case. They have virtually NO self esteem and they use.
Citation needed!
I asked for citations so I'll provide one myself:
"The mental and physical health of female sex workers: a comparative study"
"Results: There were no differences in mental health on the GHQ-28 or in self-esteem (measured by an item on the Present State Examination) between the two groups. Neither were there any differences in their assessment of their physical health or the quality of their social networks. Sex workers were less likely to be married and had been exposed to more adult physical and sexual abuse than the comparison group. They were more likely to smoke and to drink heavily when they drank. One-third said that their general practitioner was not aware of their work. A subgroup not working with regular clients or in a massage parlour had higher GHQ-28 scores and may be an at-risk group. Narrative information about the work, particularly its intermittent nature, is presented."
"Conclusions: No evidence was found that sex work and increased adult psychiatric morbidity are inevitably associated, although there may be subgroups of workers with particular problems. The illegal and stigmatized nature of sex work are likely to make usual public health strategies more difficult to apply, considerations which should give concern from a preventive health standpoint."
Not all taxes, just income tax. By forcing people who work to pay tax on what they make you're penalizing them.
many things must be done for the general population.
Like what? Building and maintaining roads? Then tax miles driven. Schools and education? Property taxes should pay for that. As it should for the fire department and police. Now while I oppose federal income taxes for individuals I would tax corporations. If you want limited liability then you pay for it. This could then be used to pay for a reduced military, NASA, and research.
If the ROI > 1, then there is a (debunkable) case for having the government do it - to debunk that case you need merely to establish that private industry can deliver a better return to society (Not to it's shareholders) than the Government.
Okay, the Soviet Union. Government did it all, and ran the union into the ground. Now some people are enjoying their economic and political freedom. Meanwhile the nation with the most economic freedom, the US, is also the biggest economy. Until China and India pass the US, however they are both moving to economic freedom as well.
Actually, in the US, your fair share doesn't actually track your income. The middle-class carries the greatest tax burden. That's why the economy is so screwed--the middle class has been decimated.
According to FactCheck.org "The top 1 percent of all households got 18 percent of all personal income and paid nearly 28 percent of all federal taxes in 2005, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The top 1 percent now pay a significantly larger share of taxes than before President Bush's tax cuts, and also have a larger share of income."
Read Galbraith's book, "The Great Crash", where he analyises the 1929 stock market crash.
Read how UCLA professors Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian's study concluded "FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years. Others believe protectionism like the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act made the Great Depression worse. After the US raised tariffs on imports other nations retaliated by raising their own tariffs against US goods. With US employers not able to sell goods internationally they could not pay employees.
So, other than helping citizens of the country, what pray tell, should the government do with its money?
It's not the governments's, yes plural, money. It money people work to earn. If people didn't have to pay income taxes they could both invest and spend more thus create more jobs.
Ah, they remind me of one of my favorite movies, "To Catch a Thief", there's a scene where Grace Kelly (soon to become Princess Grace) is racing in the mountains of southern France.
with the next goal as cleaner fuels and energy production methods.
We have those now, though more research needs to be done to increase efficiency and storage.
Presently, plug-in vehicles just mean the burning coal or oil elsewhere.
It may be that way now but if the electricity is produced by renewable resources it doesn't have to remain that way. I'm not sure if it was in "Homepower" or "Solar Today" but someone had written how they recharge their EV with energy generated by a solar or hybrid system.
The average home or even parking lot is certainly not going to be wired to refill a vehicle in 30-minutes.
The average home or parking lot does not need to recharge batteries in 30 minutes. Batteries can be charged while working and sleeping for instance. The problem would come with long haul trucking, however trains are more fuel efficient. Semis could then use hybrid drive systems, a small petro engine recharges batteries which powers an electric engine, until hydrogen can be used.
Sorry to sound like a cynic but a car that needs to be plugged-in will never be the one for the masses.
Where will people who live in apartments plug in their car?
Do those same people fuel their cars in their apartments? No, they go to a gas station. The same thing can happen with plugin EVs. Or do you thing those gas stations were there before cars with internal combustion engines?
Plug-ins are not the wave of the future. Hydrogen is.
Plug-ins can serve as a stepping stone to Hydrogen vehicles. The only thing different is the energy storage if the hydrogen feeds a fuel cell that produces electricity.
colder temperatures (I'm less certain on this one).
