Not entirely true: "The Supreme Court later ruled in 1999 that the use of statistical sampling cannot be used to apportion House seats, but indicated that adjustments could be made to the population count when redrawing congressional boundaries."
Who gets to define the sampling algorithms? Who gets to certify that the sampling is "correctly done?" Such a process would be completely unconstitutional anyway (the Constitution says you've got to count actual people, not "guess" how many there are), and with ACORN helping with the Census count, don't forget that there are many of us who remember how they rigged the false voter registrations of inner city residents prior to the last election and believe that, at the very least, such an important process deserves more impartial bipartisan oversight.
Judging the speed with which the Democratically-controlled House and Senate (and Obama, by signing it into law) just spent $1 trillion of our tax money as "stimulus," do you REALLY think the reason the PATRIOT Act can't be repealed, IMMEDIATELY, if the Democrats decide to do so?
But why is that the case. Reagan & Bush blew up the budget on huge tax breaks to the rich. Obama is going to blow up the deficit trying to fix the mess left for him by Reagan and Bush.
Exactly how long is Obama planning to keep blaming everything on Bush, especially with a Democratic House and Senate at his beckon call? That may work for dyed-in-the-wool lefties, but it won't work with the swing voters come next election.
Obama never should have picked Geithner, and the sooner he DTMFA's, the better. But I trust you were as proportionally outraged over the last 8 years of Republican lawbreaking that dwarf's Geithner's tax issues?
Absolutely. Warrantless wiretaps are wrong (which Obama continues), the war in Iraq is wrong (which Obama continues), and unchecked deficit spending is wrong (which Obama continues). What exactly is Obama doing differently, besides increasing the rate at which he's raising the National Debt? How come the banks aren't loaning out any money right now, even though they've sucked trillions of our tax dollars out of the system, and exactly what is George W. Bush doing, TODAY, to prevent them from loaning money?
It's what happens when local, state, and Fed governments spends someone else's money (the taxpayers'). They overpay for stuff, buy stuff they don't always need, and waste billions and billions of our money nationwide, every year. After all, it's not like the government is spending its own money -- why would they lose any sleep over it?
You can either whine about it (which does nothing), fight the system (here's a hint -- you'll lose) or line up and try to get your little piece of the action. Sorry to sound so cynical -- but this is coming from someone who has sold software and tech services to both the public and private sectors for over a decade.
Don't confuse playing on the public's irrational fear of domestic terrorist attacks for stupidity. While this guy may indeed be a retard, I'd unfortunately have to say that the vast majority of politicians know *exactly* what they're doing when they create previously unthinkable laws and restrictions in the name of keeping us safe from the "terr'rists.":-(
Forgeting about "morality" for a second -- which is a distinctly human concept -- but isn't the scenario you postulate *exactly* what natural selection is all about? How is it any different than any other species, where those which are "most successful" and "best adapted" get to pass their genes on, and the ones who aren't do not?
Because you need some way to describe the logic used in PDF-encapsulated forms. We are not talking about multi-tiered apps which adhere to MVC, mind you -- we're talking about forms which are completely self-contained in a PDF file, such as those created with Adobe's LiveCycle Designer. In LiveCycle Designer's case, you can either use Adobe's proprietary scripting language (which relatively few people already know), or you can use JavaScript (which lots of people already know). I've written a PDF order form, for example, which automatically recalculates the order's total on-the-fly for the customer filling it out in the browser, right on the form and without requiring an Internet connection. Among other things, this cuts down significantly on the volume of sales support calls and increases order accuracy. So, yes, there's really a use case for having a way to express logic in a PDF.
Good question. I think there are several reasons. One is that since Ross Perot, people are leery of "throwing their votes away" on a third-party candidate most people perceive as someone who cannot win. Lately, the Libertarians are reforcing this notion by playing spoliers to the Republicans, much like Nader did for the Democrats. It just happened here in my own Baltimore County, where a Congressional seat held for years by a Republican was lost in a tight election to the Democrats when a Libertarian siphoned off about 8,000 votes from folks who otherwise would have voted Republican.
Another issue with the party's viability is the pro-drug legalization plank. Regardless of what you may think of the "drug war," we live in a country where generations of Americans have been institutionally conditioned in the schools that "drugs == bad" under any circumstances. Even though we now have a President who admits he used not only pot but cocaine and was still elected, there's a loooooooong way to go until legalizing even pot is a possibility.
Finally -- due in part to the media, the Libertarians are perceived as the party of black helicopter / conspiracy theorist loonies. This is where they could learn a lot from the Obama folks about slick marketing and rock star appeal.
