You should meet Neal Boortz, who will soon stop working in part to prevent his money from falling into Obama's hands. Or any of the hundreds of doctors who have already closed their practices rather than work under the system Obama has set up.
Would you like to explain how hordes of dangerous unworking mobs living off government largess is something that the wealthy have made into law, in order to improve the lives of the rich? How decreased overall production makes the rich richer? How impoverishing the country will make possible the medical innovations that can lengthen the lives of the rich?
Sure, there are plenty of rich, myopic assholes, but there are a hundred times as many poor myopic assholes, and most of them vote Democrat.
You have a short memory. Leaders of France and Italy frequently openly have mistresses, and the only place I've seen criticism of it is in the US conservative press.
Having children is something most people choose to do, and they regard the expenses involved as something they're proud to shoulder. Disproportionate taxes being regarded as punishment for success derives directly from the meaning of the word, and it's not a cost people have as a desired result of their choice to work hard and effectively. It is theft by the people with the guns to make it so, and nothing else.
Its Congresses job to work with the President at this point, not the other way around.
WRONG WRONG WRONG
Congress's first job is to follow the Constitution; it's the law and it's their oath of office. (Obama's too, but he doesn't give a bloody F*** about the Constitution.)
Congress's second job is to do what's best for the country and the states the senators represent, (and Obama has neither the ability nor the intention of doing what's best for the country.)
Nowhere, nowhere is it Congress's "job to work with the President" or vice versa. It is never any person's job to sacrifice right to wrong.
So they take data with them only for those patients they'll be seeing that day, and only the data needed: not SSNs, account payment methods, next of kin data, etc.
There are leadless solders, and they're required by law in most uses these days. In batteries which use lead, the lead therein is pretty well isolated from the world outside. By mass, electronic use of lead other than solder is mostly leaded CRT glass, which is becoming obsolete. Lead is a poor choice for weights due to toxicity and softness, although it's still cheaper than better alternatives like stainless steel or brass. You neglected to mention bullets, where the density and controlled malleability of lead is important; I don't know if there's a suitable replacement here. In short, for most uses lead's chief advantage is low price, and it has good alternatives that allow it to no longer be "a very important metal". I am not aware of any application in which "we can not do without it", just some in which the alternative is impractical (car batteries).
Wikipedia: Lead paint or lead-based paint is paint containing lead, as pigment, with lead(II) chromate (PbCrO4, "chrome yellow") and lead(II) carbonate (PbCO3, "white lead") being the most common. Lead is added to paint to speed up drying, increase durability, maintain a fresh appearance, and resist moisture that causes corrosion.
Also, as might be expected by those who have handled tin-lead solder, lead is soft and flexible. This helps lead paint adhere for a long time on surfaces with differing thermal coefficients of expansion.
If display quality is important, the touchscreen user also needs a bowl of water and a roll of paper towels to wipe crud from his fingers off the screen.
You haven't been paying attention. Rupert Murdoch became a naturalized US citizen in 1985, so that citizenship restrictions on US media ownership would cease being a problem.
Glass-Steagall limited banks' ability to diversify their investments. Consequently, they became more vulnerable to crashes in a particular industry. Housing industry first bubbles and then goes sour, and banks forced by the government to make risky loans and not diversify out of housing loans die. Also, they have to hire a phalanx of lawyers to tell them if they're operating within the law, instead of just following good business practices.
Clean air and water laws are, first of all, attempts to protect one's property, that is, a portion of the air around us and such water that is on or under one's real estate.
Secondly, these restrictions apply to all, not just businesses. Houses not on sewers need code-legal septic tanks and leach fields. If I put in a new fireplace or wood stove (SURPRISE!) it has to include a catalytic converter in some places.
What many call restrictions or regulations on capitalism, if they are proper, are actually legal formulations of and recognition of the property rights on which capitalism is based.
Of course, those who choose to demonize capitalism seldom attack the roots on which it stands with full clarity (You don't have any right to own clothes or anything else.) Instead, capitalism is misrepresented in outrageous straw-man fashion.
Child (factory) labor came about when children who would have starved to death on family farms were able to produce greater value by being employed in a factory. Child labor was, and remains, a good thing for anyone who doesn't want dead children. As society became richer and could afford some idle children*, union pressure to prevent cheap competition and other political forces came forth with largely bogus arguments against child labor. By this time large numbers of people were isolated from deep poverty, didn't understand the economics involved, and thus had no problem supporting (anti-) child labor laws. So child labor was banned in visible places, and those affected either: 1 lived poorer lives 2 died 3 moved where their labor was still legal 4 relied on charity 5 (more recently) lived off government money.
So are child labor laws not a problem now, since we're in a rich country that can afford hordes of idle youth?
Where do you think violent inner-city gangs come from? What is the cause of 40% black youth unemployment, and where do they put the energy that would otherwise go into a job?
*Note that "society became richer and could afford some idle children" is collectivist language, but you probably understand what I mean. I'm not going to spend several hours explaining the issue in proper detail.
