They say you should never try to be sarcastic in print. Apparently "they" were right. It never once occurred to me that GPP was anything but sarcastic.
It would be nice, but once you build in the weakness that allows the government to do this, you can't keep anyone else from exploiting the same weakness.
Government undermines those shit jobs by siphoning off a huge chunk of the fares paid to regulators and the crony capitalists who pay the regulators to protect their rents. The driver and passenger between them pay for the rent of the taxi license plate and for the rent of the taxi itself, as both the plate and the modifications to the vehicle required by regulators are out of the reach of someone working a "shit job".
Uber is providing customers and drivers with the means to cheat crony capitalists out of millions of dollars of income the crony capitalists do literally nothing to earn. Keep the transaction between the driver, the customer and the service provider that puts the two in contact with each other and watch the market provide a better service than a regulated market could possibly imagine accomplishing.
An inconvenience to whom? The people they're inconvenient to already use metric and the others aren't inconvenienced or they would already be using it and don't want to endure the inconvenience of converting.
There aren't more than 5 common speed limits anyway, it's not that hard to memorize the equivalents, so there's no need for math or gratuitous mocking of people who don't do things identically to Europe.
The hon(!) R. Finkelstein in the Independent Inquiry into the Media and Media Regulation commissioned by the Australian Federal government:
"In the United States, free speech is given primacy among rights, and therefore the potential harm caused by restrictions on speech is thought to outweigh the potential harm caused by speech that is not restricted. In Australia free speech does not necessarily have the same primacy. "
A respected Australian retired judge would seem to endorse that view. And he not only applauds the greater restrictions on their speech that Australians "enjoy", he thinks that we don't enjoy enough of them.
It's not a pickup truck, it's a ute (abbreviation of "utility") and Fosters is the crap no one here will drink so they have to export the stuff.
Anyway censorship and freedom of speech are fairly low on the agenda
Say rather not on any agenda anywhere in the country and you're closer to the truth. The hon(!) R. Finkelstein, a respected Australian jurist, has this to say about freedom of speech
"United States, free speech is given primacy among rights, and therefore the potential harm caused by restrictions on speech is thought to outweigh the potential harm caused by speech that is not restricted. In Australia free speech does not necessarily have the same primacy"
more on the hon(!) R. Finkelsteins' views of free speech here
By requiring online retailers to file sales tax nearly 50 times per year when they could have accomplished exactly the same thing by requiring online retailers to pay sales tax in their home state for all sales. They've vastly increased business costs, most of which will go not to the public purse but to wealthy accounting firms. I wonder whose idea that was.
Yup, we must punish our sons and our grandsons to the nth generation to make up for the privileges enjoyed by our fathers and our grandfathers (while they lay in a pool of mud diluted with their own blood and tried desperately and futilely to take just one more breath.)
the projection is strong with this one. I explained why it is not zero cost and you simply asserted that it is zero cost. I'm done with you. Feel free to have the last word.
Slashdot Mirror
We've had a hundred years to build up the infrastructure
The first real internal combustion engine was only built in 1860 (that's not 'hundreds of years' ago).
He didn't say "hundreds", he said "A hundred". As in one hundred. Which your own post substantiates.
They say you should never try to be sarcastic in print. Apparently "they" were right. It never once occurred to me that GPP was anything but sarcastic.
It would be nice, but once you build in the weakness that allows the government to do this, you can't keep anyone else from exploiting the same weakness.
Government undermines those shit jobs by siphoning off a huge chunk of the fares paid to regulators and the crony capitalists who pay the regulators to protect their rents. The driver and passenger between them pay for the rent of the taxi license plate and for the rent of the taxi itself, as both the plate and the modifications to the vehicle required by regulators are out of the reach of someone working a "shit job". Uber is providing customers and drivers with the means to cheat crony capitalists out of millions of dollars of income the crony capitalists do literally nothing to earn. Keep the transaction between the driver, the customer and the service provider that puts the two in contact with each other and watch the market provide a better service than a regulated market could possibly imagine accomplishing.
You punish irresponsible people, not responsible people.
Unless it's a civil liability lawsuit, in which case exactly the same thing amounts to negligence.
California State Assembly: 52 Democrats, 25 Republicans, 3 vacant
California State Senate:28 Democrat, 12 Republican
I'm thinking This legislature isn't passing laws to, and I quote, "protect Republicans and their "Perverted" ways"
What's your point? That any grounds to meddle in ones business dealings justifies any grounds to meddle in ones business dealings?
Anyone who thinks their private communications should be just that... private
I wouldn't mind so long as I had a return ticket.
Sexy is not sexist.
That hasn't got any worse. Hasn't got any better either, but take what you can get, eh?
A rent-controlled apartment is not the property of the renter.
[rolls eyes] That was exactly my point.
Because when one hands a rent controlled apartment to ones offspring, one is disposing of ones own property, not someone elses. Moron.
One where peoples possessions are not theirs to dispose of as they see fit? Probably, but why would you want to?
Hold the patent holders financially responsible for the results of withholding their intellectual property.
An inconvenience to whom? The people they're inconvenient to already use metric and the others aren't inconvenienced or they would already be using it and don't want to endure the inconvenience of converting.
There aren't more than 5 common speed limits anyway, it's not that hard to memorize the equivalents, so there's no need for math or gratuitous mocking of people who don't do things identically to Europe.
"In the United States, free speech is given primacy among rights, and therefore the potential harm caused by restrictions on speech is thought to outweigh the potential harm caused by speech that is not restricted. In Australia free speech does not necessarily have the same primacy. "
A respected Australian retired judge would seem to endorse that view. And he not only applauds the greater restrictions on their speech that Australians "enjoy", he thinks that we don't enjoy enough of them.
Anyway censorship and freedom of speech are fairly low on the agenda
Say rather not on any agenda anywhere in the country and you're closer to the truth. The hon(!) R. Finkelstein, a respected Australian jurist, has this to say about freedom of speech
"United States, free speech is given primacy among rights, and therefore the potential harm caused by restrictions on speech is thought to outweigh the potential harm caused by speech that is not restricted. In Australia free speech does not necessarily have the same primacy"
more on the hon(!) R. Finkelsteins' views of free speech here
By requiring online retailers to file sales tax nearly 50 times per year when they could have accomplished exactly the same thing by requiring online retailers to pay sales tax in their home state for all sales. They've vastly increased business costs, most of which will go not to the public purse but to wealthy accounting firms. I wonder whose idea that was.
Equality doesn't necessarily mean equal
Quite so. Why separate can be equal as well.
Yup, we must punish our sons and our grandsons to the nth generation to make up for the privileges enjoyed by our fathers and our grandfathers (while they lay in a pool of mud diluted with their own blood and tried desperately and futilely to take just one more breath.)
the projection is strong with this one. I explained why it is not zero cost and you simply asserted that it is zero cost. I'm done with you. Feel free to have the last word.