And you know what, you also won't find the words "Punishment by grabbing of the balls and ripping them off of your useless body is prohibited."
And yet, it's still prohibited by the Constitution. How about that. Who would ever imagine that the Constitution has more meaning than the exact words used? Wow!
Sorry, but you're wrong. The FISA Law covers "electronic surveillance" and that includes email. The government is therefore prohibited from domestic eavesdropping without a warrant or FISA court order.
It does not appear that anyone is making profit from the procedure and the fee is to cover the cost. However, the article is light on these details so we cannot say for sure. I don't think that money being involved necessarily makes it a commercial product. Research costs money. Under your definition, all research would be a commercial product.
There's no reason to refer to the committee as "Republican-controlled" in the writeup. Congress is controlled by the Republicans, so all of the committees will be, as well.
As another poster points out, not all of the committees are controlled by the majority (most notably the ethics committee). However, many people do not know how Congress works. I don't think it's 'bias' to add some clarification.
IMO, and I don't have anything to back it up, I think enviro is pretty low on the list of reasons why companies relocate to other countries. I would guess that minimum wage, the 40-hour work week, healthcare and taxes are much more significant reasons. Enviro regs can cost a significant amount of money, but the issues I list above generally cost much more.
There are very few left exits and merges in NJ and where they exist it is generally because there is nowhere else for the road to go. They are more frequent in the Philly area due to the usual problems of wedging highways into urban areas (can't speak to the rest of PA). I've seen more left merges/exits since I moved down here to DC.
NJ road engineers are more than aware of the problems with putting things in the left lane. That is why on many highways with traffic lights you cannot make a left turn and must use the jughandle.
Yes, and POLICE are for enforcing the law, not YOU so GET OUT OF THE WAY.
I've had this argument so many times on the nj.com boards, it's not even funny. If you're holding up traffic, you're also breaking the law, regardless of what speed the traffic is going at.
Frank DeFord never has a great segment. He's one of those blowhard sports writers who longs for the "old days" when sports wasn't about money, scandals or personalities. He conveniently forgets that sports has ALWAYS been about money, scandals and personalities.
Ty Cobb was a dirty player and a racist. He once went into the crowd and assaulted a fan. Sound familiar?
Babe Ruth was traded to the Yankees because the Sox didn't have enough money to pay him. Sound familiar?
In general, non-modified sources are grandfathered, but not in all cases. The CAA evolved a lot from '63 to 1990, so it's not really right to say it took 30 years. As I said, the regulations only really got serious with the 90 amendments. IMO some of the failures have been EPA and States reluctance to revoke permits for gross violations. They will generally bend the rules as much as possible to keep you operating. In fact, I'm involved in a situation where a State is in direct violation of the CAA but EPA doesn't really care. It's hard to blame the regulations if they're not properly enforced.
State-level regulations are not a solution, imo. I am generally against state regulation for problems like environmental issues. What state regulation does is setup a patchwork of varying regulations that makes it very difficult to do business (however, it is good for me personally as a consultant..). It also forces the states to compete against each other in a race to the bottom and I do not believe that is good for the Union as a whole. Furthermore, you get situations where if you set up your factory on one side of the river, you might have been limited to 10 tons, but if you go 50 feet across the river, you're only limited to 30 tons. The residents on both sides of the river get screwed by situations like this.
I saw a study once which found that something like 98% of road wear and damage is caused by semi trucks. Unfortunately I can't find the link right now. The study basically said if you ran only standard passenger vehicles on the road, it could last for 30 years without resurfacing.
A few comments.. afaict a Mustang GT is not 1/2 the price of a hybrid. You're bitching about the appearance of a fuel efficient vehicle (ignoring the fact that the new hybrids look exactly the same as non-hybrids).. somehow I doubt you'd be content to navigate the masses each day on public transportation (I do, also in DC). How much more improved do you need it to be?
