"There are "real" alternatives other than voting in a party that believes in the destruction of Israel and establishment of Islamic law."
And those would be?
"destruction of Israel"
On what basis would you think they would care much one way or another about this issue? "The Israelis have done so much for us..."? ( note, that *does not* mean that I think any particular way about Israel myself ).
And I had thought it was fairly well understood in elections that many fear "wasting" a vote on a party/candidate that is not a front runner. Obama was not the candidate I would have *really* liked to have voted for, but the option I did like was too far out of the running.
So, yes, if you vote for the sister-rapers in order to get/keep the baby-killers out of office, that is, indeed *not* an endorsement of the sister raper's platform. And yes, everyone has a choice about lots of things. While technically open, some of those choices are unlikely to be picked as practical considerations make them unpalatable.
All the reading I have done indicated to me that Hamas was elected mainly on the strength that they were not Fatah. The citizenry were tired of the corruption of Fatah, and had one real alternative open to them.
"Them". Say "some of 'them'", and you are on to something. Or do you maintain that each and every resident of Gaza all hate Israelis with all their breath? This article puts the lie to that notion, this one guy made a stove instead of a rocket.
And Israel has a blockade where aluminum and cooking gas ( from the article ) are not allowed in or in low supply. This punishes the "live and let live" types far more than the violent militant ones, *and* gives backing to any "the Israelis hate you, see what they are doing to you?" kind of rhetoric. ( Yes, that blockade is in reaction to violence from Arabs against Israelis, but A: this will lead to hatred, not a limitation to violence and B: the violence is in reaction ( as they see it ) to the occupation of their lands ).
"or been choked of their lifeblood by non-competitive government mandated actions and excessive tax rates and onerous union contracts"
They knew the lay of the land going in, and still decided to play the game. A winning game on their part should have included dealing with those obstructions ( in a legal moral, and ethical manner ) as should any business' plan. So, no, I think the claim of mismanagement still applies. And it is quite likely that the layoff is mostly about executives making their yearly bonuses.
And it is funny how it OK to choke people of their lifeblood ( laying them off, so that the race to the bottom in wages can continue ), but don't dare do it to a corporation.
Funny, that, I think, is the least defensible of them. Roosevelt did want us in the war. But with Germany. Japan and Germany had a *defensive* treaty with one another. Provoking Japan to attack would in no way guarantee conflict with Germany. There were only provisions in the treaty for defense, if one or the other were attacked, nothing on offensive moves by the parties involved. It did happen that way, but there was nothing forgone about it. Germany, with much foolishness, declared war on the US on, IIRC, Dec 10 or something like that. War with Japan would only have been a distraction from what Roosevelt wanted ( to Aid England ).
I had a Nissan that turned that light on, to "remind" me that the truck "needed" to go in for the recommended service intervals. It turned on once, then I just ignored it from then on.
I would not recommend you follow that example, though. And I would recommend thinking about changing mechanics, 400 to turn off the indicator seems a bit much to me.
What is the motivation? They are making electric cars because no one is in that market in a big way yet. Not because they believe in environmental responsibility.
"I don't think expressing opinions should be illegal, no matter how much someone doesn't like it"
Nor I, when it is you, straight up representing yourself as you expressing that opinion. I understand the desire not to set a precedent involving using a fictitious name, and I agree that it is a bad one, but there is more to the case than an opinion. There was a relationship ( of sorts ) built, then used against a child to inflict emotional harm, which lead to the death of a child.
Are they moving these thermometers from cooler places, over the years to ever warmer places? If not, then they may get a hot reading, but, over the years, it will be uniformly hot, and they will not be able to report climate change from that.
Assuming you have your facts right ( and I am ), fair enough. But as stated, your original post made it sound like everyone made equal amounts, but paid *oh so much*.
So, you make my point, there is income inequality ( which I am fine with ), and there is taxation inequality ( which I am also fine with, to a point ( note, I am not arguing this as someone who made minimum wage or anything close to that, I am getting close to the line where McCain's tax plans would leave me with more ) ( going with the British 90% top tax rate I would consider wrong ) ).
"Ah...but, the person making $250K a year likely spends MORE than the $3000/yr that a person on a $30K income. They eat out at nicer restaurants more often, they buy finer foods, wines, booze etc than a lower income earner"
Are you really arguing that they should have a lower tax burden because they can afford more luxuries in their life?
Slashdot Mirror
"There are "real" alternatives other than voting in a party that believes in the destruction of Israel and establishment of Islamic law."
And those would be?
"destruction of Israel"
On what basis would you think they would care much one way or another about this issue? "The Israelis have done so much for us..."? ( note, that *does not* mean that I think any particular way about Israel myself ).
And I had thought it was fairly well understood in elections that many fear "wasting" a vote on a party/candidate that is not a front runner. Obama was not the candidate I would have *really* liked to have voted for, but the option I did like was too far out of the running.
