If she feel indebted to the UK, she could compute how much the UK welfare state gave her, plus interests, and give the money directly to the government. Nothing prevent her from doing so.
Maybe we are talking of different things. The solution of this problem, in my eyes, is not forever. I know, perfectly, that there would be always the possibility of new pirates, even if we kill all of the pirates today. But I'm more interested in a solution that work at 99%, now, than a solution that work 100% in the far future, maybe.
Pirates are motivated by greed. So they respond to monetary incentives, costs, risks. Arming the vessels traveling the waters near them simply rise the costs and the risks for them. This, alone, reduce the profitability of the enterprise and deter many of them. If we raise the costs and reduce the profitability of the enterprise, they could simply switch to other jobs.
You could say they could raise the threat, but their funds are limited and if the become too big, they become easier to target for the military Navies. Pirates, just now, operates from mother-ships, not directly from the coast.
When comparing terrorists with pirates is a bit disingenuous. Terrorists act for, often misguided, selfless reasons. Anyway, Hafez Assad, President of Syria, when faced with an insurrection of Islamic fundamentalists in the city of Hama, sieged the city with his tanks and killed all. He let Allah sort them out. He had no other problems for twenty years and counting.
Anyone think about using the big laser Wicked laser sell as a makeshift weapon for self defence. The beam is enough to blind and burn eyes, flesh, paper, plastic. Don't know the range, but 1 W laser could be enough.
It appear that law abiding gun owner could not approach the event and the particular corner of street. I bet he would not shoot so many shots at a meeting at a shooting range.
Saddam didn't tolerate the group from attacking him. He actively helped them after the first war, as he was weakened and needed them not hostiles to him. How do you think al-Zarkawi arrived in Iraq? He was there after the invasion of Afghanistan to recover from his injuries. Overthrowing the KSA government would be stupid then and now: 1) Saddam left in power would be a huge PITA now, more if the KSA was overthrow by the US. 2) Saddam didn't exported oil then, KSA did so. Invading would disrupt the oil flux for long time. 3) Iraq people are, mind you, much more secular than the KSA people. They are much more diverse, so they have a chance to really become democratic and have a working democracy and a rule of law. 4) Just now, when it is needed, the oil production of Iraq is coming on line in large quantities. This will force the KSA to keep the production up and the prices down. Their margin will be less and they will earn less money. Less money for them, less money for the jihadists. 5) A working Iraq is a huge PITA for both KSA and IRI (and probably Syria and Turkey, also). Iran people resent that their filthy Arab neighbors have a democracy when they are forced under a theocracy. Unable to destroy the democracy next door, Iran and KAS will start to feel the internal pressure from their people. 6) Killing scores of jihadists and criminals in combat help much to build a society will less crime and more peaceful. true in Iraq, in Iran and in KSA. 7) The US is not the only actor to spend huge sums of money in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its enemies do the same, even if they are much poorer. They money they spend there (and the men and the time and the other resources) can not be spent in other places and in other plans.
Must have something to do with a few airplanes flying inside the WTC and the Pentagon. Not mentioning the attacks in the 1990-2000, the killing of kurds and shiite, the invasion of Kuwait, etc.
Dell'Utri, an italian Senator accused to be linked to the Mafia and ex-collaborator of Silvio Berlusconi before both entered in politics, defined "heroic" not Mangano but what he did.
The episode is this: mangano refused to testimony against Dell'Utri, when the prosecutors of the process against Dell'Utri asked him to tell them something, anything, against Dell'Utri. True or false would not be really important, but if he said something, they would let him out of jail and return to his family home. Mangano was in jail for many years and at the time and he was very ill; pratically he had to choose to die in jail or die at home with his family.
Dell'Utri, when informed of the episode, told that if he was in the place of Mangano he would had a very difficult time to refuse the same offer, so he considered the act "heroic". He always were clear that he don't consider Mangano a hero or an example for other to follow. Only his decision, near the end of his life. Mangano, for a man of the Mafia, had a twisted sense of honor.
