"Ever had to carry a 20 ft ladder over rough terrain?"
No but I would imagine several people could do it quite easily.
"Border security requested a fence instead of a wall. The main reason for that was so that they could see the people carrying the 20 ft ladder over rough terrain, and could concentrate their efforts there."
You know what would be even easier to see a bunch of illegal immigrants through? Nothing. Meanwhile I wall doesn't mean more security guarding it so how will a wall help us see people coming over the boarder illegally?
"They are willing to drag them across a desert, after all. They'll need to carry two ladders over rough terrain."
More like a ladder and a rope. Or they can become mules and use one of the many tunnels currently running under our boarder. We find more every year and that's without Trump's wall.
Illegal immigrants will continue to enter our country as long as there is demand for their labor. Simple supply and demand economics are a powerful force that a stupid wall will not thwart. Meanwhile, things like required use of our government's already existing e-verify system by employers aren't even being discussed by mainstream Republicans despite that reducing demand for illegal immigrant labor will significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants entering the country as the only reason the vast majority of them come here is for work.
But no, the Republican party elites don't actually want to solve the problem, that would upset big Ag which is the only money in most of their states. So rather than making a huge dent in the incredibly simple supply and demand problem for a cost of next to nothing they're willing to blow billions on a huge symbol that won't do shit.
https://www.sacbee.com/opinion... - Caifornia makes up 13.3% of the United State's GDP https://blogs.voanews.com/all-... and holds 15.34% of all state debt going by the numbers I'm looking at here https://www.usgovernmentdebt.u... . I would certainly agree that the state has a liability problem (one of what I would consider to be one of the state's two key problems) but the scope of it isn't as big as the author tries to make it seem.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0... - So an article about how our governor is trying to get California ready for another recession is bad? That sounds like a plus for California. Hopefully the governor of Texas is planning for another dip in their essential oil market.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/1... - The only really damning thing here is mentioning our high cost of living (the other major problem I'd say the state has). This certainly needs addressing and is likely already cutting into our economic growth in places like the valley but it is hardly a doomsday scenario.
https://www.investors.com/poli... - This is just dumb fear mongering with gems like... "The carbon emissions laws and other regulatory overreach kill jobs and hope for many." So our record unemployment isn't real? "The state's gas tax is the nation's highest, some 30 cents to a dollar per gallon above the national average." Oh heavens! Wait, doesnt every other first world nation have gas taxes far in access of what California has? "Businesses won't hire more workers and invest in growth due to confiscatory state and local taxes and complex and contradictory regulatory regimes. Hundreds of striving small businesses face bullying and high fees from state agencies." Once again, current massively low unemployment rate. We also generated 20 percent of the country's GDP growth last year, so no, this is not a problem. "California has become the modern equivalent of the Southern Confederates of 1860. Antipathetic to federal law, and seeking its own coalition with foreign governments via trade and environmental and immigration policy." HAHAHAHAHA. Right, we're a bunch of slave holding degenerates willing to dissolve the union so we can own people. What an apt comparison for the incredibly small amount of international outreach California has done.
"Not to mention my personal hope that high-state tax states (CA, like NY, MA, and my state of MN) *don't* get to wriggle out from under the state-tax-writeoff cap put into law last year. Because previously - being able to write off the high endemic state taxes - meant that RED STATES were essentially subsidizing your (our) social giveaways, which was/is bullshit....but I'm sure they're all just conservative publications funded by the Koch brothers, right?"
Well much like your self I can't find proper numbers on what the results are expected to be but I would anticipate it will not be the wonderful put down to blue states you want it to be. When have you heard of the South generating economic prosperity for our country? Only when they used to own people. All they do now is offer cheap American labor because they're that destitute. How about the bible belt? Well they have some reasonably solid agriculture whose backbone is illegal immigrant labor. Thankfully for them Trump is
How many of those have you actually heard about in the news? If the answer is almost none of them it's because earth quakes are not some huge hazard in California. As a California resident I was actually surprised by how big that list was because nothing meaningful came from almost any of them. If you look at federal disaster payouts, Earthquakes are almost non existent on the ledgers. I would be far more concerned with locating a nuclear power plant anywhere near the east cost given the level of devastation the region receives due to hurricanes. A good looking federal source is down right now but sort this list by country and region and perceive the lack of earthquakes on it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"That might be because in the Midwest, where I live, we don't have an irrational fear of far cheaper and far more reliable nuclear power."
