and definitely does not come into opposition to that. To the contrary, Satanism directly and proudly promotes evil, damage, and chaos; Satanism conflicts with the constitutions.
This is not to say that the Ten Commandments should be posted on government property; it shouldn't. Satanism on government property is the blatant promotion of perversion given implicit government approval, and obviously should not be permitted..