They never made the offer to the poor communities around here.
And this surprises you why exactly???
I mean, how many people in a poor neighborhood are going to be able to afford an extra $70/mo when they're already having problems affording the actual basic necessities in life, you know...food, shelter, etc....?
...if they'd target a couple of the most disruptive sites out there...Facebook and Twitter.
I'd just love to see the panic on peoples' faces, especially the most recent generation which doesn't seem to know how to carry on a real live, meatspace interaction without it.....
Hell, turn them off for maybe a couple of weeks and give everyone a break.
It would be amazing to see what actually gets done during that outtage......
I think the US should seriously limit what China or Chinese interests can buy in the US, at least until THEIR markets are as open to the US to purchase so we can buy companies and such over there just as easily....
Excuse me if I don't hold my breath till that one comes to fruition.....
Even if Trump could throw a magic switch and have Apple decide in Februrary 2017 to produce all of the iPhones in the US, have you given any thought to how long it would take to tool up something like an iPhone factory in the US? Foxconn has literally thousands of engineers just to design the production process and around 1 million employees. I'm sure you're thinking, "Great! That's a million new jobs for the US." How long will it take to interview and hire a million people? How long will it take to design the assembly lines? How long would it take to build a factory where those people work? You're probably thinking that we could use all of those closed factories all around the country, but I think most of those probably had a few thousand workers, so you'd probably need around a hundred of those. That's not great for scaling to the production volume of the iPhones. You're probably looking at 5-10 years before something like this is even possible. All in all, getting Apple to make the iPhones in the US makes a great sound byte, but 5-10 years is not a practical timeframe for a competitive market segment
I can't tell what was in the mind of the Founding Fathers when they set up the electoral vote system, but I would be surprised if they intended this to happen. Generally, elections are intended to determine the winner based on the number of votes for each candidate.
Do a little digging on your US civics my friend.
This is EXACTLY the type of thing it was set up for.
This is to help keeps the states on a more equal footing. The country is set up, where you are a citizen of your state FIRST, and then you are a citizen of the United States. The vote is based on the voting of the states....this is to keep from having 2-3 super populous states dictate the leader for the whole country all the time. The states have such diverse needs based on population type, climate, etc....so the EC was set up to help keep things a bit more set so that each state was somewhat proportionally represented...
I would posit that some tweaking to the EC would be made to have each states' EC votes be proportional to the votes within each state, rather than winner take all.
But that change would be up to each individual state. I think it would be a GOOD change and force candidates to spend more time in each state more than they do and not take states for granted.
But this is just another part in the US set up...balancing the rights of states as equals, but also some nod to population within states.
NYC has needs vastly different than a city in Wyoming....but the state of NY is no more important than WY..and therefore mechanisms need be in place to make sure voices are heard and have same impact from all states.
Why are your states more important than the whole of the nation?
You need to read up on US civics a bit then.
The US was set up as a union of individual states...in the US constitutionally, MOST power is supposed to reside in the states. The US constitution does not grant rights, instead, it is there to enumerate a very few rights and power the Federal govt has. Over the years, the fed has grown more powerful than it was intended, many of us want to rein that back in.
But they way it was set up, you are a citizen of your state first, and THEN a citizen of the United States.
The closest analogy might be the European Union.....they actually in ways mimic what the US did. Think of the individual states as small countries unto themselves, and the Federal govt is one way to regulate the relationships between them and as a singular front to dealing with the rest of the world.
Its actually kind of interesting. Back in the day, there was huge rivalry between states....even today, when you meet someone, you will often ask where they are from. If from a different state, that's kind of a big deal, you know they have started life out in a bit different culture than you did.
The electoral college is there for a reason and serves a purpose.
Could it be tweaked? Sure, I would like to see all the states' electoral votes be proportioned to the candidates by the popular vote within each state.
But really it is there for a REASON. You are a citizen of your state first, and then a citizen of the United States.
The voting set up in the college, gives more equal proportional voice to all states based on population. If this were only the popular vote nationally, we'd forever have policy and presidents dictated based on 3 or so states, most on either coast with more extreme views and vast different needs from those other states between them.
The states are the unit of power in the US. A citizen in Maine has vastly different needs often, than someone in Wyoming, than in Louisiana, than northern NY.