I think it's much more likely that the Republicans try to recast themselves as the party of small government than the Libertarian Party (as it exists today) will become more popular.
Logging will be built in for you by the manufacturer with no "off" switch. The extra storage required will increase the cost of the router, of course, which the manufacturer will happily pass on to its customers -- you. The clueless AOL users you reference don't understand logging, let alone wireless security, but they know they need a blue box with antenna thingies plugged into their cable modem so they can IM their friends from their laptop while watching Idol -- and since the blue box with the antenna thingies is approved for use with the Internet SAFETY Act, they're doing your part to help the kids, right?
It would be funny if it wasn't already preordained and quite purposeful. Politicians aren't nearly as stupid as we call them -- in fact, they're masters of marketing.
The Republicans want this "in the interest of national security" so they can stop the terr-rists.
The Democrats want this so they can save the children from all of that evil kiddie porn, and also so the **AA can better control the media you consume, kill P2P and net neutrality, and bill you for it appropriately.
They both want stuff like this so they can control the citizens better.
Where's the party who doesn't want any of this shit and thinks the government has much, much more important stuff on its plate right now?
Of course they can get welfare. If they can get fake SSNs to get a job, why can't they use those to abuse the welfare system?
you are standing here saying, in effect: "I've got mine, now screw the rest of the world."
Nope. I'm saying, "My ancestors came here legally -- why are today's illegals so special they get to break the rules?" All I ask is that illegal immigrants are made to wait in line like everyone else trying to get into the country -- with no special intermin treatment not afforded to anyone else -- and that the laws on the books are enforced. People who do not respect our laws have no right to become citizens when they are plenty waiting in line who do.
1. Money spent on cyber-crap takes away from irl-crap purchased in NY state. Who would pay $107 for your books at a brick and mortar bookstore when you can get them for $100 for them (with free shipping) on amazon.com?
Good question. Maybe NY should lower its taxes before its brick & morter retailers go the way of the covered wagon.
Poor people don't have the wherewithal to purchase things on the internet.
Every public library, even those in the most backwoods areas of the country, now has computers that anyone can use to access the Internet. For free. And even those who have terrible credit can get credit cards or debit cards that can be used to make online purchases (in fact, it's actively encouraged these days . . . spend! spend! spend!). Along with a mailing address, these are the only requirements for making purchases online. So exactly how is purchasing things on the Internet a conspiracy against the poor?
No, the real reason is that states like NY don't want to miss out on all of that sweet, sweet revenue they can just pluck out of thin air.
First of all -- I'm talking about illegal immigrants, not Mexicans (your word). I don't care where they're from -- my problem is that they're in the country illegally and not paying (all of) their taxes.
You know, I hear this all the time here in TN, where we have a 9.25% sales tax and no state income tax.
I'll trade you MD's 6% sales tax and 11% combined state and local income taxes for your 9.25% sales tax and no income tax (and no tax on retirement assets either). Deal?
Where is it that these illegals are buying groceries
Since when are non-luxury groceries like milk, bread, and produce taxed in most states? Even in your state of TN, they're only partially taxed.
Are they simply shopping at the same places as me, and producing an "illegal alien" identification card that lets them skip paying the taxes?
Even better than that -- they can get a (welfare) card that gets them stuff for free, even though they're not supposed to be here in the first place. Here in MD, it's ironically called an Independence Card. Other states have similar programs. Hell, in MD, illegal immigrants can even qualify for in-state tuition discounts ahead of out-of-state US Citizens! Go ahead and wrap your brain around that one for awhile.
I've looked closely many times when Mexicans were getting gas and the pump shows the same $/gallon as my pump, but maybe that's to fool me and when they go to pay the cashier knocks the tax off?
You're assuming it's their vehicle and their gas money, and not the boss's (unlikely if they're here illegally in the first place -- how would they register the car and get licensed? Or are they breaking even more laws?). Other the other hand, 1/3 of all drivers in the state of CA are uninsured, leading to huge increases to the cost of auto insurance.
Bottom line -- I don't know how it is in TN, but in CA and in my blue state, MD, illegal immigrants are treated as victims, not criminals, at a tremendous cost to our states' governments. Don't mistake people being pissed at another group thinking they're so special that they don't have to follow the rules and wait in line, for racism. I could care less what race people are as long as they follow the laws like those of us who do and pay ALL of our taxes.