I'm not sure what your little scenario is supposed to prove. In fact, I think it works against you. Your coworkers travel far greater distances and still use the same amount of fuel as you. Obviously simply not driving or driving less is a solution, but most people are not content or otherwise cannot use this method. Instead, they choose to use vehicles with higher fuel efficiencies.
But if I want to buy a bigger car with a sporty V6 then I should be able to without having to worry about the Fed crippling it.
You can. I don't know where this strawman comes from. Vehicles like the Excursion and Tahoe, Viper, Mustang, Ferrari, etc whatever, are all LEGAL under the current regs. They're not going to go away, as that's not how the reg works.
Next, mandates don't work. You can encourage a sector to do something, but as soon as you mandate, you are requiring without funding. For a private company, it is often less expensive to simply ignore these mandates. That's why it took 10-15 years for many factories to get scrubbers on their smoke stacks.
You disprove your own argument (which is factually incorrect to begin with). Your premise is that mandates don't work. However, you concede that many factories have applied controls, demonstrating that the mandate was eventually effective.
The EPA mandated originally in 1963 with the Clean Air Act, amended in 66, 70 and 77, but it wasn't until the 1990 amendments that things really kicked in with the NAAQS and Title V. The CAA has demonstratively reduced emissions in the United States. Also note that in most jurisdictions the CAA is administered by a State or local agency. The CAA was never meant to be an overnight solution, as should be obvious from its now 40+ year history. Compliance deadlines are frequently years after regulations are promulgated, giving industry sufficient time to redesign their processes, evaluate control strategies, and evaluate the business market (i.e. decide to sell, relocate or change markets).
There is no similar demonstration for the effectiveness of voluntary, or in your words "encouraged", controls. That is because voluntary controls do not work and are a fairy tale bandied about by anti-regulation folks like yourself and dada21. When you give a business the choice of the status quo or upending their process, they are going to choose the status quo except in the very rare case of a cost-savings change that just so happens to result in lower emissions. The vast majority of emission reductions in the US are the direct result of regulation or international treaty. No one in the environmental field disputes this.
If you simply state "all vehicles will be 40mpg or better", what you have is bankrupt auto companies, and a very pissed off populace.
Nice strawman. The fact is that CAFE is not a hard and fast rule. CAFE is an averaging of a manufacturer's fleet. This allows the manufacturer to produce both high and low mileage vehicles, with the caveat that the overall fuel efficiency must meet a certain threshold. Also note that certain vehicles (such as the Hummer) are exempt from this rule due to their weight.
With your insights on Al Qaeda you better watch out or who knows where you'll end up. Got any sources for your claims?
our underestimation of Al Qaeda is probably the #1 contributing factor to September 11.
No, the #1 contributing factor to September 11 was lack of communication and attention at various levels of government. Most of the pieces were known. Agents of various levels were making noise. No one was listening.
is the moment you realize your bank accounts have been drained (do that to a couple thousand people and create a mass hysteria where people don't trust banks.)
Identity theft ring a bell? From wiki, "The most recent US Javelin data also showed that 9.3 million individuals (or 4.25% of all adults) are victims of identity fraud on an annual basis."
And yet, people still use banks, credit cards, and shop on the internet.
If you're getting 5 kB/s (yes, that's what you said) on DSL you obviously have a problem and need to have your line and/or modem checked out. I'm not sure if you know what you're talking about.
Slashdot Mirror
And you know what, you also won't find the words "Punishment by grabbing of the balls and ripping them off of your useless body is prohibited."
And yet, it's still prohibited by the Constitution. How about that. Who would ever imagine that the Constitution has more meaning than the exact words used? Wow!
Sorry, but you're wrong. The FISA Law covers "electronic surveillance" and that includes email. The government is therefore prohibited from domestic eavesdropping without a warrant or FISA court order.
It does not appear that anyone is making profit from the procedure and the fee is to cover the cost. However, the article is light on these details so we cannot say for sure. I don't think that money being involved necessarily makes it a commercial product. Research costs money. Under your definition, all research would be a commercial product.
in this case I think the FDA is right. This particular technology is not mature enough to allow as a commercial product.