Each of these states needs to have voice...hell, even with the electoral college, you have a lot of fly over states. It was shown last night, that maybe politicians should NOT take some of these states for granted (Hello W, where Hillary never set foot again during general election).
But like I said, I do with it wasn't winner take all in each state for their electoral votes. HOWEVER, that decision is up to the states themselves.
It is great that most power does reside in each state to make decisions just like this. The state is more answerable to its own citizens, and one size Federal does not fit all.
The nice thing with such difference in the states is, if you don't like the laws and culture of one state, you are free to move to another state that more fits your views and lifestyle.
I don't like that potentially voters in the Electoral College could vote how they want instead of how their state laws say....but again, I like the principal of the EC, maybe just tweak the rules a little.
Hey, he's president, at worst, you should hope he can do something.
Frankly, I have no problem with the US giving breaks and incentives to stay in the US, employ US citizens...and penalize those that leave and ship jobs overseas.
I do blame the electoral college, it's a stupid waste,
No it isn't. You need to brush up on your civics.
You are a citizen of your STATE and then, you are a citizen of the United States, that's how things were set up. It make sense, is that each STATE is equal here in this union. It shows now,more than ever, that there should be NO states that are taken for granted, or be a "fly over" state.
Each state has citizens that have varied interests and need to have equal chance to have voice in how they are addressed.
People in Southern FL have vastly different interests than those in Wyoming,, a small down in Nevada has different ones than New York City...but neither is more important than the other in this union.
That's why the electoral college *IS* and remains important, so that one populous area doesn't dictate the way the whole country is run. It is the same reason we have the house of representatives...it was a compromise with the states all having equal representation in the Senate, but a bit more varied representation in congress based on population.
There's a reason it is there and it needs to stay.
I don't have a problem with tweaking it...I'd say that having a states votes be allocated proportionally based on the popular vote of that state would likely be a good thing, but that is up to the states individually to decide.
And...the nice thing is, since it is a states right (as most things should be in the US), you can vote and have your state be more representative to your needs....or you can move to a state where laws and the people are more to your liking.
I just do not have that much sympathy for someone that is stupid enough to just believe anything they hear without looking it up or in this case, making a simple call to Secretary of the State they live in....geez.
For 99% of US citizens in 99% of their normal daily lives, they would see NO benefit with upheaving their lives by going metric. It would cause a lot of grief and be a major PITA for years till you finally had a generation of kids that grew up with it. It frankly isn't worth it.
Getting rid of the daylight time changes, however, would have immediate effect, especially health effects on most all of the US population.
But with metric, not so much, I mean....99% of the US citizenry rarely if ever has interaction with anyone in any other nation where this would help or be noticeable. Most US citizens could go through life and never need to touch the metric system for their normal daily life needs.
BUT....everyone please remember, with the expected high voter turnouts this year, in order to endure everyone can cast their votes, THS year, we are having the Republicans vote today, and tomorrow is reserved for the Democrats to cast their ballots.
This is the best way to keep things fair, and ensure everyone gets to vote and have their vote counted.
You are scum. This is not a joking matter.
Lighten up Francis....
Geez, if you're stupid enough to believe a joke like this, you kinda deserve what you get.
Now, here is the better question, if those people are working and contributing to society and have been doing so for a long time, why shouldn't they have a say in things?
Simple, because there are NOT FUCKING CITIZENS!!
Geez, how hard is that to get?
They came here illegally....they are disqualified from voting and they have started out their journey on US soil by committing a crime. If you don't like that, change the laws, but you can't change the fact that they are here by breaking immigration laws.
Ok..so, you say anyone here in the US during elections should be able to vote? Ok..are there other countries in the world that are so haphazard with their election laws?
By your logic, you'd be cool with other countries sending floods of folks here to try to sway elections. How about lots of Russians flooding in close swing states...they come here, overstay their visa...and keep doing this with more and more people coming over during the 4 years between elections and then they all get to vote and sway our elections based on what their mother country wants.
Far fetched? It could happen.
Ok, how long do you think you should have if you are in the US illegally before you can vote. 1 year? 5 years? 10 years? If you are here illegally, how can you prove it?
Those documents to prove how long you are here could easily be forged....
Again..there are rules and laws on the books. If you don't like them, vote to get representative that will change them, get involved...promote your cause.