I lived in CA for two years. I left eight years ago because it was waaaaaaaay too expensive back then, and I'd never live there again for that very same reason -- pretty much impossible to buy a house without having a two hour commute. Remember, it is your choice to live there -- no one's making you stay -- and you and your fellow Californians continually vote to increase your own tax burden. Heck, I'm now in Maryland, and am planning on moving back to Florida because MD is headed down the same tax-crazy, anti-business path as the rest of the Northeast and the CA.
I will, however, certainly agree with you re: farm subsidies (and pretty much everything else that the Federal government subsidizes). I'll even make a leap and guess you were against the Republicans wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, and I'd agree with you there too. Some of us still believe in less government, less spending, and less taxes, but unfortunately, there's no political party for us these days -- and most importantly, two wrongs don't make a right.:-(
California has almost 3 million illegals. That's almost 8% of the state's population who are not paying taxes, and it's part of the reason the state is $41 billion in the hole (the cost of illigal immigrants to California is $10.5 billion annually, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform). People who think it's "racist" to state that illegal immigrants generally don't pay taxes are full of shit and clearly don't have a clue as to what real racism is.
Blue states love high taxes, and their populations vote accordingly. They're just "spreading the wealth around." However, that does not absolve their governments from planning for a rainy day, creating balanced budgets and paying their bills.
That's funny . . . California lost 144,000 people between July 1, 2007 and July 1, 2008, and New York lost 126,000 during the same period. Both states' populations are shrinking, not growing. According to you, state spending should be falling, but both states are tens of billions in the hole and scrambling to come up with new taxes to make up for the revenue they're losing from the people who left and continue to leave for more tax-friendly states. You can spin it all you want, but people and companies are getting the hell out of CA and the Northeast, and the primary reasons are high taxes and high cost of living. Increasing spending (which requires higher taxes on the poor souls who choose to stay when you have a negative population growth) will only make people leave faster.
Slashdot Mirror
Not entirely true: "The Supreme Court later ruled in 1999 that the use of statistical sampling cannot be used to apportion House seats, but indicated that adjustments could be made to the population count when redrawing congressional boundaries."
Who gets to define the sampling algorithms? Who gets to certify that the sampling is "correctly done?" Such a process would be completely unconstitutional anyway (the Constitution says you've got to count actual people, not "guess" how many there are), and with ACORN helping with the Census count, don't forget that there are many of us who remember how they rigged the false voter registrations of inner city residents prior to the last election and believe that, at the very least, such an important process deserves more impartial bipartisan oversight.
Judging the speed with which the Democratically-controlled House and Senate (and Obama, by signing it into law) just spent $1 trillion of our tax money as "stimulus," do you REALLY think the reason the PATRIOT Act can't be repealed, IMMEDIATELY, if the Democrats decide to do so?
Don't forget statistical sampling in the 2010 Census.
But why is that the case. Reagan & Bush blew up the budget on huge tax breaks to the rich. Obama is going to blow up the deficit trying to fix the mess left for him by Reagan and Bush.
Exactly how long is Obama planning to keep blaming everything on Bush, especially with a Democratic House and Senate at his beckon call? That may work for dyed-in-the-wool lefties, but it won't work with the swing voters come next election.
Obama never should have picked Geithner, and the sooner he DTMFA's, the better. But I trust you were as proportionally outraged over the last 8 years of Republican lawbreaking that dwarf's Geithner's tax issues?
Absolutely. Warrantless wiretaps are wrong (which Obama continues), the war in Iraq is wrong (which Obama continues), and unchecked deficit spending is wrong (which Obama continues). What exactly is Obama doing differently, besides increasing the rate at which he's raising the National Debt? How come the banks aren't loaning out any money right now, even though they've sucked trillions of our tax dollars out of the system, and exactly what is George W. Bush doing, TODAY, to prevent them from loaning money?
No math needed. Here's the Official Table of Drops . . . from the Brits.
There's a Democrat in the White House who's in the process of making his own blocks on this chart look like the freakin' Sears Tower in comparison to what's there now. While he searches for even more ways to increase the National debt by trillions of dollars (that's right -- his bars won't even *fit* on this chart), his Treasury Secretary can't even pay his fucking taxes. Paradise under the Democrats indeed.
It's what happens when local, state, and Fed governments spends someone else's money (the taxpayers'). They overpay for stuff, buy stuff they don't always need, and waste billions and billions of our money nationwide, every year. After all, it's not like the government is spending its own money -- why would they lose any sleep over it?