Many others Mafia components, after the arrest, have "collaborated" with the prosecutors and testimonied in before the judges. But the quality of their testimonies is very low. For example, the last boss heard in front of the judges (after an year of "collaborations" and "revelations" to the prosecutors) was so embarassing that not even the leftist tried to spin his accuses against Berlusconi and Dell'Utri. Another example is the trial against Andreotti. They accused him of many things. Unfortunately for them, Andreotti (a major politicians in the history of Italy) kept a detailed log of all his movements, appointments, holidays, name it. He destroyed them completely.
If you think all these "collaborators" were found guilty of perjury and sentenced, you are wrong. If you think all of them losen their advantages, you are wrong.
In Italy, too many prosecutors are from the same law school of mr. Nifong. They are political activists in the judicial.
Here the Italian Ministerial Program for the Lower Middle School (kids 11-13 years old)
http://www.aetnanet.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=118#SCIENZE%20MATEMATICHE,%20CHIMICHE,%20FISICHE%20E%20NATURALI
Here what they teach at "Liceo Scientifico"
If you translate this from Italian with Google, you could find what the teachers are required to teach and the pupils to learn.
If you look further, you could find the actual problems given as tests to the pupils at the final exams for graduation:
http://www.liceocastiglione.it/esami_di_stato.htm (here the problems for the pupils from the "Liceo Scientifico" of all Italy in 2009 -2008 -2007 (pupils 19 years old)
Here the problems for the final graduation exams from Technical Schools (Electronics and Systems) and proposed solutions
http://web.tiscali.it/i2viu/esami/svolti.htm
The final exams in Italy are called "Esame di MaturitÃ", the problems are the same for all Italy classes, for all schools. They are different only for different specializations.
The texts of the exams are delivered in the same day, at the same hour, to all the school of Italy by the Police (depending directly from the Government) just before the exam. And if the student cheat they seriously risk to repeat all the exams the next year.
Not exactly bubble-box exams.
This feature is not unique of English. Italian, too, is able to incorporate foreign words with ease.
The main problem with English is that how you read a word is not always as it is wroten.
Italian, for his complexity, have the advantage to be written exactly as is spoken.
The abused car methaphor would be:
"Have I the right to build spare parts for my car if the builder(s) of the cars refuse to build and sell spare parts for my car?"
College education could be less costly in Europe or free. But free is not costless.
Take Italy.
Universities are payed in little part by student fees, they are subsided by the state (they are public universities). What did happen?
Slowly, in a few decades, the tenures were taken by the friends of the most powerful professors, the family members and their paramours.
People becoming tenured with ZERO citations, publications, books, etc. People winning because other 25 candidates retire themselves.
http://informazionesenzafiltro.blogspot.com/2008/10/universit-malata-la-denuncia-di-roberto.html
In italian sorry.
I translate a part for you:
"The data of Bankitalia [Italy Central Bank] show that in the South (where the phenomenon is more visible) from the richier 20% of the society come the 28% of the students and from the poorer 20% only the 4%. One seventh. In America, where the university is paid by the students, the poor that go to the university are 13%. Why? Because, over the demagogery, show the author, the italian university is Âa reversed Robin Hood, where the taxes of all, poors included, finance the free courses of the richer".
How many bhuddists are there in the wester India (now Pakistan) and Afghanistan?
None, because they was exterminate by the muslims conquerors.
Hindus were a bit more militaristic than bhuddists and resisted the extermination.
The attacks of 11 September 2001 were not criminal acts, they were war actions. al-Qaeda declared war on the USoA. That people not noticed this could be excusable before 9/11 but not much. The Daar-el Salaam bombing and the attack to the Cole were other war action and the declaration was public before them.
What is different is that al-Qaeda is not a state, but state only wars is an european/western thing and it is so only from the Peace of Westphalia.
A normal criminal act don't have political aims, so the 9/11 is not a normal criminal act. That terrorism is treated like a criminal act is only because it is convenient to do so for the people attacked, not because terrorism is not an act of war.
The big error of the current POTUS is that didn't ask for a formal declaration of war against al Qaeda and its allies.