The failing is in politicians. For about 40 years after the founding and sporadically for the next 100 years, officeholders knew not to mix business and politics. It's their job and they take an oath of office to act properly. Businessmen are also wrong to go to government for money, but at least they are operating within their role to make their business successful.
using the public welfare clause of the modern state
That's misusing, as in abusing. And properly speaking, it's not a clause, it's a preface.
The paragraph in a Constitution that uses "public welfare" is always a statement of purpose (this is why we're doing this), not a carte blanche to do any old damn thing, as it is deliberately misunderstood to be.
Solyndra was not only in an industry with a lot of competition, solar cells is an industry considerably older, more stable, and better understood than video games. FWIW, one of the reasons Solyndra failed is inferior technology (according to Rogers of Cypress Semiconductor).
The question is not whether Mars can hold an Earth-like atmosphere (of course it can), but how long it can hold it, and how fast and how many times it can be regenerated. Anyone have any info on how long Mars could hold onto (for example) a 7 psi atmosphere, starting from 14 psi?
Presumably that's "Now" as is "Since Mitt Romney lost the election". Mormon beliefs might well have informed the decisions of the most powerful official in the world. Phew!
As opposed to Barack Hussein Obama, who has neither the ability nor the desire to have America either prosperous or strong. As opposed to Barack Hussein Obama, whose early upbringing was primarily Islam, the most vicious current major religion.
Your "120 million people in Central and South America" is double the best estimate of the population in existence at first contact, and the various American civilizations were already declining at that time.
This is an area of open debate among competent historians. I've read many explanations, and the general cultural rot encompasses debasing the currency. Christianity shares the blame.
The organization known as the "United Nations" considers the whole world, including the US, as its jurisdiction. There are many US "liberals" who consider that a good thing.
That's the second almost identical post. You have a sexual issue about underwear?
I've been told that Mormon underwear is designed to discourage sex. The men's underwear makes it difficult to get an erection while wearing it. This makes it more likely that they'll attend to business instead of engaging in sexual fantasies, which in turn results in them being better businessmen.
Understand that I'm not promoting it, but it's not as if they're actually doing something silly here. Too bad it's fodder for those who have sneering at others as one of their major joys in life.
It's easier to track the history of frauds when they're recent. Scientology is all too obvious. Mormon's founder was established as a fraudster early on.
On the other hand, "Church of Christ, Scientist" appears to have a self-deluded founder, rather than a malicious one. That doesn't undo the damage she's done, but they aren't noteworthy for illegal behavior like the other two.
Slashdot Mirror
You should meet Neal Boortz, who will soon stop working in part to prevent his money from falling into Obama's hands. Or any of the hundreds of doctors who have already closed their practices rather than work under the system Obama has set up.
Would you like to explain how hordes of dangerous unworking mobs living off government largess is something that the wealthy have made into law, in order to improve the lives of the rich? How decreased overall production makes the rich richer? How impoverishing the country will make possible the medical innovations that can lengthen the lives of the rich?
Sure, there are plenty of rich, myopic assholes, but there are a hundred times as many poor myopic assholes, and most of them vote Democrat.
You have a short memory. Leaders of France and Italy frequently openly have mistresses, and the only place I've seen criticism of it is in the US conservative press.
Having children is something most people choose to do, and they regard the expenses involved as something they're proud to shoulder. Disproportionate taxes being regarded as punishment for success derives directly from the meaning of the word, and it's not a cost people have as a desired result of their choice to work hard and effectively. It is theft by the people with the guns to make it so, and nothing else.
WRONG WRONG WRONG
Congress's first job is to follow the Constitution; it's the law and it's their oath of office. (Obama's too, but he doesn't give a bloody F*** about the Constitution.)
Congress's second job is to do what's best for the country and the states the senators represent, (and Obama has neither the ability nor the intention of doing what's best for the country.)
Nowhere, nowhere is it Congress's "job to work with the President" or vice versa. It is never any person's job to sacrifice right to wrong.
So they take data with them only for those patients they'll be seeing that day, and only the data needed: not SSNs, account payment methods, next of kin data, etc.
There are leadless solders, and they're required by law in most uses these days. In batteries which use lead, the lead therein is pretty well isolated from the world outside. By mass, electronic use of lead other than solder is mostly leaded CRT glass, which is becoming obsolete. Lead is a poor choice for weights due to toxicity and softness, although it's still cheaper than better alternatives like stainless steel or brass. You neglected to mention bullets, where the density and controlled malleability of lead is important; I don't know if there's a suitable replacement here. In short, for most uses lead's chief advantage is low price, and it has good alternatives that allow it to no longer be "a very important metal". I am not aware of any application in which "we can not do without it", just some in which the alternative is impractical (car batteries).
Wikipedia: Lead paint or lead-based paint is paint containing lead, as pigment, with lead(II) chromate (PbCrO4, "chrome yellow") and lead(II) carbonate (PbCO3, "white lead") being the most common. Lead is added to paint to speed up drying, increase durability, maintain a fresh appearance, and resist moisture that causes corrosion.