You can either whine about it (which does nothing), fight the system (here's a hint -- you'll lose) or line up and try to get your little piece of the action. Sorry to sound so cynical -- but this is coming from someone who has sold software and tech services to both the public and private sectors for over a decade.
Indeed . . . especially those of dying liberal icons.
Good point . . . I hope you remember this when future IL docs are prepping the leeches to restore your vitality. ;-)
Don't confuse playing on the public's irrational fear of domestic terrorist attacks for stupidity. While this guy may indeed be a retard, I'd unfortunately have to say that the vast majority of politicians know *exactly* what they're doing when they create previously unthinkable laws and restrictions in the name of keeping us safe from the "terr'rists." :-(
Forgeting about "morality" for a second -- which is a distinctly human concept -- but isn't the scenario you postulate *exactly* what natural selection is all about? How is it any different than any other species, where those which are "most successful" and "best adapted" get to pass their genes on, and the ones who aren't do not?
How 'bout eSATA? How long until powered eSATA jacks are standard?
Because you need some way to describe the logic used in PDF-encapsulated forms. We are not talking about multi-tiered apps which adhere to MVC, mind you -- we're talking about forms which are completely self-contained in a PDF file, such as those created with Adobe's LiveCycle Designer. In LiveCycle Designer's case, you can either use Adobe's proprietary scripting language (which relatively few people already know), or you can use JavaScript (which lots of people already know). I've written a PDF order form, for example, which automatically recalculates the order's total on-the-fly for the customer filling it out in the browser, right on the form and without requiring an Internet connection. Among other things, this cuts down significantly on the volume of sales support calls and increases order accuracy. So, yes, there's really a use case for having a way to express logic in a PDF.
Good question. I think there are several reasons. One is that since Ross Perot, people are leery of "throwing their votes away" on a third-party candidate most people perceive as someone who cannot win. Lately, the Libertarians are reforcing this notion by playing spoliers to the Republicans, much like Nader did for the Democrats. It just happened here in my own Baltimore County, where a Congressional seat held for years by a Republican was lost in a tight election to the Democrats when a Libertarian siphoned off about 8,000 votes from folks who otherwise would have voted Republican.
Another issue with the party's viability is the pro-drug legalization plank. Regardless of what you may think of the "drug war," we live in a country where generations of Americans have been institutionally conditioned in the schools that "drugs == bad" under any circumstances. Even though we now have a President who admits he used not only pot but cocaine and was still elected, there's a loooooooong way to go until legalizing even pot is a possibility.
Finally -- due in part to the media, the Libertarians are perceived as the party of black helicopter / conspiracy theorist loonies. This is where they could learn a lot from the Obama folks about slick marketing and rock star appeal.
I think it's much more likely that the Republicans try to recast themselves as the party of small government than the Libertarian Party (as it exists today) will become more popular.
Logging will be built in for you by the manufacturer with no "off" switch. The extra storage required will increase the cost of the router, of course, which the manufacturer will happily pass on to its customers -- you. The clueless AOL users you reference don't understand logging, let alone wireless security, but they know they need a blue box with antenna thingies plugged into their cable modem so they can IM their friends from their laptop while watching Idol -- and since the blue box with the antenna thingies is approved for use with the Internet SAFETY Act, they're doing your part to help the kids, right?
It would be funny if it wasn't already preordained and quite purposeful. Politicians aren't nearly as stupid as we call them -- in fact, they're masters of marketing.
The Republicans want this "in the interest of national security" so they can stop the terr-rists.
The Democrats want this so they can save the children from all of that evil kiddie porn, and also so the **AA can better control the media you consume, kill P2P and net neutrality, and bill you for it appropriately.
They both want stuff like this so they can control the citizens better.
Where's the party who doesn't want any of this shit and thinks the government has much, much more important stuff on its plate right now?
Of course they can get welfare. If they can get fake SSNs to get a job, why can't they use those to abuse the welfare system?
you are standing here saying, in effect: "I've got mine, now screw the rest of the world."
Nope. I'm saying, "My ancestors came here legally -- why are today's illegals so special they get to break the rules?" All I ask is that illegal immigrants are made to wait in line like everyone else trying to get into the country -- with no special intermin treatment not afforded to anyone else -- and that the laws on the books are enforced. People who do not respect our laws have no right to become citizens when they are plenty waiting in line who do.
1. Money spent on cyber-crap takes away from irl-crap purchased in NY state. Who would pay $107 for your books at a brick and mortar bookstore when you can get them for $100 for them (with free shipping) on amazon.com?
Good question. Maybe NY should lower its taxes before its brick & morter retailers go the way of the covered wagon.