The war in Afghanistan was right, because the people that harbor and protect and help your enemies in a war against you are your enemies too.
The USoA asked for bin Laden and al Qaeda to the talibans, they declined, and war followed.
Without war, al Qaeda would have continued to attack the USoA and the western world (and others) from a safe heaven in Afghanistan.
Now they are confined inside the Pakistan's trial areas (and try to attack from there Afghanistan). The USoA don't invade Pakistan because it's government is not supporting the talibans and combat them.
What you are not understanding is that the people in control in Iran give a rat ass about how much their people live and how well they are. This is the essence of a tirannical government. They are (first) interested to keep their power, (second) interested in extending their power.
What the means will be is uninteresting for them, until their goals are met.
So, thet theroized that if they lose half of their population, but are able to destroy Israel, this would be a price they could afford to pay.
USA and URSS never contemplated an attack that resulted in half (or more) their population destroyed. Iran regime could, because their religion and way of thinking justify this behaviuor.
They, for sure, don't want suffer this type of punishment for nothing. But they are willing to pay (or let their population to pay for them) if their ideologic / religious goal are met or are probable to met.
Or Ted Bundy, Jeffry Dahmer, Hitler and so on.
We are near to know the genetics of many human traits. Good and bad traits.
Why give priority to the embryos with more good traits and less bad traits?
Because they probably will be able to care for themselves and care for others and not to be a burden for the others.
Shit happens also to the people with good traits (like finding a muslim with a caterpillar on your way). So they also need help sometimes.
the increase from.005% to.0057% is around 14%.
It gone up from 50/1 million to 57/1 million (every year).
This imply that now there is the 99,36% to not be killed during a 64 year life, against a 99,63% in the 1960. So the chance to be killed during 64 year is doubled (from 0.37% to 0.64%). And there is more people too. So the sheer number of homicide is bigger.
My argument is that the parents (mainly the mother) have the rights to choose what give birth to.
The burden to raise the children is their, not of anyone else. So they have the right/duty to decide who they will bring to life.
And until the unborn is in the womb they have the right to sever any connection they have with it.
When the newborn is born, they have the right to leave him/her anytime. The only obligation I would impose on the mother and father is to leave him/her where someone else interested is able to take him/her and take care of him/her.
Abortion bring its own penalty: one less descendant able to continue the family line.
I think it is a strong penalty.
Well. the "Oppressive so called Democratic puppet Regime of Democracy 1" don't put people in shredders like the "Oppressive Bad Guy1". The mortality under the "Bad Guy 1" regime was the same of the current regime.
But so called Democratics or Liberals never complained too much loudly when the "Bad Guy 1" in charge of Iraq killed his people. But they complain so loudly when the killing is done by people not from the government and the government and its allies kill the killers.
Place like England?
Their homicide rate growth in the last 15 years (when they cracked down on legal gun owners) and the gun related homicides growth also.
Right on the target. And unions too. In a fascist (or communist) regime you have groups deciding for the people.
Fascism is not "big businness rule", is "big state rule all".
State organize the life of the people, decide their jobs, their vacations, their interests.
All of this for the "gretater good of the community".
For sure, if a bigoted uneducated white trash write the same nonsense about you and city dwellers I would suppose you would call it "racist", "fascist", "nazi",...
To argue to prevent people from vote and raise their own children is something even the most far-right party in Europe would not touch with a ten-feet pole.
But, for your information, nazist and fascist parties are leftist parties as their political programs are/were socialist (state eugenetics was practiced in the Roosevelt USA, in socialist Sweden, and in many other leftist leaning countries) . It is not a surprise that liberals have the same inclinations.
They kill any public homosexual they find; so it is probably true.
To compensate, they have many pedophiles that are able to marry and fuck little girls aged six (with father assent) or nine (without father assent). Recently they raised the aged to consent to thirteen.
They have many cases of Imams in madrases that molest male children (try suing them).
How many atheists liberals molester are out there?
Do enough to form a public association?
Slashdot Mirror
If she feel indebted to the UK, she could compute how much the UK welfare state gave her, plus interests, and give the money directly to the government.