Also, as might be expected by those who have handled tin-lead solder, lead is soft and flexible. This helps lead paint adhere for a long time on surfaces with differing thermal coefficients of expansion.
If display quality is important, the touchscreen user also needs a bowl of water and a roll of paper towels to wipe crud from his fingers off the screen.
You haven't been paying attention. Rupert Murdoch became a naturalized US citizen in 1985, so that citizenship restrictions on US media ownership would cease being a problem.
The US is currently headed by people intent on its destruction. Nothing can be depended on.
Glass-Steagall limited banks' ability to diversify their investments. Consequently, they became more vulnerable to crashes in a particular industry. Housing industry first bubbles and then goes sour, and banks forced by the government to make risky loans and not diversify out of housing loans die. Also, they have to hire a phalanx of lawyers to tell them if they're operating within the law, instead of just following good business practices.
Clean air and water laws are, first of all, attempts to protect one's property, that is, a portion of the air around us and such water that is on or under one's real estate.
Secondly, these restrictions apply to all, not just businesses. Houses not on sewers need code-legal septic tanks and leach fields. If I put in a new fireplace or wood stove (SURPRISE!) it has to include a catalytic converter in some places.
What many call restrictions or regulations on capitalism, if they are proper, are actually legal formulations of and recognition of the property rights on which capitalism is based.
Of course, those who choose to demonize capitalism seldom attack the roots on which it stands with full clarity (You don't have any right to own clothes or anything else.) Instead, capitalism is misrepresented in outrageous straw-man fashion.
Child (factory) labor came about when children who would have starved to death on family farms were able to produce greater value by being employed in a factory. Child labor was, and remains, a good thing for anyone who doesn't want dead children. As society became richer and could afford some idle children*, union pressure to prevent cheap competition and other political forces came forth with largely bogus arguments against child labor. By this time large numbers of people were isolated from deep poverty, didn't understand the economics involved, and thus had no problem supporting (anti-) child labor laws. So child labor was banned in visible places, and those affected either: 1 lived poorer lives 2 died 3 moved where their labor was still legal 4 relied on charity 5 (more recently) lived off government money.
So are child labor laws not a problem now, since we're in a rich country that can afford hordes of idle youth?
Where do you think violent inner-city gangs come from? What is the cause of 40% black youth unemployment, and where do they put the energy that would otherwise go into a job?
*Note that "society became richer and could afford some idle children" is collectivist language, but you probably understand what I mean. I'm not going to spend several hours explaining the issue in proper detail.
The failing is in politicians. For about 40 years after the founding and sporadically for the next 100 years, officeholders knew not to mix business and politics. It's their job and they take an oath of office to act properly. Businessmen are also wrong to go to government for money, but at least they are operating within their role to make their business successful.
That's mis using, as in abusing. And properly speaking, it's not a clause, it's a preface.
The paragraph in a Constitution that uses "public welfare" is always a statement of purpose (this is why we're doing this), not a carte blanche to do any old damn thing, as it is deliberately misunderstood to be.
Solyndra was not only in an industry with a lot of competition, solar cells is an industry considerably older, more stable, and better understood than video games. FWIW, one of the reasons Solyndra failed is inferior technology (according to Rogers of Cypress Semiconductor).
The question is not whether Mars can hold an Earth-like atmosphere (of course it can), but how long it can hold it, and how fast and how many times it can be regenerated. Anyone have any info on how long Mars could hold onto (for example) a 7 psi atmosphere, starting from 14 psi?
If the critical factor is density times distance, Then a less dense material is going to mean a lot more weight. Do the math.
As opposed to Barack Hussein Obama, who has neither the ability nor the desire to have America either prosperous or strong. As opposed to Barack Hussein Obama, whose early upbringing was primarily Islam, the most vicious current major religion.
Your "120 million people in Central and South America" is double the best estimate of the population in existence at first contact, and the various American civilizations were already declining at that time.
Racism? Do you have any idea what the word means?
This is an area of open debate among competent historians. I've read many explanations, and the general cultural rot encompasses debasing the currency. Christianity shares the blame.
The organization known as the "United Nations" considers the whole world, including the US, as its jurisdiction. There are many US "liberals" who consider that a good thing.
That's the second almost identical post. You have a sexual issue about underwear?
I've been told that Mormon underwear is designed to discourage sex. The men's underwear makes it difficult to get an erection while wearing it. This makes it more likely that they'll attend to business instead of engaging in sexual fantasies, which in turn results in them being better businessmen.
Understand that I'm not promoting it, but it's not as if they're actually doing something silly here. Too bad it's fodder for those who have sneering at others as one of their major joys in life.
It's easier to track the history of frauds when they're recent. Scientology is all too obvious. Mormon's founder was established as a fraudster early on.
On the other hand, "Church of Christ, Scientist" appears to have a self-deluded founder, rather than a malicious one. That doesn't undo the damage she's done, but they aren't noteworthy for illegal behavior like the other two.