Interesting you don't mention how that government came to be in the first place.
By the way, revolutions apparently have nothing to do with treaties signed. Otherwise Russia would not have to follow any the USSR signed. And, as you said, Iran can leave the NNPT any time it wants.
I love the double standard! So, if that's the case, then people should STFU about Iran building anything, considering they haven't signed that treaty either...
Iran signed 1 July 1968. What was that about a double standard and STFU?
Yes, I have. FOUO and a lot of other useful information is not compartmentalized like you are trying to imply. Secret and Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information is like you describe, but anything below that is NOT in any way shape or form like you describe. FOUO and stuff is the kind that people keep in regular filing cabinets in normal buildings in regular corporate environments.
You want the example for a sensor? Pictures taken by it. You don't need to know the details for it, you only need the results. The capabilities of a sensor are critical, not just how to build it. The capabilities may not be classified, but they can still be FOUO and not for public release. By the way, FOUO is NOT classified, but it still shouldn't be spread around.
The only foreign policy that would follow from that is roll over and die. So long as we have wars, revolutionaries, and pretty much most of human nature, there is a need to keep secrets and classify information.
Just because you never get near classified material doesn't mean you don't get near material that shouldn't be released. A lot of information is stamped FOUO (For Official Use Only) and enough of that compiled together can equal classified.
That is quite accurate. These sensors also have military applications both for satellites and other reconnaissance systems. Knowing the capabilities of these sensors will give you a floor for determining the capabilities of others.
No, I didn't misunderstand. You're just spouting B.S. Commercial Airliners incorporate multiple levels of redundancy to ensure complete electrical failure or hydraulic failure doesn't happen, even if both engines fail. They do, for instance, have auxiliary power units (APUs) that are independent of both engine that provide both power and hydraulics even if both engines fail.
If you want to talk about complete failures, lets see what happens to one of your small aircraft if the cables break that go from the stick to the control surfaces. It's not like that never happens.
That's funny. People have landed a huge commercial jet dead stick before. Nor do they fall out of the sky when something goes wrong unless they lose a wing.
There is that. But from what I've seen, the tax base is sufficiently large most places to make most schools average. The only place I've heard of where the tax base is too small is dying cities such as Detroit. New York City averages out a lot better with both rich and poor in the tax base.
well, I am against income taxes completely (is that what the US schools are paid from?)
Just answering the question: It varies from state to state, but most US schools are paid for out of property taxes (taxes on houses and such), not income taxes. Those taxes are also collected at the local government level, not state or federal.
You really have no clue. European countries tax everything high.
To encourage drivers to get out of their cars, European countries devote a large portion of their gas-tax revenue to heavily subsidized public transportation systems.
Interesting how you're only looking at the Federal Government. How does that stack when you include the states and what is your source? By the way, if city dwellers don't need cars, they don't pay gas taxes and therefore don't fund the roads. So, wouldn't that mean that it is still the rural folks paying for the roads?
No, they should be forced to pay a tax on gasoline that pays for all the underused roads they drive on. Gas is artificially cheap in America compared to other countries, where they place a tax on it that reflects the true cost of roadbuilding and maintenance.
Wrong, most other countries use gasoline taxes as a general revenue source to fund the government, not for road construction and maintenance.
Here, urban dwellers subsidize road costs with their income taxes.
Really? Funny me, I thought the gas taxes funded the roads.
So, still not sure how the rural areas are getting subsidized.
Why should everyone subsidize your choice to live in a rural area?
Don't forget, land values in rural areas are generally far lower than in urban areas, so you're already getting a benefit there.
Land prices are lower because people are willing to pay more in the cities, not because the rural areas are subsidized. And so what if I'm getting a benefit? It's because I choose to live there, not from the government reducing the cost.
You're misapplying the numbers. If a farmers expenses increase 100%, then you do not have enough information to guess the affect on food prices. The only way it would be an increase of 1% is if the costs of farming expenses are 1% of the farmers cost of growing food. As this would mean 99% profit margins, that is unlikely given 30% profit margins are high. from here (pdf) the largest farms have a profit margin of 15-20%. With the 20% figure, you're talking an increase of prices by farmers of 80%. This would likely be a 10-20% increase by the time it reaches the store shelves.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm missing where it says the US did anything until well after the Shah was already removed.
Interesting you don't mention how that government came to be in the first place.
By the way, revolutions apparently have nothing to do with treaties signed. Otherwise Russia would not have to follow any the USSR signed. And, as you said, Iran can leave the NNPT any time it wants.
I love the double standard! So, if that's the case, then people should STFU about Iran building anything, considering they haven't signed that treaty either...
Iran signed 1 July 1968. What was that about a double standard and STFU?
