Considering the volatile nature of most pregnant women, in the final trimester in particular, which would you want your woman to have? A big TV, or an assault rifle?
I'd have to choose the assault rifle....if you need to take that hormone spewing bitch coming at you with a knife, down, it would be much more effective than the TV.
Wow...a Sig...likely as not, that will be worth more than the TV...keep it and order another tv!!
If he didn't want the rifle, he could likely resell it and make a profit. Isn't there the old rule, if you receive something in the mail that you didn't order....you can keep it, etc?
Now, if a certain element in a society decides to deliberately destroy those parts of their government dedicated to provide help and assistance in disasters, well, yeah: you're going to be on your own. Doesn't have to be that way of course.
Trust me, if you ever experience a disaster that will involve you dealing with FEMA...you will understand the new meaning pain in the ass....and will begin to wonder which is the worst disaster....the one due to nature...or FEMA.
Oh but wait, this whole "increased taxes are bad for everyone" motif is just a ruse, so you were being hypothetical and not seeking an actual answer that would solve problems.
I wouldn't mind modest tax increases if...
Everyone had to pay them. Even the poorest person out there working can pay at least $1 federal tax. No one working should not pay anything net.
Before raising it...by law, any new revenues can NOT be used for new spending...only to pay things off. And..like any family does that is in fiscal difficulty....CUT SPENDING.
Doing these things first...I'd be cool with modest tax increases.
What does this Bush-bashing have to do with anything? I don't see what point you're trying to make. And just to bring balance: There's flooding in the Northern midwest states right now and Obama's FEMA still hasn't done squat. (In fact he denied the governors' requests for emergency aid.) GOP or DNC; they both suck.
What Katrina illustrated to me first hand, and should have to everyone else by example is...when there is a disaster, you're really left to your own resources to save your own life, and recover afterwards.
Anyone that doesn't have flood insurance post Katrina, in an area that is prone to flooding, is a fool and deserves what they get if they don't have the insurance. Flood insurance is dead cheap, and you cannot be turned down.
Don't depends on anything else to come save you.....not only fiscally...but if you see a big storm coming your way...LEAVE. It isn't that big a deal...leave, think of it as a day or two vacation if it turns out to be a false alert and it doesn't hit you....but you can save your life by acting responsibly.
FEMA? Whew....what a cluster fsck dealing with them is...even on a GOOD day....
These days, I'm going more and more back to trying to do only cash transactions for daily needs (groceries, eat out....etc). I really am not a fan of giving up my purchasing patterns to all these corporations just so they can try to sell me more or sell me crap I don't want or need.
Personally the fact that investment income is taxed at such a lower rate is something the public needs to hear about.
Trouble is..if you start taxing the hell out of investment...that hits all of us 'normal' people in the retirement bank account.....the less tax is one thing that helps and encourages us to save and invest this way for retirement.
Are you going to be able to only target increased investment taxes on those who live on it from being wealthy vs those saving to retire on it...or maybe already ARE retired and living off those investments?
Considering that those investments have taken a huge hit, and are already constricting seniors trying to live off them...taxing them extra is going to squeeze them even harder...what's the remedy to that? How do you propose going after the few super wealthy that can get around taxes this way, without hurting those normal folks that need this investment as a way to save for retirement and try to beat inflation?
Yes, and it's also entirely possible that Mitt Romney will release his tax returns for the last 10 years.
I'd like him to make a deal with Obama..Mitt releases these tax returns....and Obama opens up all his college transcripts/records for his years in school....
All of that should provide some interesting fodder for the press......
I wish the govt...state AND federal, would get out of the marriage business.
What the states and feds should do, is allow for, and enforce across state lines...civil contracts..between two or more of ANY sexual preference, etc. This should be the ONLY legal binding contract there is.
If someone in this relationships also wants the "marriage" moniker on their relationship, let them get a church to do this....but merely having a church blessed marriage, would not hold any legal binding bonds....that is the civil contract part offered by the govt.
Let that civil contract between 2 or more people, take care of all the inheritance, insurance...etc....and that would be the same for any group of people wanting such a legal relationship, and should do away with all this controversy of marriage.
Let's put marriage back in the church where it resides, and out of Govt hands where it causes controversy. The Govt is there to help enforce contracts...let's put the govt back to work doing what it is supposed to do in this case.