But we can just ignore things we don't like, or it falls into anarchy.
And other external countries to the US do NOT have our best interest in mind, they have their best interest. That's what a countries government is supposed to do.
So, look. I don't think hardly anyone has a problem with immigrants. Legal immigrants.
Yes, come to the US...just sign the fucking guest book on the way in....
And one last hint..if you want to come here, be a citizen and contribute...quit waving other countries' flags when you're on TV protesting. It doesn't help your cause much.
If you wanted things like they were in your home country..stay there.
Well, by the logic being put forth here....should I be able to have litigation against me if I physically nail notices of house for sale around my neighborhood (which is predominately lighter in skin tone), and I don't at the same time, nail up notices of the same house for sale in the other neighborhoods around the city that are occupied by predominately darker skin tone folks?
I mean, this is about the same thing here with Facebook.
A better question - what is this "Facebook of Spreading Fake Stories" that BO is criticizing?
I dunno.
BUT....everyone please remember, with the expected high voter turnouts this year, in order to endure everyone can cast their votes, THS year, we are having the Republicans vote today, and tomorrow is reserved for the Democrats to cast their ballots.
This is the best way to keep things fair, and ensure everyone gets to vote and have their vote counted.
Can you cancel online without having to speak/chat with a rep?
If they're smart and have set this up like SlingTV and Playstation VUE, then you should be able to sign up, upgrade, degrade or cancel online without having to talk to a rep.
I'm anxious to see what the DirectTV Now offers.
My "cut the cord" set up currently is with Playstation VUE over Amazon FireTV box....combined with a Tivo Roamia OTA unit and Tivo minis for the bedrooms and office....
I like the VUE option over SlingTV to date...for $35/mo has all the "cable channels" I'd miss from regular cable tv...TCM, FX, FXX...new channels (MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, etc), and it does have a decent DVR capability for these channels too!!
But then nice thing about this...is so far, none of them require any contract...month to month, so if I like DirectTV Now...I can switch, etc.
I'll be anxious to see what they offer.
One thing, however...I'd caution against using any "stick" for these services. I found with VUE..the guide section, it would not work smoothly on a PS3...or old Roku 3...I had to get the latest Amazon Fire TV to have it work smoothly. I believe the Roku 4 should work the same, but the sticks just can't handle the processing in many cases...just like the older full sized units I listed.
Of course, a complete Universal Basic Income will take a loooong time. But there's already many country on the world that give some sort of basic income for people that don't/can't work.
Ok, ignoring the aversion I have to paying someone who does nothing to earn it......let me ask the question, "How do we fund and pay for a UBI?"
I mean, even if you immediately garnished all the money the top 1% has....it wouldn't fund UBI for any length of time for the US, and once that money was gone, then what?
If it is funded by taxes....well, you get UBI and then you spend it back on taxes to get a UBI check...etc.
I just don't understand how a UBI system would be paid for....it just doesn't make sense to me.
Slashdot Mirror
If they could make one with this performance, and in the ballpark range of a Vette, man..I'd be in the market for that immediatly.
Sadly, she didn't age very well.....I guess crazy will do that to a face and body....
And this surprises you why exactly???
I mean, how many people in a poor neighborhood are going to be able to afford an extra $70/mo when they're already having problems affording the actual basic necessities in life, you know...food, shelter, etc....?
And, here's your participation trophy...
I'd just love to see the panic on peoples' faces, especially the most recent generation which doesn't seem to know how to carry on a real live, meatspace interaction without it.....
Hell, turn them off for maybe a couple of weeks and give everyone a break.
It would be amazing to see what actually gets done during that outtage......
Excuse me if I don't hold my breath till that one comes to fruition.....
Bye Bye Shazam.....deleting NOW.....
Hey...you gotta start somewhere.....
Do a little digging on your US civics my friend.
This is EXACTLY the type of thing it was set up for.
This is to help keeps the states on a more equal footing. The country is set up, where you are a citizen of your state FIRST, and then you are a citizen of the United States. The vote is based on the voting of the states....this is to keep from having 2-3 super populous states dictate the leader for the whole country all the time. The states have such diverse needs based on population type, climate, etc....so the EC was set up to help keep things a bit more set so that each state was somewhat proportionally represented...