Nothing prevent her from doing so.
Maybe we are talking of different things.
The solution of this problem, in my eyes, is not forever.
I know, perfectly, that there would be always the possibility of new pirates, even if we kill all of the pirates today.
But I'm more interested in a solution that work at 99%, now, than a solution that work 100% in the far future, maybe.
Pirates are motivated by greed. So they respond to monetary incentives, costs, risks. Arming the vessels traveling the waters near them simply rise the costs and the risks for them. This, alone, reduce the profitability of the enterprise and deter many of them.
If we raise the costs and reduce the profitability of the enterprise, they could simply switch to other jobs.
You could say they could raise the threat, but their funds are limited and if the become too big, they become easier to target for the military Navies. Pirates, just now, operates from mother-ships, not directly from the coast.
When comparing terrorists with pirates is a bit disingenuous. Terrorists act for, often misguided, selfless reasons.
Anyway, Hafez Assad, President of Syria, when faced with an insurrection of Islamic fundamentalists in the city of Hama, sieged the city with his tanks and killed all. He let Allah sort them out.
He had no other problems for twenty years and counting.
Anyone think about using the big laser Wicked laser sell as a makeshift weapon for self defence.
The beam is enough to blind and burn eyes, flesh, paper, plastic.
Don't know the range, but 1 W laser could be enough.
"it might cause the pirates to become more desperate and violent".
It doesn't matter if they are dead
Anyway, resistance is not futile, because they could think that an honest job could pay better and be less risky.
It appear that law abiding gun owner could not approach the event and the particular corner of street.
I bet he would not shoot so many shots at a meeting at a shooting range.
Saddam didn't tolerate the group from attacking him.
He actively helped them after the first war, as he was weakened and needed them not hostiles to him.
How do you think al-Zarkawi arrived in Iraq? He was there after the invasion of Afghanistan to recover from his injuries.
Overthrowing the KSA government would be stupid then and now:
1) Saddam left in power would be a huge PITA now, more if the KSA was overthrow by the US.
2) Saddam didn't exported oil then, KSA did so. Invading would disrupt the oil flux for long time.
3) Iraq people are, mind you, much more secular than the KSA people. They are much more diverse, so they have a chance to really become democratic and have a working democracy and a rule of law.
4) Just now, when it is needed, the oil production of Iraq is coming on line in large quantities. This will force the KSA to keep the production up and the prices down. Their margin will be less and they will earn less money. Less money for them, less money for the jihadists.
5) A working Iraq is a huge PITA for both KSA and IRI (and probably Syria and Turkey, also).
Iran people resent that their filthy Arab neighbors have a democracy when they are forced under a theocracy. Unable to destroy the democracy next door, Iran and KAS will start to feel the internal pressure from their people.
6) Killing scores of jihadists and criminals in combat help much to build a society will less crime and more peaceful. true in Iraq, in Iran and in KSA.
7) The US is not the only actor to spend huge sums of money in Iraq and Afghanistan. Its enemies do the same, even if they are much poorer. They money they spend there (and the men and the time and the other resources) can not be spent in other places and in other plans.
Must have something to do with a few airplanes flying inside the WTC and the Pentagon.
Not mentioning the attacks in the 1990-2000, the killing of kurds and shiite, the invasion of Kuwait, etc.
Dell'Utri, an italian Senator accused to be linked to the Mafia and ex-collaborator of Silvio Berlusconi before both entered in politics, defined "heroic" not Mangano but what he did.
The episode is this: mangano refused to testimony against Dell'Utri, when the prosecutors of the process against Dell'Utri asked him to tell them something, anything, against Dell'Utri. True or false would not be really important, but if he said something, they would let him out of jail and return to his family home. Mangano was in jail for many years and at the time and he was very ill; pratically he had to choose to die in jail or die at home with his family.
Dell'Utri, when informed of the episode, told that if he was in the place of Mangano he would had a very difficult time to refuse the same offer, so he considered the act "heroic". He always were clear that he don't consider Mangano a hero or an example for other to follow. Only his decision, near the end of his life. Mangano, for a man of the Mafia, had a twisted sense of honor.