You're assuming that the next internet will be created, or even depend, on commercial and government organizations. There are some laws higher than theirs; Sooner or later the cost of producing a device capable of communicating wirelessly in a secure, mobile, and untraceable fashion, will be low enough that individuals can produce it. And then, no amount of government influence will keep private citizens from taking to the skies, quite literally, in pursuit of freedom.
But, what if said govt...decided that this type of thing was 'too dangerous' to have in the hands of the general public, and terrorists could use it.....and made creation, possession and use a criminal offense?
Just before Webvan tanked, they were playing around with a similar concept. In the Webvan system, the lockers were refrigerated, since they were delivering food.
I could just never every get used to having someone else pick out my groceries for me...I wouldn't trust them to pick over the produce to get the best fruits and vegetables (likely, they'd be wanting to pick out the oldest stuff to sell first, eh?)....nor which cuts of meat to get...etc.
I rarely buy any processed, pre-packaged foods.....and I just could not trust an employee to pick out my foods as well and thoughtful as I do for myself.
Besides...how lazy it is it not to go shopping? I mean, it is once a week...look to see what's on special at the various grocery stores in your area, make a list, jump in the car, hit the ones with the sales, etc...back home. How hard is that?
If it costs 20% more to deliver to a residential address, then one strategy brick and mortar retailers can use to save on shipping is to allow people to pick up their shipments at the store. This would have the added benefit of getting more people into the stores.
But it has the rather LARGE disadvantage of them having to charge you tax on the items you'd be ordering and picking up from them.
That's one of the major perks of buying online....no sales tax, and usually free shipping too.
That's exactly what I do. I have a private mailbox that is located inside my local supermarket.
So, yo only get your mail from that box once a week? Most people I know do their grocery shopping once a week....I wouldn't want to wait that long to get my stuff....nor would I like to add an extra trip out, fighting traffic, etc, to run to the grocery store to get my mail.
And as I mentioned in another post on this thread...what about multiple grocery stores? Do you not shop at the store with the best things on sale each week?
The future is probably delivering to your local supermarket.
That's not terribly convenient...why do that?
I mean, I only buy groceries once a week...and then the question...which grocery store? I don't always hit them all. I look at the weekly sales, pick the ones I want, plan my menu, and usually get up early Sat or Sun..drive and hit whatever store(s) I need to....bring everything back home, and do most of my cooking for the week on Sunday afternoons.
Having to work and fit in which store to hit to pick up packages, and waiting for grocery day to get it...or make a special weekday trip out in traffic to get packages...not worth it.
I'll just let them drop it on my doorstep, and get it when I get home from work...
Slashdot Mirror
No, you ASS makes your ass look big....
[laughing to self, while moving on to next girlfriend]
I'd have to choose the assault rifle....if you need to take that hormone spewing bitch coming at you with a knife, down, it would be much more effective than the TV.
YOu gotta plan ahead for these things, you know?
Hey, if the guy doesn't want it....PLEASE...have him send it to mE!!
Well, considering that Slashdot is a US Centric site....deal with it.
If he didn't want the rifle, he could likely resell it and make a profit. Isn't there the old rule, if you receive something in the mail that you didn't order....you can keep it, etc?
They can call themselves what they want...church or not.
I'm just saying the word 'marriage' should be stricken from anything the govt. supports, instills or enforces legally.
Trust me, if you ever experience a disaster that will involve you dealing with FEMA...you will understand the new meaning pain in the ass....and will begin to wonder which is the worst disaster....the one due to nature...or FEMA.
I wouldn't mind modest tax increases if...
Everyone had to pay them. Even the poorest person out there working can pay at least $1 federal tax. No one working should not pay anything net.
Before raising it...by law, any new revenues can NOT be used for new spending...only to pay things off. And..like any family does that is in fiscal difficulty....CUT SPENDING.
Doing these things first...I'd be cool with modest tax increases.
Ahh...the good old days...before all the modern problems started...
So, just quit calling it marriage at all from the govt side....and then, problem solved.
What Katrina illustrated to me first hand, and should have to everyone else by example is...when there is a disaster, you're really left to your own resources to save your own life, and recover afterwards.
Anyone that doesn't have flood insurance post Katrina, in an area that is prone to flooding, is a fool and deserves what they get if they don't have the insurance. Flood insurance is dead cheap, and you cannot be turned down.
