I guess you don't know how to read because I just admited defeat. I just didn't admit that the best candidate won because I don't beleive that. NOT admiting defeat would fall squarely on Al Gore's shoulders. I have a conference call with him tonight and I should probably bring up this conversation.
Actually, its kind of like life. You would save a lot of money and be better off if you didn't put a roof over your head but if not living under a roof also means you die from exposure to the elements then that benefit never got seen. The same applies to a corporation. Many times it would make more sense in the long term to do one thing but because all the other corporations are concentrating on todays profits then their competition needs to as well or risk being made obsolete and dying.
3 years ago there was not much (READ: ANY) talk about Bush spending because liberals were too busy repeating the "Bush lied, children died" meme that proved so completely false. If instead of bashing the war policy (even though actual INCREASE in defense spending was minimal because peacetime training costs money too) they could have been talking about waste of money. Know why they didn't? Because they actually like spending the tax payers dollars on entitlement programs and pork barrel legislation ensuring they get elected again.
Yes but the doctrine does not imply that congress should breeze by the due diligence part of the lawmaking process. They need to look for unintended consequences and word the legislation in such a way as to counteract them.
I guess you missed the part where you can be personally FINED if you don't buy a qualified health insurance plan for yourself. I know it was only one line in the bill but it was the most important line and it stayed in there.
Every hear of an Ad Hominem attack? You just did it. Ron Paul is the furthest thing from racist possible but more importantly his ARGUMENT STAND IN THEIR OWN MERIT! Namely, most of what congress enacts it outside of its jurisdiction and therefore unconstitutional!
Yeah, if San Francisco had it's way then nobody would be able to own a gun, we would all ride around on cable cars and when we got home from work we woud take it up the ass.
This is the best post on Slashdot in quite some time. I cannot agree more on the point about government having no role in marriage. They should get out of the marriage business altogether and the whole issue would dissolve. Instead we waste all this time trying to overturn the will of the people.
On abortion I agree as well. Humans are humans and if we value that species over others then that value should extend throughout the life of the human and not just during certain parts of it.
On Stem cell research I agree as well. First of all the ban was on FEDERAL FUNDING of developing NEW LINES of EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS. To put it in another way, the ban said that federal money could not be used to harvest cells from zygotes which effectively ended their lives. Or in another way, don't use taxes to kill babies for you experimental research. It did NOT however ban research on existing ESCR or Adult Stem cell research.
Its what Democrats do best; fall for the trap of unintended consequences and then claim they were ignorant (which they were). The problem is that the very fact that they did not see the 3000 ton train speeding their way is so down right preposterous as to be criminally negligent. Making laws requires DUE DILIGENCE and that includes thinking about the law of unintended consequences. NOT doing so is morally and ethically WRONG!
if you don't want the tasty government tax credits, don't comply
I don't think you quite understand competition under capatalism. If one bank does not take the tax credits and another does then the bank that does not is at an economic disadvantage. These advantages and disadvantages pile up until a bank cannot continue to compete and either gets taken over by the FDIC and sold for a fraction of its value (Read: Washington Mutual) or it gets bought out by another more competitive (Read: take the tasty government tax credits) bank.
Exactly! I mean I actually physically went to a Tea Party event and there were politicians there affiliated with EVERY party and there were MINORITIES (GASP!) holding giants signs extolling that they were minorities and that they were NOT racist! The Tea Party is about ending the ridiculous spending and waste in Government.
I don't think you understand all the hoops you have to jump through to get the long-term capitcal gains rate and anyways that doesn't even apply to business profit at you report that quarterly. You seem to not understand much of what you are discussing.
No, the exemption is because we resell things and only the end users is supposed to pay sales tax. We then have to report all our sales and the sales tax we collected FOR the Government. Even with Sales Tax, we have to do the Government's job for them.
No, you take my argument out of context. I understand that there are limits to the freedom of the press. Specifically when it comes to privacy. However being in public means that Police officers are afforded NONE of these exemptions. Taking Video of the Police while they are in public is legal IN ALL 50 STATES under the Constution of the United States and all the legal precedents set beforehand.
Which she should have been able to do. If you hear something yourself then you should be able to record it. End of story. The other option is to transcribe the conversation with another witness also transcribing it as it happens but that is too much work when the technology exists to just record the audio.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess you don't know how to read because I just admited defeat. I just didn't admit that the best candidate won because I don't beleive that. NOT admiting defeat would fall squarely on Al Gore's shoulders. I have a conference call with him tonight and I should probably bring up this conversation.