Research != commercial product.
There's no reason to refer to the committee as "Republican-controlled" in the writeup. Congress is controlled by the Republicans, so all of the committees will be, as well.
As another poster points out, not all of the committees are controlled by the majority (most notably the ethics committee). However, many people do not know how Congress works. I don't think it's 'bias' to add some clarification.
IMO, and I don't have anything to back it up, I think enviro is pretty low on the list of reasons why companies relocate to other countries. I would guess that minimum wage, the 40-hour work week, healthcare and taxes are much more significant reasons. Enviro regs can cost a significant amount of money, but the issues I list above generally cost much more.
They use civil cases, so there isn't a burden for "beyond a reasonable doubt". All they need is a preponderance of evidence.
Also, the Bush Administration will not promote AIDs prevention that includes condom use.
There are very few left exits and merges in NJ and where they exist it is generally because there is nowhere else for the road to go. They are more frequent in the Philly area due to the usual problems of wedging highways into urban areas (can't speak to the rest of PA). I've seen more left merges/exits since I moved down here to DC.
NJ road engineers are more than aware of the problems with putting things in the left lane. That is why on many highways with traffic lights you cannot make a left turn and must use the jughandle.
Yes, and POLICE are for enforcing the law, not YOU so GET OUT OF THE WAY.
I've had this argument so many times on the nj.com boards, it's not even funny. If you're holding up traffic, you're also breaking the law, regardless of what speed the traffic is going at.
My only complaint about publicly funded programming is the fact it doesnt have anyone to compete with.
Dunno about you, but every TV and radio I've ever come across receives stations other than PBS and NPR.
Frank DeFord never has a great segment. He's one of those blowhard sports writers who longs for the "old days" when sports wasn't about money, scandals or personalities. He conveniently forgets that sports has ALWAYS been about money, scandals and personalities.
Ty Cobb was a dirty player and a racist. He once went into the crowd and assaulted a fan. Sound familiar?
Babe Ruth was traded to the Yankees because the Sox didn't have enough money to pay him. Sound familiar?
Do I even have to mention the Black Sox?
In general, non-modified sources are grandfathered, but not in all cases. The CAA evolved a lot from '63 to 1990, so it's not really right to say it took 30 years. As I said, the regulations only really got serious with the 90 amendments. IMO some of the failures have been EPA and States reluctance to revoke permits for gross violations. They will generally bend the rules as much as possible to keep you operating. In fact, I'm involved in a situation where a State is in direct violation of the CAA but EPA doesn't really care. It's hard to blame the regulations if they're not properly enforced.
State-level regulations are not a solution, imo. I am generally against state regulation for problems like environmental issues. What state regulation does is setup a patchwork of varying regulations that makes it very difficult to do business (however, it is good for me personally as a consultant..). It also forces the states to compete against each other in a race to the bottom and I do not believe that is good for the Union as a whole. Furthermore, you get situations where if you set up your factory on one side of the river, you might have been limited to 10 tons, but if you go 50 feet across the river, you're only limited to 30 tons. The residents on both sides of the river get screwed by situations like this.
Biodiesel, iirc and depending on how it's produced, can have higher particulate emissions than traditional diesel.
I saw a study once which found that something like 98% of road wear and damage is caused by semi trucks. Unfortunately I can't find the link right now. The study basically said if you ran only standard passenger vehicles on the road, it could last for 30 years without resurfacing.
Do you know what quotation marks are? When you use quotation marks, you're restating the exact words of someone else.
The OP never said what you have placed in quotation marks. They stated there is no reason for a commuter to get less than 20 mpg.
A few comments.. afaict a Mustang GT is not 1/2 the price of a hybrid. You're bitching about the appearance of a fuel efficient vehicle (ignoring the fact that the new hybrids look exactly the same as non-hybrids).. somehow I doubt you'd be content to navigate the masses each day on public transportation (I do, also in DC). How much more improved do you need it to be?
