People are born with equal opportunity (for the most part) but not everyone wants to take it, many are rather happy living off the taxpayers.
I know plenty of people born into billionaire families. They have "welfare", just not taxpayer paid. And it pays a hell of a lot more than government welfare. Opportunities aren't equal. That it's theoretically possible for a rich person to fail or a poor person to succeed doesn't prove equality. The rarity of each seems to prove the rule.
They need to cut back on benefits to encourage them to go to work, not give them more.
Many of the systems are rigged. I've seen the numbers where a poor person making $10 more on their own would lose $100 or more of benefits. It's "cheaper" to not work, than to work some and try to reduce their burden. It's the system that's broken, not the people using it. Many people can't ever be self sufficient. What would you do with them?
I had to get special permission for using computers at school. I was the only person who couldn't be marked down for handwriting. So I had a special advantage over everyone else. It also had a spell-check (the 1st gen, where it notified you that a word wasn't in its small, static dictionary, but gave no hints or suggestions). But I was never bad with spelling in school papers because I knew I was bad, so I'd look up words lots and go slow. I typed much much faster than I wrote (also a benefit for school that showed up on grades). Ended up leaving school typing faster than most. About 60 WPM. Never took a typing class or course. Taught myself touch typing.
I've seen more than one job site (many government run) that required Internet access. Internet is "entertainment" like a car is "entertainment". You might think it s luxury, but many places it's a necessity.
That's silly. And inaccurate (mostly). Business hours don't have to change to change working hours. Only a few people need be at a corporation, like the receptionist, for it to be "open".
Bah, last time they held a meeting on it, 50% of parents complained school started too early, the other 50% it started too late. 0% said it was just right. It doesn't matter what you'll do, it'll go over poorly with parents.
Yeah, I have heard about places that crowded. Ever been to Mardi Gras (in New Orleans, before the flood)? I had told people that it's so packed you could lift your feet and the pressure from the crowd would keep you up. People objected, so the next year, I tried it, and yes, you could lift your feet and remain upright. But only in the tightly packed areas. I've not been anywhere else where that were possible.
Which part, and what's your cite. There is an example of a person who had to pay money and change his name to be eligible to vote with the "free" ID requirements. I gave a cite. Where's yours? Oh yeah, you are a lying AC. Nevermind.
Then start school later on the dark days. Why is there such an opposition to businesses changing hours with the seasons, rather than changing the clocks?
The government - if that is the word - of the middle Northern American country, colloquially known as the Americas [sic?],
In American English, "America" unambiguously identifies he United States of America. The Americas unambiguously refers to North, South, and Latin America collectively. The people I've found with the most confusion on this point is those who learn English as a second language, and the wording is different, and they tend to insist that their English is better than millions of natives, because it sounds like their native language.
We already have people win with less than the majority vote and claim legitimacy. So how would a "majority" win with 10% voter turn out be any different?
The law is easy to change. The government is hard to change. You want to abandon law because you find the government inconvenient. A law can be passed in hours, if there was political will to do it. There isn't. Vote in new people, don't abandon law because you don't like it.
Then how are those involved in this one not counted? Making things "cheaper" drives innovation. And that's what happens when profit-motive gets involved.
And if receiver pays, even for long haul, then why does Comcast slow down Netflix? All Comcast's customers are already paying.
That's why people are angry. Comcast is already paid by its users for content. And Comcast tries to not deliver competing content. Making up reasons why, because "we are monopolistic douchebags" is not a good reason.
Better than Texas, where you have to pay money to vote (the mandated ID must be free to be legal, but it's ok for it to require other paperwork that costs money, so long as the ID itself is free). http://www.theguardian.com/us-...
You aren't paying attention to the words you are saying.
The original quote:
Boys are naturally [more] curious [...] than [women]
Then you jumped all over me for pointing out that boys are naturally curious when girls are punished for being curious.
You are a fucking nutjob. Go back. Read the thread. See that you are supporting an underclass of women, kept subservient, because that's all I've been complaining about, and you keep saying I'm wrong (implying, but not stating, the opposite).
You are just a racist sexist pig, too cowardly to say anything, just lying and implying until everyone around you gives up, and you declare victory.
What leftists? I haven't seen any of those since the '70s. They are all on Social Security and voting Republican to increase subsidies and welfare for the well-off seniors.
At the age of 8, I toured my first nuclear power plant and asked the same thing. It was true then, and it's true now. Kill grid power (and the backups), and all (currently operational) nuclear power plants will melt down.
There's enough waste heat from a near-meltdown to power a colling system, but doing so is costly and complex. And obviously never needed.
If the plan is to poison the diesel fuel, ram the power line pole with a truck (which seems awfully ambitious when I look at high-voltage towers),
The large power line towers are surprisingly fragile. The weight of the lines pulls them into the ground. If you don't like the idea of ramming them with a truck, then cut them with a torch. Oh, and you don't have to poison the fuel at the same time as you take down a power tower. Just poison the fuel once, and you have until the next test cycle to take down the tower.
Slashdot Mirror
DemPhones ?
The DemPhones started by Ronald Reagan? I didn't think he was a Democratic Party member.
People are born with equal opportunity (for the most part) but not everyone wants to take it, many are rather happy living off the taxpayers.
I know plenty of people born into billionaire families. They have "welfare", just not taxpayer paid. And it pays a hell of a lot more than government welfare. Opportunities aren't equal. That it's theoretically possible for a rich person to fail or a poor person to succeed doesn't prove equality. The rarity of each seems to prove the rule.