Actually batteries do worse in colder weather. See "Why Do Batteries Discharge More Quickly in Cold Weather?" When I go out to shoot photos during the winter I keep spare batteries in a pocket next to me to keep warm because the batteries in the camera die faster than in warm weather.
Fast, flashy, exotic. But not for the masses. Yet. And the masses are where the real difference comes in.
It's research like this that will bring EVs to the masses. Tesla already is planning a lower price car, the Model S. At $49,900, after a $7,500 federal tax credit, it's high priced but there may be another in the wings.
The big three all make economy cars, but they sell them overseas.
Ford makes and sells a 68 mpg diesel in Europe.
Normally they would do some financing deal to the customers that would help them changed there momentum to move with the market(this is a 5 year process) but the bottom fell out of the economy and no one was backing big loans.
Saying they're a bank, GMAC, GM tried to get some of that bank bailout money.
Well the Japanese and European car makers have good, profitable markets for their small cars. GM and Ford have narrower markets and are more exposed to changes in market conditions.
I don't know about GM but Ford makes more fuel efficient vehicles in Europe. Here's a "Business Week" article about "The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have". TFA says it's not available in the US because it runs on diesel and that the fuel has a bad rep. As biodiesel is getting more popular in the US I say this is BS as an excuse.
When you build tens of thousands of cars you have to sell what the market wants and clearly in the US that is large cars or SUVs.
The thing is is Detroit, that is Chrysler, Ford, and GM, have a record of NOT making what the market wants. This was amply demonstrated in the '70s. For years after the oil crisis people were demanding fuel efficient autos but the big 3 wouldn't offer them. So the Japanese auto makers ate their lunch by making more efficient cars. That was when Japanese cars had to be imported and weren't made in the US. Eventually Detroit started importing Japanese cars but rebranded them. I once bought a Chevy branded truck but when I opened it up to work on the engine it was a Japanese company that made it.
My Corolla has a 10-gallon tank, so at typical 28mpg I only get 250 safe miles out of a tank.
Perhaps there's something wrong with your Corolla, it needs a tuneup, or you mostly do slow, stop and go city driving. Someone once told me gas tanks are made to travel 300 miles on a full tank. I have a 2000 Saturn and 300 miles is the shortest I've gotten out of a full tank. And yes I keep the records.
They are using the high end market to drive the technology until it's cheap enough to work for everyday cars. This is a much better approach than the EV1 that started cheap.
I agree Tesla is taking a better approach than GM did with the EV1. However GM didn't sell the EV1, it was available only for lease and only in California, Arizona, and Georgia for employees of GM.
I'll give you two good reasons we're not ever going to see this.
There's a bigger reason Lake Erie water won't be pumped to the Southwest, there's a compact or agreement between the US and Canada.
NOTHING in the southwest is an important center for commerce. Los Angeles is a major port city, a major tourism destination, and a home for many large businesses. Phoenix?
Can dry-up and wither in the desert heat, for all the world cares.
Yea, for all I care. I oppose any more building and growth there. That applies to LA and Imperial Valley too though. If not for the water pumped from the Colorado River the farms in Imperial Valley would not even exist.
So their overall performance is even worse than I realized? Wow.
The MS stock price has gone down. But back in 1999 I don't think Microsoft paid dividends. The earliest this shows MS paying a dividend was in 2003. Before then MS kept the money. This says MS has consistently increased dividends since. There was also a stock split in 2003. It was a 2 for 1 split and the day before the closing MS stock price was $48.30 and after the closing price was $24.96.
Slashdot Mirror
Taxes are a necessity for a society, but when they become a burden and retard entrepreneurial activity, then its tax structure needs to be examined.
Either your employer withholds tax and pays it for you, or the responsibility is on your head. (Well actually it's always on your head, ultimately)
It's difficult when you have to hire an accountant to figure out how much you owe in taxes.
Falcon
First thing to do...incorporate yourself.
Or form a limited liability company.
Falcon
case. They have virtually NO self esteem and they use.
Citation needed!
I asked for citations so I'll provide one myself:
"The mental and physical health of female sex workers: a comparative study"
"Results: There were no differences in mental health on the GHQ-28 or in self-esteem (measured by an item on the Present State Examination) between the two groups. Neither were there any differences in their assessment of their physical health or the quality of their social networks. Sex workers were less likely to be married and had been exposed to more adult physical and sexual abuse than the comparison group. They were more likely to smoke and to drink heavily when they drank. One-third said that their general practitioner was not aware of their work. A subgroup not working with regular clients or in a massage parlour had higher GHQ-28 scores and may be an at-risk group. Narrative information about the work, particularly its intermittent nature, is presented."