I'm not sure what your little scenario is supposed to prove. In fact, I think it works against you. Your coworkers travel far greater distances and still use the same amount of fuel as you. Obviously simply not driving or driving less is a solution, but most people are not content or otherwise cannot use this method. Instead, they choose to use vehicles with higher fuel efficiencies.
Capitalism got us here. There's absolutely no reason to believe that unfettered capitalism is going to get us out.
But if I want to buy a bigger car with a sporty V6 then I should be able to without having to worry about the Fed crippling it.
You can. I don't know where this strawman comes from. Vehicles like the Excursion and Tahoe, Viper, Mustang, Ferrari, etc whatever, are all LEGAL under the current regs. They're not going to go away, as that's not how the reg works.
You can buy, make and sell any car you want right this second. Only caveat: you may not be able to legally drive that car on a public roadway.
You do NOT have the right to drive whatever you want on a public roadway. It's a simple fact that you're going to have to accept.
Next, mandates don't work. You can encourage a sector to do something, but as soon as you mandate, you are requiring without funding. For a private company, it is often less expensive to simply ignore these mandates. That's why it took 10-15 years for many factories to get scrubbers on their smoke stacks.
You disprove your own argument (which is factually incorrect to begin with). Your premise is that mandates don't work. However, you concede that many factories have applied controls, demonstrating that the mandate was eventually effective.
The EPA mandated originally in 1963 with the Clean Air Act, amended in 66, 70 and 77, but it wasn't until the 1990 amendments that things really kicked in with the NAAQS and Title V. The CAA has demonstratively reduced emissions in the United States. Also note that in most jurisdictions the CAA is administered by a State or local agency. The CAA was never meant to be an overnight solution, as should be obvious from its now 40+ year history. Compliance deadlines are frequently years after regulations are promulgated, giving industry sufficient time to redesign their processes, evaluate control strategies, and evaluate the business market (i.e. decide to sell, relocate or change markets).
There is no similar demonstration for the effectiveness of voluntary, or in your words "encouraged", controls. That is because voluntary controls do not work and are a fairy tale bandied about by anti-regulation folks like yourself and dada21. When you give a business the choice of the status quo or upending their process, they are going to choose the status quo except in the very rare case of a cost-savings change that just so happens to result in lower emissions. The vast majority of emission reductions in the US are the direct result of regulation or international treaty. No one in the environmental field disputes this.
If you simply state "all vehicles will be 40mpg or better", what you have is bankrupt auto companies, and a very pissed off populace.
Nice strawman. The fact is that CAFE is not a hard and fast rule. CAFE is an averaging of a manufacturer's fleet. This allows the manufacturer to produce both high and low mileage vehicles, with the caveat that the overall fuel efficiency must meet a certain threshold. Also note that certain vehicles (such as the Hummer) are exempt from this rule due to their weight.
With your insights on Al Qaeda you better watch out or who knows where you'll end up. Got any sources for your claims?
our underestimation of Al Qaeda is probably the #1 contributing factor to September 11.
No, the #1 contributing factor to September 11 was lack of communication and attention at various levels of government. Most of the pieces were known. Agents of various levels were making noise. No one was listening.
is the moment you realize your bank accounts have been drained (do that to a couple thousand people and create a mass hysteria where people don't trust banks.)
Identity theft ring a bell? From wiki, "The most recent US Javelin data also showed that 9.3 million individuals (or 4.25% of all adults) are victims of identity fraud on an annual basis."
And yet, people still use banks, credit cards, and shop on the internet.
If you're getting 5 kB/s (yes, that's what you said) on DSL you obviously have a problem and need to have your line and/or modem checked out. I'm not sure if you know what you're talking about.
From the info we've received from Verizon, it looks amazing.
Really? The vendor says their product is amazing? No shit!
That such a stupid and mindless argument was modded up is ridiculous.
The implication that every english speaker except the OP understands is, "AT&T's model is faster to deploy [once you start deploying it]."