They need to cut back on benefits to encourage them to go to work, not give them more.
Many of the systems are rigged. I've seen the numbers where a poor person making $10 more on their own would lose $100 or more of benefits. It's "cheaper" to not work, than to work some and try to reduce their burden. It's the system that's broken, not the people using it. Many people can't ever be self sufficient. What would you do with them?
I had to get special permission for using computers at school. I was the only person who couldn't be marked down for handwriting. So I had a special advantage over everyone else. It also had a spell-check (the 1st gen, where it notified you that a word wasn't in its small, static dictionary, but gave no hints or suggestions). But I was never bad with spelling in school papers because I knew I was bad, so I'd look up words lots and go slow. I typed much much faster than I wrote (also a benefit for school that showed up on grades). Ended up leaving school typing faster than most. About 60 WPM. Never took a typing class or course. Taught myself touch typing.
And the use of leaded fuels. Which at least has a proven causal factor.
I've seen more than one job site (many government run) that required Internet access. Internet is "entertainment" like a car is "entertainment". You might think it s luxury, but many places it's a necessity.
That's silly. And inaccurate (mostly). Business hours don't have to change to change working hours. Only a few people need be at a corporation, like the receptionist, for it to be "open".
Bah, last time they held a meeting on it, 50% of parents complained school started too early, the other 50% it started too late. 0% said it was just right. It doesn't matter what you'll do, it'll go over poorly with parents.
Yeah, I have heard about places that crowded. Ever been to Mardi Gras (in New Orleans, before the flood)? I had told people that it's so packed you could lift your feet and the pressure from the crowd would keep you up. People objected, so the next year, I tried it, and yes, you could lift your feet and remain upright. But only in the tightly packed areas. I've not been anywhere else where that were possible.
Only really matters for retail. Everything else it doesn't matter for.
Which part, and what's your cite. There is an example of a person who had to pay money and change his name to be eligible to vote with the "free" ID requirements. I gave a cite. Where's yours? Oh yeah, you are a lying AC. Nevermind.
Then start school later on the dark days. Why is there such an opposition to businesses changing hours with the seasons, rather than changing the clocks?
ID isn't required for cashing a check or buying liquor.
The government - if that is the word - of the middle Northern American country, colloquially known as the Americas [sic?],
In American English, "America" unambiguously identifies he United States of America. The Americas unambiguously refers to North, South, and Latin America collectively. The people I've found with the most confusion on this point is those who learn English as a second language, and the wording is different, and they tend to insist that their English is better than millions of natives, because it sounds like their native language.
We already have people win with less than the majority vote and claim legitimacy. So how would a "majority" win with 10% voter turn out be any different?
The law is hard to change,
The law is easy to change. The government is hard to change. You want to abandon law because you find the government inconvenient. A law can be passed in hours, if there was political will to do it. There isn't. Vote in new people, don't abandon law because you don't like it.
Then how are those involved in this one not counted? Making things "cheaper" drives innovation. And that's what happens when profit-motive gets involved.
Nope. They got it through contact that bypassed the skin. Reports are generally an eye-wipe while covered in infected body fluids.
The conditions in Africa are not sterile, even when they are in the big suits.
And if receiver pays, even for long haul, then why does Comcast slow down Netflix? All Comcast's customers are already paying.
That's why people are angry. Comcast is already paid by its users for content. And Comcast tries to not deliver competing content. Making up reasons why, because "we are monopolistic douchebags" is not a good reason.
Better than Texas, where you have to pay money to vote (the mandated ID must be free to be legal, but it's ok for it to require other paperwork that costs money, so long as the ID itself is free). http://www.theguardian.com/us-...
I think the left out a word, "don't". When you put that one word in, everything makes more sense.
Most planets don't have stars, but most stars still have planets - the new discovery doesn't change that.
The original quote:
Boys are naturally [more] curious [...] than [women]
Then you jumped all over me for pointing out that boys are naturally curious when girls are punished for being curious.
You are a fucking nutjob. Go back. Read the thread. See that you are supporting an underclass of women, kept subservient, because that's all I've been complaining about, and you keep saying I'm wrong (implying, but not stating, the opposite).
You are just a racist sexist pig, too cowardly to say anything, just lying and implying until everyone around you gives up, and you declare victory.
Fuck you.
What leftists? I haven't seen any of those since the '70s. They are all on Social Security and voting Republican to increase subsidies and welfare for the well-off seniors.
If the goal was "spaceflight" how were the Challenger deaths of heroes? Apollo I could qualify, but we'd gone into space plenty before 1986.
If you break the law when convenient, you have no rule of law. That you prefer an anarchy doesn't mean anyone else would.
Do the plants require grid power really?
At the age of 8, I toured my first nuclear power plant and asked the same thing. It was true then, and it's true now. Kill grid power (and the backups), and all (currently operational) nuclear power plants will melt down.
There's enough waste heat from a near-meltdown to power a colling system, but doing so is costly and complex. And obviously never needed.
If the plan is to poison the diesel fuel, ram the power line pole with a truck (which seems awfully ambitious when I look at high-voltage towers),
The large power line towers are surprisingly fragile. The weight of the lines pulls them into the ground. If you don't like the idea of ramming them with a truck, then cut them with a torch. Oh, and you don't have to poison the fuel at the same time as you take down a power tower. Just poison the fuel once, and you have until the next test cycle to take down the tower.
and cause a major earthquake,
No earthquake needed.