"Conclusions: No evidence was found that sex work and increased adult psychiatric morbidity are inevitably associated, although there may be subgroups of workers with particular problems. The illegal and stigmatized nature of sex work are likely to make usual public health strategies more difficult to apply, considerations which should give concern from a preventive health standpoint."
Falcon
Not all taxes, just income tax. By forcing people who work to pay tax on what they make you're penalizing them.
many things must be done for the general population.
Like what? Building and maintaining roads? Then tax miles driven. Schools and education? Property taxes should pay for that. As it should for the fire department and police. Now while I oppose federal income taxes for individuals I would tax corporations. If you want limited liability then you pay for it. This could then be used to pay for a reduced military, NASA, and research.
Falcon
If the ROI > 1, then there is a (debunkable) case for having the government do it - to debunk that case you need merely to establish that private industry can deliver a better return to society (Not to it's shareholders) than the Government.
Okay, the Soviet Union. Government did it all, and ran the union into the ground. Now some people are enjoying their economic and political freedom. Meanwhile the nation with the most economic freedom, the US, is also the biggest economy. Until China and India pass the US, however they are both moving to economic freedom as well.
Falcon
Actually, in the US, your fair share doesn't actually track your income. The middle-class carries the greatest tax burden. That's why the economy is so screwed--the middle class has been decimated.
According to FactCheck.org "The top 1 percent of all households got 18 percent of all personal income and paid nearly 28 percent of all federal taxes in 2005, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The top 1 percent now pay a significantly larger share of taxes than before President Bush's tax cuts, and also have a larger share of income."
Where did you get your data from?
Falcon
Remember, the whole point of corporations is to avoid personal responsibility while enhancing the owners wealth.
No the point of corporations is to serve the common or public good. See this.
Falcon
Very highly paid people do very little work for each dollar they earn. This is not my opinion, it is simple mathematics.
So, a ditch digger should get paid more than an IT worker?
Falcon
Read Galbraith's book, "The Great Crash", where he analyises the 1929 stock market crash.
Read how UCLA professors Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian's study concluded "FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years. Others believe protectionism like the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act made the Great Depression worse. After the US raised tariffs on imports other nations retaliated by raising their own tariffs against US goods. With US employers not able to sell goods internationally they could not pay employees.
Falcon
So, other than helping citizens of the country, what pray tell, should the government do with its money?
It's not the governments's, yes plural, money. It money people work to earn. If people didn't have to pay income taxes they could both invest and spend more thus create more jobs.
Falcon
It took this long because it was going *through narrow mountain roads in the Alps*. Are you going to drive 80mph on roads like this?
Ah, they remind me of one of my favorite movies, "To Catch a Thief", there's a scene where Grace Kelly (soon to become Princess Grace) is racing in the mountains of southern France.
Falcon
independence
Agreed!!!
with the next goal as cleaner fuels and energy production methods.
We have those now, though more research needs to be done to increase efficiency and storage.
Presently, plug-in vehicles just mean the burning coal or oil elsewhere.
It may be that way now but if the electricity is produced by renewable resources it doesn't have to remain that way. I'm not sure if it was in "Homepower" or "Solar Today" but someone had written how they recharge their EV with energy generated by a solar or hybrid system.
Falcon
The US power grid is already stretched pretty thin and widespread adoption of plugin vehicles would necessitate major infrastructure upgrades.
Obama included money in the stimulus package to upgrade the power grid and is "Pressing for a Power Grid Overhaul".
The average home or even parking lot is certainly not going to be wired to refill a vehicle in 30-minutes.
The average home or parking lot does not need to recharge batteries in 30 minutes. Batteries can be charged while working and sleeping for instance. The problem would come with long haul trucking, however trains are more fuel efficient. Semis could then use hybrid drive systems, a small petro engine recharges batteries which powers an electric engine, until hydrogen can be used.
Falcon
Sorry to sound like a cynic but a car that needs to be plugged-in will never be the one for the masses.
Where will people who live in apartments plug in their car?
Do those same people fuel their cars in their apartments? No, they go to a gas station. The same thing can happen with plugin EVs. Or do you thing those gas stations were there before cars with internal combustion engines?