"I found out recently that the nuclear power plant near me is threatening to close down and not build a new nuclear power plant to replace it."
There's a very obvious dissonance in the points you are trying to make. "We don't have an irrational fear of nuclear power but we're shutting down a nuclear plant"
The real question here is why is the plant you mention closing? If there's no legislation forcing it to shut down then the problem can only be economic in nature as most of our nation's nuclear plants aren't so old that they must be retired.
Please name your power plant so we can clean up this discrepancy.
I won't lie to you and tell you California is perfectly run but it's run a hell of a lot better than any red state. It's great you have a single article from a conservative publication preaching the imminent failure of California. The ending is wonderfully precious when it claims in a completely unsubstantiated manner that California wants the fed to pay for the problems it does have when unlike red states we put in more to the fed then get out. In other words, there would be a hell of a lot more money to go around in California if we didn't have to prop up decades worth of failed Red state governance.
Your article even links to another by the same author that claims people are fleeing the state because of the problems it does have while the article you posted tries to make the case that California's infrastructure is stretched too thin. Those are mutually exclusive problems. Either the state's population is shrinking and therefore moving closer towards the author's completely unsubstantiated and likely made up number of a max population of 25 mil for California or the population is increasing and therefore people leaving the state isn't a the horrible problem he makes it out to be.
No serious economist that doesn't have an ideological bone to pick thinks California is anywhere close to economic failure.
Ease your rage here. The problem here isn't government, it's a shit hole slashdot headline. PG&E was pulling down great profits prior to these fires when all of a sudden it was found to have been negligent in maintaining their equipment after the fires broke out. The only thing "global warming" has to do with this is that the likelihood of fires like these are increased as global warming worsens. Global warming, however, does not change the conditions that PG&E, through its neglect of requirements it knew it had, failed to meet. These are what it is being fined over. If they had maintained what what they should have as they should have the California wild fires wouldn't have caused them much trouble.
I know it's fashionable for conservatives to pick at the Leftist policies of the United States' most prosperous state but you're just making things up here. PG&E was doing great prior to the two big waves of fires that came through California https://www.macrotrends.net/st... and they would have zero liabilities in the case of these fires if they had maintained things the way they knew they were obligated to.
"Meanwhile, state and federal regulations basically conspire against them."
So we're convoluting state and federal policy now as a means of damning California? Most of our big open territory in this state is Federal.
"And they're made liable for any fires in the area of their equipment, whether it was actually their equipment or not..."
Citation needed.
"Meanwhile, California's idiot density is going up year over year as people with an actual functional brain flee the state."
Right, Californian's are idiots. What state are you from? Wait, it doesn't matter because it's not as prosperous as California.
"It's just the intellectually retarded leading the intellectually retarded out there."
Shit, I'll take our imperfect system over a Red state's any day of the week. At least we're able to generate meaningful wealth without the maximum exploitation of all of our public land as Texas does. We could certainly learn a thing or two from other blue states but I'm guessing that's not where you're at.
"It is scifi drivel that they are convinced is really real."
No, in the context of my own comment about wormholes, it's theoretical physics supported by the works of some of the greatest minds in in the field. All you keep repeating is "if we can't do it right here and now then it's impossible" and that's simply not true.
" but stop pretending it is real and stop saying "well in the 1800s no one ever though humans can fly, but now look what we can do!". Complete BS. Trying actually building something real before spouting off about "space factories" or "Dyson Spheres"."