Oh, I forgot. There is one more thing Democrats are good at; rewriting history. Thanks for the above points.
Actually, its kind of like life. You would save a lot of money and be better off if you didn't put a roof over your head but if not living under a roof also means you die from exposure to the elements then that benefit never got seen. The same applies to a corporation. Many times it would make more sense in the long term to do one thing but because all the other corporations are concentrating on todays profits then their competition needs to as well or risk being made obsolete and dying.
3 years ago there was not much (READ: ANY) talk about Bush spending because liberals were too busy repeating the "Bush lied, children died" meme that proved so completely false. If instead of bashing the war policy (even though actual INCREASE in defense spending was minimal because peacetime training costs money too) they could have been talking about waste of money. Know why they didn't? Because they actually like spending the tax payers dollars on entitlement programs and pork barrel legislation ensuring they get elected again.
Yes but the doctrine does not imply that congress should breeze by the due diligence part of the lawmaking process. They need to look for unintended consequences and word the legislation in such a way as to counteract them.
http://goooh.com/home.aspx Here is a plan.
I guess you missed the part where you can be personally FINED if you don't buy a qualified health insurance plan for yourself. I know it was only one line in the bill but it was the most important line and it stayed in there.
Every hear of an Ad Hominem attack? You just did it. Ron Paul is the furthest thing from racist possible but more importantly his ARGUMENT STAND IN THEIR OWN MERIT! Namely, most of what congress enacts it outside of its jurisdiction and therefore unconstitutional!
Actually we lost the election because the voting public is for the most part ignorant and lazy.
Yeah, if San Francisco had it's way then nobody would be able to own a gun, we would all ride around on cable cars and when we got home from work we woud take it up the ass.
This is the best post on Slashdot in quite some time. I cannot agree more on the point about government having no role in marriage. They should get out of the marriage business altogether and the whole issue would dissolve. Instead we waste all this time trying to overturn the will of the people.
On abortion I agree as well. Humans are humans and if we value that species over others then that value should extend throughout the life of the human and not just during certain parts of it.
On Stem cell research I agree as well. First of all the ban was on FEDERAL FUNDING of developing NEW LINES of EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS. To put it in another way, the ban said that federal money could not be used to harvest cells from zygotes which effectively ended their lives. Or in another way, don't use taxes to kill babies for you experimental research. It did NOT however ban research on existing ESCR or Adult Stem cell research.
Its what Democrats do best; fall for the trap of unintended consequences and then claim they were ignorant (which they were). The problem is that the very fact that they did not see the 3000 ton train speeding their way is so down right preposterous as to be criminally negligent. Making laws requires DUE DILIGENCE and that includes thinking about the law of unintended consequences. NOT doing so is morally and ethically WRONG!
I don't think you quite understand competition under capatalism. If one bank does not take the tax credits and another does then the bank that does not is at an economic disadvantage. These advantages and disadvantages pile up until a bank cannot continue to compete and either gets taken over by the FDIC and sold for a fraction of its value (Read: Washington Mutual) or it gets bought out by another more competitive (Read: take the tasty government tax credits) bank.
Exactly! I mean I actually physically went to a Tea Party event and there were politicians there affiliated with EVERY party and there were MINORITIES (GASP!) holding giants signs extolling that they were minorities and that they were NOT racist! The Tea Party is about ending the ridiculous spending and waste in Government.
I don't think you understand all the hoops you have to jump through to get the long-term capitcal gains rate and anyways that doesn't even apply to business profit at you report that quarterly. You seem to not understand much of what you are discussing.
You should get a new job. Yours sucks!
No, the exemption is because we resell things and only the end users is supposed to pay sales tax. We then have to report all our sales and the sales tax we collected FOR the Government. Even with Sales Tax, we have to do the Government's job for them.
*Cars. Damn Typos!
Actually most modern cards can survive being put in neutral and mashing the throttle.
Hmm, then my sales tax exemption form will be REALLY useful!
Intuit is making money OFF of the problem. Put the blame where it belongs; on the lying politicians and the apathetic public.
Nice Dune reference.
No, you take my argument out of context. I understand that there are limits to the freedom of the press. Specifically when it comes to privacy. However being in public means that Police officers are afforded NONE of these exemptions. Taking Video of the Police while they are in public is legal IN ALL 50 STATES under the Constution of the United States and all the legal precedents set beforehand.
Which she should have been able to do. If you hear something yourself then you should be able to record it. End of story. The other option is to transcribe the conversation with another witness also transcribing it as it happens but that is too much work when the technology exists to just record the audio.
MOD PARENT UP!