Many others Mafia components, after the arrest, have "collaborated" with the prosecutors and testimonied in before the judges. But the quality of their testimonies is very low. For example, the last boss heard in front of the judges (after an year of "collaborations" and "revelations" to the prosecutors) was so embarassing that not even the leftist tried to spin his accuses against Berlusconi and Dell'Utri. Another example is the trial against Andreotti. They accused him of many things. Unfortunately for them, Andreotti (a major politicians in the history of Italy) kept a detailed log of all his movements, appointments, holidays, name it. He destroyed them completely.
If you think all these "collaborators" were found guilty of perjury and sentenced, you are wrong.
If you think all of them losen their advantages, you are wrong.
In Italy, too many prosecutors are from the same law school of mr. Nifong.
They are political activists in the judicial.
The real motive to have more days of schools is to have a reason to hire more teachers.
Here the Italian Ministerial Program for the Lower Middle School (kids 11-13 years old) http://www.aetnanet.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=118#SCIENZE%20MATEMATICHE,%20CHIMICHE,%20FISICHE%20E%20NATURALI Here what they teach at "Liceo Scientifico" If you translate this from Italian with Google, you could find what the teachers are required to teach and the pupils to learn. If you look further, you could find the actual problems given as tests to the pupils at the final exams for graduation: http://www.liceocastiglione.it/esami_di_stato.htm (here the problems for the pupils from the "Liceo Scientifico" of all Italy in 2009 -2008 -2007 (pupils 19 years old) Here the problems for the final graduation exams from Technical Schools (Electronics and Systems) and proposed solutions http://web.tiscali.it/i2viu/esami/svolti.htm The final exams in Italy are called "Esame di MaturitÃ", the problems are the same for all Italy classes, for all schools. They are different only for different specializations. The texts of the exams are delivered in the same day, at the same hour, to all the school of Italy by the Police (depending directly from the Government) just before the exam. And if the student cheat they seriously risk to repeat all the exams the next year. Not exactly bubble-box exams.
This feature is not unique of English. Italian, too, is able to incorporate foreign words with ease. The main problem with English is that how you read a word is not always as it is wroten. Italian, for his complexity, have the advantage to be written exactly as is spoken.
The abused car methaphor would be: "Have I the right to build spare parts for my car if the builder(s) of the cars refuse to build and sell spare parts for my car?"
College education could be less costly in Europe or free. But free is not costless. Take Italy. Universities are payed in little part by student fees, they are subsided by the state (they are public universities). What did happen? Slowly, in a few decades, the tenures were taken by the friends of the most powerful professors, the family members and their paramours. People becoming tenured with ZERO citations, publications, books, etc. People winning because other 25 candidates retire themselves. http://informazionesenzafiltro.blogspot.com/2008/10/universit-malata-la-denuncia-di-roberto.html In italian sorry. I translate a part for you: "The data of Bankitalia [Italy Central Bank] show that in the South (where the phenomenon is more visible) from the richier 20% of the society come the 28% of the students and from the poorer 20% only the 4%. One seventh. In America, where the university is paid by the students, the poor that go to the university are 13%. Why? Because, over the demagogery, show the author, the italian university is Âa reversed Robin Hood, where the taxes of all, poors included, finance the free courses of the richer".
How many bhuddists are there in the wester India (now Pakistan) and Afghanistan? None, because they was exterminate by the muslims conquerors. Hindus were a bit more militaristic than bhuddists and resisted the extermination.