That's funny, you point out why you're wrong and then refute it by yet again repeating "dur, if we can't do it today it's not possible!". I don't know what you're thinking you're accomplishing by saying that over and over again but humanity has consistently pushed the bounds of what was thought to be possible. Much of our present would be inconceivable to a person living a few hundred years ago while other parts would have been merely theorized by their finest minds. It's just stupid to think our distant future will be any different. Sure, it's possible there is literally no way to move between the stars in a time efficient manner, on the other hand there are very well respected theories that suggest that there might be ways.
Her review is hardly a feminist critique of the movie. The negative points it details are bad CGI, wooden acting, cheese ball lines, and poor romance sub plot chemistry while acknowledging that the character of Aquaman himself was much more fun than the rest of the DC universe heroes.
Now I haven't seen the movie so I have no idea how accurate her claims are but what is glaringly obvious is that there's no radical feminist agenda preset in it.
Einstein theorized their existence over a half century ago and they are still featured as possibilities in many models of the universe.
Given this could a more advanced civilization possibly use one to send a probe to our solar system? Yes. Just like things that were once just "science fiction" for us are now reality today it is possible sending matter through a wormhole could be possible. Therefore, my core point stands that just because it really couldn't have traveled here under modes of travel we currently use doesn't mean it's impossible that it's an alien probe.
It's certainly incredibly unlikely it is an alien probe.
As I stated before though, I am only saying that just because it couldn't have realistically gotten here under currently proven means of travel does not mean it can't possibly be an alien probe.
How about it came in through a worm hole, natural or artificially made, just outside our solar system?
I'm not convinced that was an alien probe or anything but I don't think known travel speed restrictions disprove it being an alien probe. It only disproves it having come to our solar system by any means we currently use to move about which is a pretty easy conclusion to come to.
In other words, if it's an alien probe of course it didn't travel here at sub light speeds.
I'm not saying you're wrong but redwoods do have an impressive trait or two beyond height. The same bark that requires exposure to moist air also makes them mostly fire retardant. At least in the context of the type of fire present in wild fires.
I made a trip to the UK a few years ago and found quite a lot of really fucking good cheese of all kinds and varieties for very affordable prices. Over here, anything other than the fundamental basics for cheese are a small fortune. It seems to me our Dairy industry is pretty dysfunctional and I suspect government subsidies are discouraging them from innovating in the context of their surplus milk.
The more I think back on this the more I'm bothered by the stance of supposed leftist on slashdot.
How is a leftist a libertarian for simply acknowledging simple supply and demand economics? The lack of acknowledgement of free market economics is exactly why the Soviet Union failed and why Venezuela and North Korea are failing. Meanwhile, China's growth has been entirely driven by their embrace of a free market (more of their economy is privately owned than publicly. Hardly communist).
The ideology wars are over for any intelligent person. A hybrid economy is what clearly works and what that means for the Left is that we need to acknowledge how money works. Price controls simply do not work, we've seen this proven over and over again.
Slashdot Mirror
Well said sir, you beat me to the punch.
"Ever had to carry a 20 ft ladder over rough terrain?"
No but I would imagine several people could do it quite easily.
"Border security requested a fence instead of a wall. The main reason for that was so that they could see the people carrying the 20 ft ladder over rough terrain, and could concentrate their efforts there."
You know what would be even easier to see a bunch of illegal immigrants through? Nothing. Meanwhile I wall doesn't mean more security guarding it so how will a wall help us see people coming over the boarder illegally?
"They are willing to drag them across a desert, after all. They'll need to carry two ladders over rough terrain."
More like a ladder and a rope. Or they can become mules and use one of the many tunnels currently running under our boarder. We find more every year and that's without Trump's wall.
Illegal immigrants will continue to enter our country as long as there is demand for their labor. Simple supply and demand economics are a powerful force that a stupid wall will not thwart. Meanwhile, things like required use of our government's already existing e-verify system by employers aren't even being discussed by mainstream Republicans despite that reducing demand for illegal immigrant labor will significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants entering the country as the only reason the vast majority of them come here is for work.