I would posit that some tweaking to the EC would be made to have each states' EC votes be proportional to the votes within each state, rather than winner take all.
But that change would be up to each individual state. I think it would be a GOOD change and force candidates to spend more time in each state more than they do and not take states for granted.
But this is just another part in the US set up...balancing the rights of states as equals, but also some nod to population within states.
NYC has needs vastly different than a city in Wyoming....but the state of NY is no more important than WY..and therefore mechanisms need be in place to make sure voices are heard and have same impact from all states.
HTH....
I agree....
I was reading this headline and thought to myself "Hey, this Trump election already has maybe one good thing result from it so far...
Wait..you can GET LAID doing this somehow?!?!
Shit...if that's the case, I might need to dig out an old flannel shirt and torn jeans and make my out onto the streets for a while tonight....
I didn't vote for Hillary, but I do like getting laid...hehehe.
You need to read up on US civics a bit then.
The US was set up as a union of individual states...in the US constitutionally, MOST power is supposed to reside in the states. The US constitution does not grant rights, instead, it is there to enumerate a very few rights and power the Federal govt has. Over the years, the fed has grown more powerful than it was intended, many of us want to rein that back in.
But they way it was set up, you are a citizen of your state first, and THEN a citizen of the United States.
The closest analogy might be the European Union.....they actually in ways mimic what the US did. Think of the individual states as small countries unto themselves, and the Federal govt is one way to regulate the relationships between them and as a singular front to dealing with the rest of the world.
Its actually kind of interesting. Back in the day, there was huge rivalry between states....even today, when you meet someone, you will often ask where they are from. If from a different state, that's kind of a big deal, you know they have started life out in a bit different culture than you did.
The electoral college is there for a reason and serves a purpose.
Could it be tweaked? Sure, I would like to see all the states' electoral votes be proportioned to the candidates by the popular vote within each state.
But really it is there for a REASON. You are a citizen of your state first, and then a citizen of the United States.
The voting set up in the college, gives more equal proportional voice to all states based on population. If this were only the popular vote nationally, we'd forever have policy and presidents dictated based on 3 or so states, most on either coast with more extreme views and vast different needs from those other states between them.
The states are the unit of power in the US. A citizen in Maine has vastly different needs often, than someone in Wyoming, than in Louisiana, than northern NY.
Each of these states needs to have voice...hell, even with the electoral college, you have a lot of fly over states. It was shown last night, that maybe politicians should NOT take some of these states for granted (Hello W, where Hillary never set foot again during general election).
But like I said, I do with it wasn't winner take all in each state for their electoral votes. HOWEVER, that decision is up to the states themselves.
It is great that most power does reside in each state to make decisions just like this. The state is more answerable to its own citizens, and one size Federal does not fit all.
The nice thing with such difference in the states is, if you don't like the laws and culture of one state, you are free to move to another state that more fits your views and lifestyle.
I don't like that potentially voters in the Electoral College could vote how they want instead of how their state laws say....but again, I like the principal of the EC, maybe just tweak the rules a little.
;)
Frankly, I have no problem with the US giving breaks and incentives to stay in the US, employ US citizens...and penalize those that leave and ship jobs overseas.
No it isn't. You need to brush up on your civics.
You are a citizen of your STATE and then, you are a citizen of the United States, that's how things were set up. It make sense, is that each STATE is equal here in this union. It shows now,more than ever, that there should be NO states that are taken for granted, or be a "fly over" state.
Each state has citizens that have varied interests and need to have equal chance to have voice in how they are addressed.
People in Southern FL have vastly different interests than those in Wyoming,, a small down in Nevada has different ones than New York City...but neither is more important than the other in this union.
That's why the electoral college *IS* and remains important, so that one populous area doesn't dictate the way the whole country is run. It is the same reason we have the house of representatives...it was a compromise with the states all having equal representation in the Senate, but a bit more varied representation in congress based on population.
There's a reason it is there and it needs to stay.
I don't have a problem with tweaking it...I'd say that having a states votes be allocated proportionally based on the popular vote of that state would likely be a good thing, but that is up to the states individually to decide.
And...the nice thing is, since it is a states right (as most things should be in the US), you can vote and have your state be more representative to your needs....or you can move to a state where laws and the people are more to your liking.