Poor people don't have the wherewithal to purchase things on the internet.
Every public library, even those in the most backwoods areas of the country, now has computers that anyone can use to access the Internet. For free. And even those who have terrible credit can get credit cards or debit cards that can be used to make online purchases (in fact, it's actively encouraged these days . . . spend! spend! spend!). Along with a mailing address, these are the only requirements for making purchases online. So exactly how is purchasing things on the Internet a conspiracy against the poor?
No, the real reason is that states like NY don't want to miss out on all of that sweet, sweet revenue they can just pluck out of thin air.
First of all -- I'm talking about illegal immigrants, not Mexicans (your word). I don't care where they're from -- my problem is that they're in the country illegally and not paying (all of) their taxes.
You know, I hear this all the time here in TN, where we have a 9.25% sales tax and no state income tax.
I'll trade you MD's 6% sales tax and 11% combined state and local income taxes for your 9.25% sales tax and no income tax (and no tax on retirement assets either). Deal?
Where is it that these illegals are buying groceries
Since when are non-luxury groceries like milk, bread, and produce taxed in most states? Even in your state of TN, they're only partially taxed.
Are they simply shopping at the same places as me, and producing an "illegal alien" identification card that lets them skip paying the taxes?
Even better than that -- they can get a (welfare) card that gets them stuff for free, even though they're not supposed to be here in the first place. Here in MD, it's ironically called an Independence Card. Other states have similar programs. Hell, in MD, illegal immigrants can even qualify for in-state tuition discounts ahead of out-of-state US Citizens! Go ahead and wrap your brain around that one for awhile.
I've looked closely many times when Mexicans were getting gas and the pump shows the same $/gallon as my pump, but maybe that's to fool me and when they go to pay the cashier knocks the tax off?
You're assuming it's their vehicle and their gas money, and not the boss's (unlikely if they're here illegally in the first place -- how would they register the car and get licensed? Or are they breaking even more laws?). Other the other hand, 1/3 of all drivers in the state of CA are uninsured, leading to huge increases to the cost of auto insurance.
Bottom line -- I don't know how it is in TN, but in CA and in my blue state, MD, illegal immigrants are treated as victims, not criminals, at a tremendous cost to our states' governments. Don't mistake people being pissed at another group thinking they're so special that they don't have to follow the rules and wait in line, for racism. I could care less what race people are as long as they follow the laws like those of us who do and pay ALL of our taxes.
I lived in CA for two years. I left eight years ago because it was waaaaaaaay too expensive back then, and I'd never live there again for that very same reason -- pretty much impossible to buy a house without having a two hour commute. Remember, it is your choice to live there -- no one's making you stay -- and you and your fellow Californians continually vote to increase your own tax burden. Heck, I'm now in Maryland, and am planning on moving back to Florida because MD is headed down the same tax-crazy, anti-business path as the rest of the Northeast and the CA.
I will, however, certainly agree with you re: farm subsidies (and pretty much everything else that the Federal government subsidizes). I'll even make a leap and guess you were against the Republicans wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq, and I'd agree with you there too. Some of us still believe in less government, less spending, and less taxes, but unfortunately, there's no political party for us these days -- and most importantly, two wrongs don't make a right. :-(
California has almost 3 million illegals. That's almost 8% of the state's population who are not paying taxes, and it's part of the reason the state is $41 billion in the hole (the cost of illigal immigrants to California is $10.5 billion annually, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform). People who think it's "racist" to state that illegal immigrants generally don't pay taxes are full of shit and clearly don't have a clue as to what real racism is.
You're right, of course. I should have said that the states' tax bases are shrinking -- illegal immigrants and newborn babies don't pay taxes.
Blue states love high taxes, and their populations vote accordingly. They're just "spreading the wealth around." However, that does not absolve their governments from planning for a rainy day, creating balanced budgets and paying their bills.
That's funny . . . California lost 144,000 people between July 1, 2007 and July 1, 2008, and New York lost 126,000 during the same period. Both states' populations are shrinking, not growing. According to you, state spending should be falling, but both states are tens of billions in the hole and scrambling to come up with new taxes to make up for the revenue they're losing from the people who left and continue to leave for more tax-friendly states. You can spin it all you want, but people and companies are getting the hell out of CA and the Northeast, and the primary reasons are high taxes and high cost of living. Increasing spending (which requires higher taxes on the poor souls who choose to stay when you have a negative population growth) will only make people leave faster.
Hence the winking smiley. I guess I wasn't obvious enough.