But no, the Republican party elites don't actually want to solve the problem, that would upset big Ag which is the only money in most of their states. So rather than making a huge dent in the incredibly simple supply and demand problem for a cost of next to nothing they're willing to blow billions on a huge symbol that won't do shit.
https://www.sacbee.com/opinion... - Caifornia makes up 13.3% of the United State's GDP https://blogs.voanews.com/all-... and holds 15.34% of all state debt going by the numbers I'm looking at here https://www.usgovernmentdebt.u... . I would certainly agree that the state has a liability problem (one of what I would consider to be one of the state's two key problems) but the scope of it isn't as big as the author tries to make it seem.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0... - So an article about how our governor is trying to get California ready for another recession is bad? That sounds like a plus for California. Hopefully the governor of Texas is planning for another dip in their essential oil market.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/1... - The only really damning thing here is mentioning our high cost of living (the other major problem I'd say the state has). This certainly needs addressing and is likely already cutting into our economic growth in places like the valley but it is hardly a doomsday scenario.
https://www.investors.com/poli... - This is just dumb fear mongering with gems like...
"The carbon emissions laws and other regulatory overreach kill jobs and hope for many." So our record unemployment isn't real?
"The state's gas tax is the nation's highest, some 30 cents to a dollar per gallon above the national average." Oh heavens! Wait, doesnt every other first world nation have gas taxes far in access of what California has?
"Businesses won't hire more workers and invest in growth due to confiscatory state and local taxes and complex and contradictory regulatory regimes. Hundreds of striving small businesses face bullying and high fees from state agencies." Once again, current massively low unemployment rate. We also generated 20 percent of the country's GDP growth last year, so no, this is not a problem.
"California has become the modern equivalent of the Southern Confederates of 1860. Antipathetic to federal law, and seeking its own coalition with foreign governments via trade and environmental and immigration policy." HAHAHAHAHA. Right, we're a bunch of slave holding degenerates willing to dissolve the union so we can own people. What an apt comparison for the incredibly small amount of international outreach California has done.
"Not to mention my personal hope that high-state tax states (CA, like NY, MA, and my state of MN) *don't* get to wriggle out from under the state-tax-writeoff cap put into law last year. Because previously - being able to write off the high endemic state taxes - meant that RED STATES were essentially subsidizing your (our) social giveaways, which was/is bullshit. ...but I'm sure they're all just conservative publications funded by the Koch brothers, right?"
Are you referring to this? https://www.forbes.com/sites/m...
Well much like your self I can't find proper numbers on what the results are expected to be but I would anticipate it will not be the wonderful put down to blue states you want it to be. When have you heard of the South generating economic prosperity for our country? Only when they used to own people. All they do now is offer cheap American labor because they're that destitute. How about the bible belt? Well they have some reasonably solid agriculture whose backbone is illegal immigrant labor. Thankfully for them Trump is
I'll give your Mom a ring
Right, the requirement of the use of a ladder will be a huge deterrent, well worth the 10's of billions of dollars it will cost in the end.
Good luck convincing anyone who hasn't already decided the wall must be built with that.
I stumbled on more stupid from you Chas!
Here's a list of California earthquakes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
How many of those have you actually heard about in the news? If the answer is almost none of them it's because earth quakes are not some huge hazard in California. As a California resident I was actually surprised by how big that list was because nothing meaningful came from almost any of them. If you look at federal disaster payouts, Earthquakes are almost non existent on the ledgers. I would be far more concerned with locating a nuclear power plant anywhere near the east cost given the level of devastation the region receives due to hurricanes. A good looking federal source is down right now but sort this list by country and region and perceive the lack of earthquakes on it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"That might be because in the Midwest, where I live, we don't have an irrational fear of far cheaper and far more reliable nuclear power."
"I found out recently that the nuclear power plant near me is threatening to close down and not build a new nuclear power plant to replace it."
There's a very obvious dissonance in the points you are trying to make. "We don't have an irrational fear of nuclear power but we're shutting down a nuclear plant"
The real question here is why is the plant you mention closing? If there's no legislation forcing it to shut down then the problem can only be economic in nature as most of our nation's nuclear plants aren't so old that they must be retired.
Please name your power plant so we can clean up this discrepancy.