So, yes, if you vote for the sister-rapers in order to get/keep the baby-killers out of office, that is, indeed *not* an endorsement of the sister raper's platform. And yes, everyone has a choice about lots of things. While technically open, some of those choices are unlikely to be picked as practical considerations make them unpalatable.
"infinite head room,"
If you break 50 miles, do you get your astronaut wings?
Yes, quite. The market does not fix everything, in my opinion.
If only we had been working on that for the last decade or so.
All the reading I have done indicated to me that Hamas was elected mainly on the strength that they were not Fatah. The citizenry were tired of the corruption of Fatah, and had one real alternative open to them.
That is not a mandate of the Hamas platform.
"Them". Say "some of 'them'", and you are on to something. Or do you maintain that each and every resident of Gaza all hate Israelis with all their breath? This article puts the lie to that notion, this one guy made a stove instead of a rocket.
And Israel has a blockade where aluminum and cooking gas ( from the article ) are not allowed in or in low supply. This punishes the "live and let live" types far more than the violent militant ones, *and* gives backing to any "the Israelis hate you, see what they are doing to you?" kind of rhetoric. ( Yes, that blockade is in reaction to violence from Arabs against Israelis, but A: this will lead to hatred, not a limitation to violence and B: the violence is in reaction ( as they see it ) to the occupation of their lands ).
"or been choked of their lifeblood by non-competitive government mandated actions and excessive tax rates and onerous union contracts"
They knew the lay of the land going in, and still decided to play the game. A winning game on their part should have included dealing with those obstructions ( in a legal moral, and ethical manner ) as should any business' plan. So, no, I think the claim of mismanagement still applies. And it is quite likely that the layoff is mostly about executives making their yearly bonuses.
And it is funny how it OK to choke people of their lifeblood ( laying them off, so that the race to the bottom in wages can continue ), but don't dare do it to a corporation.
"I somewhat agree with you in the WW2 example"
Funny, that, I think, is the least defensible of them. Roosevelt did want us in the war. But with Germany. Japan and Germany had a *defensive* treaty with one another. Provoking Japan to attack would in no way guarantee conflict with Germany. There were only provisions in the treaty for defense, if one or the other were attacked, nothing on offensive moves by the parties involved. It did happen that way, but there was nothing forgone about it. Germany, with much foolishness, declared war on the US on, IIRC, Dec 10 or something like that. War with Japan would only have been a distraction from what Roosevelt wanted ( to Aid England ).
From the standpoint of the IP owner, I am quite sure it does look brilliant.
I had a Nissan that turned that light on, to "remind" me that the truck "needed" to go in for the recommended service intervals. It turned on once, then I just ignored it from then on.
I would not recommend you follow that example, though. And I would recommend thinking about changing mechanics, 400 to turn off the indicator seems a bit much to me.
What is the motivation? They are making electric cars because no one is in that market in a big way yet. Not because they believe in environmental responsibility.
This deserves insightful, not troll.
"and the other 90% die bemused in a hail of friendly fire."
Evolution in action?
"sisadmin"
He administers people's sisters? Wow.
What language would you recommend for an OO programmer to start with?
Lots of people think so.
"I don't think expressing opinions should be illegal, no matter how much someone doesn't like it"
Nor I, when it is you, straight up representing yourself as you expressing that opinion. I understand the desire not to set a precedent involving using a fictitious name, and I agree that it is a bad one, but there is more to the case than an opinion. There was a relationship ( of sorts ) built, then used against a child to inflict emotional harm, which lead to the death of a child.
"Lori never instructed or suggested the girl to commit suicide."
Instructed? No. Suggested? What was the message? "The world would be a better place without you", or some such. Suggests something to me.
"Personally, I'm confused as to how they came to these regulations"
Likely the bus companies drafted them. Who else would want such a thing?
Yet another example of how corporations should not be part of the political process, in my opinion.
Are they moving these thermometers from cooler places, over the years to ever warmer places? If not, then they may get a hot reading, but, over the years, it will be uniformly hot, and they will not be able to report climate change from that.
Assuming you have your facts right ( and I am ), fair enough. But as stated, your original post made it sound like everyone made equal amounts, but paid *oh so much*.
So, you make my point, there is income inequality ( which I am fine with ), and there is taxation inequality ( which I am also fine with, to a point ( note, I am not arguing this as someone who made minimum wage or anything close to that, I am getting close to the line where McCain's tax plans would leave me with more ) ( going with the British 90% top tax rate I would consider wrong ) ).
"Ah...but, the person making $250K a year likely spends MORE than the $3000/yr that a person on a $30K income. They eat out at nicer restaurants more often, they buy finer foods, wines, booze etc than a lower income earner"
Are you really arguing that they should have a lower tax burden because they can afford more luxuries in their life?
"They leave out the fact that the 10% also paid 90% of the taxes."
And got 90% of the money.
We will do them one better. The number on the coin will not be it's worth. The worth will be 10 to the number on the coin.
Maybe if they kept up on current events?