I just do not have that much sympathy for someone that is stupid enough to just believe anything they hear without looking it up or in this case, making a simple call to Secretary of the State they live in....geez.
No..not really.
For 99% of US citizens in 99% of their normal daily lives, they would see NO benefit with upheaving their lives by going metric. It would cause a lot of grief and be a major PITA for years till you finally had a generation of kids that grew up with it. It frankly isn't worth it.
Getting rid of the daylight time changes, however, would have immediate effect, especially health effects on most all of the US population.
But with metric, not so much, I mean....99% of the US citizenry rarely if ever has interaction with anyone in any other nation where this would help or be noticeable. Most US citizens could go through life and never need to touch the metric system for their normal daily life needs.
Lighten up Francis....
Geez, if you're stupid enough to believe a joke like this, you kinda deserve what you get.
Simple, because there are NOT FUCKING CITIZENS!!
Geez, how hard is that to get?
They came here illegally....they are disqualified from voting and they have started out their journey on US soil by committing a crime. If you don't like that, change the laws, but you can't change the fact that they are here by breaking immigration laws.
Ok..so, you say anyone here in the US during elections should be able to vote? Ok..are there other countries in the world that are so haphazard with their election laws?
By your logic, you'd be cool with other countries sending floods of folks here to try to sway elections. How about lots of Russians flooding in close swing states...they come here, overstay their visa...and keep doing this with more and more people coming over during the 4 years between elections and then they all get to vote and sway our elections based on what their mother country wants.
Far fetched? It could happen.
Ok, how long do you think you should have if you are in the US illegally before you can vote. 1 year? 5 years? 10 years? If you are here illegally, how can you prove it?
Those documents to prove how long you are here could easily be forged....
Again..there are rules and laws on the books. If you don't like them, vote to get representative that will change them, get involved...promote your cause.
But we can just ignore things we don't like, or it falls into anarchy.
And other external countries to the US do NOT have our best interest in mind, they have their best interest. That's what a countries government is supposed to do.
So, look. I don't think hardly anyone has a problem with immigrants. Legal immigrants.
Yes, come to the US...just sign the fucking guest book on the way in....
And one last hint..if you want to come here, be a citizen and contribute...quit waving other countries' flags when you're on TV protesting. It doesn't help your cause much.
If you wanted things like they were in your home country..stay there.
I mean, this is about the same thing here with Facebook.
I dunno.
BUT....everyone please remember, with the expected high voter turnouts this year, in order to endure everyone can cast their votes, THS year, we are having the Republicans vote today, and tomorrow is reserved for the Democrats to cast their ballots.
This is the best way to keep things fair, and ensure everyone gets to vote and have their vote counted.
Well...don't you want the capability to stream 4K off Amazon prime (free), or Netflix (extra fee)?
If they're smart and have set this up like SlingTV and Playstation VUE, then you should be able to sign up, upgrade, degrade or cancel online without having to talk to a rep.
I'm anxious to see what the DirectTV Now offers.
My "cut the cord" set up currently is with Playstation VUE over Amazon FireTV box....combined with a Tivo Roamia OTA unit and Tivo minis for the bedrooms and office....
I like the VUE option over SlingTV to date...for $35/mo has all the "cable channels" I'd miss from regular cable tv...TCM, FX, FXX...new channels (MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, etc), and it does have a decent DVR capability for these channels too!!
But then nice thing about this...is so far, none of them require any contract...month to month, so if I like DirectTV Now...I can switch, etc.
I'll be anxious to see what they offer.
One thing, however...I'd caution against using any "stick" for these services. I found with VUE..the guide section, it would not work smoothly on a PS3...or old Roku 3...I had to get the latest Amazon Fire TV to have it work smoothly. I believe the Roku 4 should work the same, but the sticks just can't handle the processing in many cases...just like the older full sized units I listed.
Ok, ignoring the aversion I have to paying someone who does nothing to earn it......let me ask the question, "How do we fund and pay for a UBI?"
I mean, even if you immediately garnished all the money the top 1% has....it wouldn't fund UBI for any length of time for the US, and once that money was gone, then what?
If it is funded by taxes....well, you get UBI and then you spend it back on taxes to get a UBI check...etc.
I just don't understand how a UBI system would be paid for....it just doesn't make sense to me.