Don't depends on anything else to come save you.....not only fiscally...but if you see a big storm coming your way...LEAVE. It isn't that big a deal...leave, think of it as a day or two vacation if it turns out to be a false alert and it doesn't hit you....but you can save your life by acting responsibly.
FEMA? Whew....what a cluster fsck dealing with them is...even on a GOOD day....
Hope they made plenty of fresh salsa for the feast.....
These days, I'm going more and more back to trying to do only cash transactions for daily needs (groceries, eat out....etc). I really am not a fan of giving up my purchasing patterns to all these corporations just so they can try to sell me more or sell me crap I don't want or need.
Trouble is..if you start taxing the hell out of investment...that hits all of us 'normal' people in the retirement bank account.....the less tax is one thing that helps and encourages us to save and invest this way for retirement.
Are you going to be able to only target increased investment taxes on those who live on it from being wealthy vs those saving to retire on it...or maybe already ARE retired and living off those investments?
Considering that those investments have taken a huge hit, and are already constricting seniors trying to live off them...taxing them extra is going to squeeze them even harder...what's the remedy to that? How do you propose going after the few super wealthy that can get around taxes this way, without hurting those normal folks that need this investment as a way to save for retirement and try to beat inflation?
I'd like him to make a deal with Obama..Mitt releases these tax returns....and Obama opens up all his college transcripts/records for his years in school....
All of that should provide some interesting fodder for the press......
What the states and feds should do, is allow for, and enforce across state lines...civil contracts..between two or more of ANY sexual preference, etc. This should be the ONLY legal binding contract there is.
If someone in this relationships also wants the "marriage" moniker on their relationship, let them get a church to do this....but merely having a church blessed marriage, would not hold any legal binding bonds....that is the civil contract part offered by the govt.
Let that civil contract between 2 or more people, take care of all the inheritance, insurance...etc....and that would be the same for any group of people wanting such a legal relationship, and should do away with all this controversy of marriage.
Let's put marriage back in the church where it resides, and out of Govt hands where it causes controversy. The Govt is there to help enforce contracts...let's put the govt back to work doing what it is supposed to do in this case.
Wait....someone else owns the rainwater this man collected from landing on his own rooftop and other property?
Who, pray tell...owns the rain that hits my house??
Can Debian not fit it all on a dual layer DVD?
If you have years of experience....it is pretty easy.
Hell, after I've had a few....is the ONLY time you'll see me paying attention to the speed limit, full stops at intersections....etc.
But, what if said govt...decided that this type of thing was 'too dangerous' to have in the hands of the general public, and terrorists could use it.....and made creation, possession and use a criminal offense?
Well my point is...who CARES if Larry Ellison gets $200 million a year or not?
Shouldn't everyone be more concerned with trying to make more money for themselves?
I could just never every get used to having someone else pick out my groceries for me...I wouldn't trust them to pick over the produce to get the best fruits and vegetables (likely, they'd be wanting to pick out the oldest stuff to sell first, eh?)....nor which cuts of meat to get...etc.
I rarely buy any processed, pre-packaged foods.....and I just could not trust an employee to pick out my foods as well and thoughtful as I do for myself.
Besides...how lazy it is it not to go shopping? I mean, it is once a week...look to see what's on special at the various grocery stores in your area, make a list, jump in the car, hit the ones with the sales, etc...back home. How hard is that?
But it has the rather LARGE disadvantage of them having to charge you tax on the items you'd be ordering and picking up from them.
That's one of the major perks of buying online....no sales tax, and usually free shipping too.
So, yo only get your mail from that box once a week? Most people I know do their grocery shopping once a week....I wouldn't want to wait that long to get my stuff....nor would I like to add an extra trip out, fighting traffic, etc, to run to the grocery store to get my mail.
And as I mentioned in another post on this thread...what about multiple grocery stores? Do you not shop at the store with the best things on sale each week?
That's not terribly convenient...why do that?
I mean, I only buy groceries once a week...and then the question...which grocery store? I don't always hit them all. I look at the weekly sales, pick the ones I want, plan my menu, and usually get up early Sat or Sun..drive and hit whatever store(s) I need to....bring everything back home, and do most of my cooking for the week on Sunday afternoons.
Having to work and fit in which store to hit to pick up packages, and waiting for grocery day to get it...or make a special weekday trip out in traffic to get packages...not worth it.
I'll just let them drop it on my doorstep, and get it when I get home from work...