The attacks of 11 September 2001 were not criminal acts, they were war actions. al-Qaeda declared war on the USoA. That people not noticed this could be excusable before 9/11 but not much. The Daar-el Salaam bombing and the attack to the Cole were other war action and the declaration was public before them. What is different is that al-Qaeda is not a state, but state only wars is an european/western thing and it is so only from the Peace of Westphalia. A normal criminal act don't have political aims, so the 9/11 is not a normal criminal act. That terrorism is treated like a criminal act is only because it is convenient to do so for the people attacked, not because terrorism is not an act of war. The big error of the current POTUS is that didn't ask for a formal declaration of war against al Qaeda and its allies. The war in Afghanistan was right, because the people that harbor and protect and help your enemies in a war against you are your enemies too. The USoA asked for bin Laden and al Qaeda to the talibans, they declined, and war followed. Without war, al Qaeda would have continued to attack the USoA and the western world (and others) from a safe heaven in Afghanistan. Now they are confined inside the Pakistan's trial areas (and try to attack from there Afghanistan). The USoA don't invade Pakistan because it's government is not supporting the talibans and combat them.
What you are not understanding is that the people in control in Iran give a rat ass about how much their people live and how well they are. This is the essence of a tirannical government. They are (first) interested to keep their power, (second) interested in extending their power. What the means will be is uninteresting for them, until their goals are met. So, thet theroized that if they lose half of their population, but are able to destroy Israel, this would be a price they could afford to pay. USA and URSS never contemplated an attack that resulted in half (or more) their population destroyed. Iran regime could, because their religion and way of thinking justify this behaviuor. They, for sure, don't want suffer this type of punishment for nothing. But they are willing to pay (or let their population to pay for them) if their ideologic / religious goal are met or are probable to met.
Or Ted Bundy, Jeffry Dahmer, Hitler and so on. We are near to know the genetics of many human traits. Good and bad traits. Why give priority to the embryos with more good traits and less bad traits? Because they probably will be able to care for themselves and care for others and not to be a burden for the others. Shit happens also to the people with good traits (like finding a muslim with a caterpillar on your way). So they also need help sometimes.
the increase from .005% to .0057% is around 14%.
It gone up from 50/1 million to 57/1 million (every year).
This imply that now there is the 99,36% to not be killed during a 64 year life, against a 99,63% in the 1960. So the chance to be killed during 64 year is doubled (from 0.37% to 0.64%). And there is more people too. So the sheer number of homicide is bigger.
My argument is that the parents (mainly the mother) have the rights to choose what give birth to. The burden to raise the children is their, not of anyone else. So they have the right/duty to decide who they will bring to life. And until the unborn is in the womb they have the right to sever any connection they have with it. When the newborn is born, they have the right to leave him/her anytime. The only obligation I would impose on the mother and father is to leave him/her where someone else interested is able to take him/her and take care of him/her. Abortion bring its own penalty: one less descendant able to continue the family line. I think it is a strong penalty.
Well. the "Oppressive so called Democratic puppet Regime of Democracy 1" don't put people in shredders like the "Oppressive Bad Guy1". The mortality under the "Bad Guy 1" regime was the same of the current regime. But so called Democratics or Liberals never complained too much loudly when the "Bad Guy 1" in charge of Iraq killed his people. But they complain so loudly when the killing is done by people not from the government and the government and its allies kill the killers.
Place like England? Their homicide rate growth in the last 15 years (when they cracked down on legal gun owners) and the gun related homicides growth also.
Right on the target. And unions too. In a fascist (or communist) regime you have groups deciding for the people. Fascism is not "big businness rule", is "big state rule all". State organize the life of the people, decide their jobs, their vacations, their interests. All of this for the "gretater good of the community".
For sure, if a bigoted uneducated white trash write the same nonsense about you and city dwellers I would suppose you would call it "racist", "fascist", "nazi",... To argue to prevent people from vote and raise their own children is something even the most far-right party in Europe would not touch with a ten-feet pole. But, for your information, nazist and fascist parties are leftist parties as their political programs are/were socialist (state eugenetics was practiced in the Roosevelt USA, in socialist Sweden, and in many other leftist leaning countries) . It is not a surprise that liberals have the same inclinations.
They kill any public homosexual they find; so it is probably true. To compensate, they have many pedophiles that are able to marry and fuck little girls aged six (with father assent) or nine (without father assent). Recently they raised the aged to consent to thirteen. They have many cases of Imams in madrases that molest male children (try suing them). How many atheists liberals molester are out there? Do enough to form a public association?