Plug-ins are not the wave of the future. Hydrogen is.
Plug-ins can serve as a stepping stone to Hydrogen vehicles. The only thing different is the energy storage if the hydrogen feeds a fuel cell that produces electricity.
Falcon
colder temperatures (I'm less certain on this one).
Actually batteries do worse in colder weather. See "Why Do Batteries Discharge More Quickly in Cold Weather?" When I go out to shoot photos during the winter I keep spare batteries in a pocket next to me to keep warm because the batteries in the camera die faster than in warm weather.
Falcon
Fast, flashy, exotic. But not for the masses. Yet. And the masses are where the real difference comes in.
It's research like this that will bring EVs to the masses. Tesla already is planning a lower price car, the Model S. At $49,900, after a $7,500 federal tax credit, it's high priced but there may be another in the wings.
Falcon
The big three all make economy cars, but they sell them overseas.
Ford makes and sells a 68 mpg diesel in Europe.
Normally they would do some financing deal to the customers that would help them changed there momentum to move with the market(this is a 5 year process) but the bottom fell out of the economy and no one was backing big loans.
Saying they're a bank, GMAC, GM tried to get some of that bank bailout money.
Falcon
Well the Japanese and European car makers have good, profitable markets for their small cars. GM and Ford have narrower markets and are more exposed to changes in market conditions.
I don't know about GM but Ford makes more fuel efficient vehicles in Europe. Here's a "Business Week" article about "The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have". TFA says it's not available in the US because it runs on diesel and that the fuel has a bad rep. As biodiesel is getting more popular in the US I say this is BS as an excuse.
Falcon
When you build tens of thousands of cars you have to sell what the market wants and clearly in the US that is large cars or SUVs.
The thing is is Detroit, that is Chrysler, Ford, and GM, have a record of NOT making what the market wants. This was amply demonstrated in the '70s. For years after the oil crisis people were demanding fuel efficient autos but the big 3 wouldn't offer them. So the Japanese auto makers ate their lunch by making more efficient cars. That was when Japanese cars had to be imported and weren't made in the US. Eventually Detroit started importing Japanese cars but rebranded them. I once bought a Chevy branded truck but when I opened it up to work on the engine it was a Japanese company that made it.
Falcon
My Corolla has a 10-gallon tank, so at typical 28mpg I only get 250 safe miles out of a tank.
Perhaps there's something wrong with your Corolla, it needs a tuneup, or you mostly do slow, stop and go city driving. Someone once told me gas tanks are made to travel 300 miles on a full tank. I have a 2000 Saturn and 300 miles is the shortest I've gotten out of a full tank. And yes I keep the records.
Falcon
That's what I said.
Okay. I thought you meant laptop batteries don't catch fire.
Falcon
And Tesla is near-unique in using laptop cells rather than the "automotive" li-ions which use different chemistries and don't have the fire risk.
Laptop batteries do catch on fire.
Falcon
They are using the high end market to drive the technology until it's cheap enough to work for everyday cars. This is a much better approach than the EV1 that started cheap.
I agree Tesla is taking a better approach than GM did with the EV1. However GM didn't sell the EV1, it was available only for lease and only in California, Arizona, and Georgia for employees of GM.
Falcon
I'll give you two good reasons we're not ever going to see this.
There's a bigger reason Lake Erie water won't be pumped to the Southwest, there's a compact or agreement between the US and Canada.
NOTHING in the southwest is an important center for commerce. Los Angeles is a major port city, a major tourism destination, and a home for many large businesses. Phoenix?
Intel is in Phoenix, including fabs. From 2005, "Intel To Build New 300 mm Wafer Factory In Arizona".
Can dry-up and wither in the desert heat, for all the world cares.
Yea, for all I care. I oppose any more building and growth there. That applies to LA and Imperial Valley too though. If not for the water pumped from the Colorado River the farms in Imperial Valley would not even exist.
Falcon
So their overall performance is even worse than I realized? Wow.
The MS stock price has gone down. But back in 1999 I don't think Microsoft paid dividends. The earliest this shows MS paying a dividend was in 2003. Before then MS kept the money. This says MS has consistently increased dividends since. There was also a stock split in 2003. It was a 2 for 1 split and the day before the closing MS stock price was $48.30 and after the closing price was $24.96.
Falcon