Yes, I have. FOUO and a lot of other useful information is not compartmentalized like you are trying to imply. Secret and Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information is like you describe, but anything below that is NOT in any way shape or form like you describe. FOUO and stuff is the kind that people keep in regular filing cabinets in normal buildings in regular corporate environments.
You want the example for a sensor? Pictures taken by it. You don't need to know the details for it, you only need the results. The capabilities of a sensor are critical, not just how to build it. The capabilities may not be classified, but they can still be FOUO and not for public release. By the way, FOUO is NOT classified, but it still shouldn't be spread around.
When is israel going to have weapon inspectors and give them up?
When Israel signs the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The only foreign policy that would follow from that is roll over and die. So long as we have wars, revolutionaries, and pretty much most of human nature, there is a need to keep secrets and classify information.
Nothing they see even approaches FOUO? They do not see specifications for sensors? Information on equipment? Nothing at all?
Just because you never get near classified material doesn't mean you don't get near material that shouldn't be released. A lot of information is stamped FOUO (For Official Use Only) and enough of that compiled together can equal classified.
That is quite accurate. These sensors also have military applications both for satellites and other reconnaissance systems. Knowing the capabilities of these sensors will give you a floor for determining the capabilities of others.
If your mechanic thinks that "The Little Mermaid" was a Shakespearean drama, that really doesn't affect his ability to fix your car. Same with this.
And if you think it's a Disney story, you'd be just as wrong
Nope. The Bible doesn't says so.
No, I didn't misunderstand. You're just spouting B.S. Commercial Airliners incorporate multiple levels of redundancy to ensure complete electrical failure or hydraulic failure doesn't happen, even if both engines fail. They do, for instance, have auxiliary power units (APUs) that are independent of both engine that provide both power and hydraulics even if both engines fail.
If you want to talk about complete failures, lets see what happens to one of your small aircraft if the cables break that go from the stick to the control surfaces. It's not like that never happens.
That's funny. People have landed a huge commercial jet dead stick before. Nor do they fall out of the sky when something goes wrong unless they lose a wing.
There is that. But from what I've seen, the tax base is sufficiently large most places to make most schools average. The only place I've heard of where the tax base is too small is dying cities such as Detroit. New York City averages out a lot better with both rich and poor in the tax base.
Alternatively, you could stick it in the microwave for a minute after you get it to fry the RFID chip.
well, I am against income taxes completely (is that what the US schools are paid from?)
Just answering the question: It varies from state to state, but most US schools are paid for out of property taxes (taxes on houses and such), not income taxes. Those taxes are also collected at the local government level, not state or federal.
To encourage drivers to get out of their cars, European countries devote a large portion of their gas-tax revenue to heavily subsidized public transportation systems.
Source
Interesting how you're only looking at the Federal Government. How does that stack when you include the states and what is your source? By the way, if city dwellers don't need cars, they don't pay gas taxes and therefore don't fund the roads. So, wouldn't that mean that it is still the rural folks paying for the roads?
Furthermore, those people living in rural areas of countries which use trains seem to avoid dying horrible deaths as a result of the trains.
Um, what?
No, they should be forced to pay a tax on gasoline that pays for all the underused roads they drive on. Gas is artificially cheap in America compared to other countries, where they place a tax on it that reflects the true cost of roadbuilding and maintenance.
Wrong, most other countries use gasoline taxes as a general revenue source to fund the government, not for road construction and maintenance.
Here, urban dwellers subsidize road costs with their income taxes.
Really? Funny me, I thought the gas taxes funded the roads.
Actually, composting doesn't release all the carbon. Composting turns most of the carbon into soil, further sequestering it.
Why should everyone subsidize your choice to live in a rural area? Don't forget, land values in rural areas are generally far lower than in urban areas, so you're already getting a benefit there.
Land prices are lower because people are willing to pay more in the cities, not because the rural areas are subsidized. And so what if I'm getting a benefit? It's because I choose to live there, not from the government reducing the cost.
You're misapplying the numbers. If a farmers expenses increase 100%, then you do not have enough information to guess the affect on food prices. The only way it would be an increase of 1% is if the costs of farming expenses are 1% of the farmers cost of growing food. As this would mean 99% profit margins, that is unlikely given 30% profit margins are high. from here (pdf) the largest farms have a profit margin of 15-20%. With the 20% figure, you're talking an increase of prices by farmers of 80%. This would likely be a 10-20% increase by the time it reaches the store shelves.
But everyone can usually agree that republicans tend not to understand issues as is demonstrated by the post I'm replying to.
Nice how you added a "and if you disagree with me you're wrong" statement at the end.
It's funny you mention that. Two sets of train tracks run right under the Pentagon.