I won't lie to you and tell you California is perfectly run but it's run a hell of a lot better than any red state. It's great you have a single article from a conservative publication preaching the imminent failure of California. The ending is wonderfully precious when it claims in a completely unsubstantiated manner that California wants the fed to pay for the problems it does have when unlike red states we put in more to the fed then get out. In other words, there would be a hell of a lot more money to go around in California if we didn't have to prop up decades worth of failed Red state governance.
Your article even links to another by the same author that claims people are fleeing the state because of the problems it does have while the article you posted tries to make the case that California's infrastructure is stretched too thin. Those are mutually exclusive problems. Either the state's population is shrinking and therefore moving closer towards the author's completely unsubstantiated and likely made up number of a max population of 25 mil for California or the population is increasing and therefore people leaving the state isn't a the horrible problem he makes it out to be.
No serious economist that doesn't have an ideological bone to pick thinks California is anywhere close to economic failure.
Ease your rage here. The problem here isn't government, it's a shit hole slashdot headline. PG&E was pulling down great profits prior to these fires when all of a sudden it was found to have been negligent in maintaining their equipment after the fires broke out. The only thing "global warming" has to do with this is that the likelihood of fires like these are increased as global warming worsens. Global warming, however, does not change the conditions that PG&E, through its neglect of requirements it knew it had, failed to meet. These are what it is being fined over. If they had maintained what what they should have as they should have the California wild fires wouldn't have caused them much trouble.
I know it's fashionable for conservatives to pick at the Leftist policies of the United States' most prosperous state but you're just making things up here. PG&E was doing great prior to the two big waves of fires that came through California https://www.macrotrends.net/st... and they would have zero liabilities in the case of these fires if they had maintained things the way they knew they were obligated to.
"Meanwhile, state and federal regulations basically conspire against them."
So we're convoluting state and federal policy now as a means of damning California? Most of our big open territory in this state is Federal.
"And they're made liable for any fires in the area of their equipment, whether it was actually their equipment or not..."
Citation needed.
"Meanwhile, California's idiot density is going up year over year as people with an actual functional brain flee the state."
Right, Californian's are idiots. What state are you from? Wait, it doesn't matter because it's not as prosperous as California.
"It's just the intellectually retarded leading the intellectually retarded out there."
Shit, I'll take our imperfect system over a Red state's any day of the week. At least we're able to generate meaningful wealth without the maximum exploitation of all of our public land as Texas does. We could certainly learn a thing or two from other blue states but I'm guessing that's not where you're at.
"It is scifi drivel that they are convinced is really real."
No, in the context of my own comment about wormholes, it's theoretical physics supported by the works of some of the greatest minds in in the field. All you keep repeating is "if we can't do it right here and now then it's impossible" and that's simply not true.
" but stop pretending it is real and stop saying "well in the 1800s no one ever though humans can fly, but now look what we can do!". Complete BS. Trying actually building something real before spouting off about "space factories" or "Dyson Spheres"."
That's funny, you point out why you're wrong and then refute it by yet again repeating "dur, if we can't do it today it's not possible!". I don't know what you're thinking you're accomplishing by saying that over and over again but humanity has consistently pushed the bounds of what was thought to be possible. Much of our present would be inconceivable to a person living a few hundred years ago while other parts would have been merely theorized by their finest minds. It's just stupid to think our distant future will be any different. Sure, it's possible there is literally no way to move between the stars in a time efficient manner, on the other hand there are very well respected theories that suggest that there might be ways.
Mod up please
Her review is hardly a feminist critique of the movie. The negative points it details are bad CGI, wooden acting, cheese ball lines, and poor romance sub plot chemistry while acknowledging that the character of Aquaman himself was much more fun than the rest of the DC universe heroes.
Now I haven't seen the movie so I have no idea how accurate her claims are but what is glaringly obvious is that there's no radical feminist agenda preset in it.
Einstein theorized their existence over a half century ago and they are still featured as possibilities in many models of the universe.
Given this could a more advanced civilization possibly use one to send a probe to our solar system? Yes. Just like things that were once just "science fiction" for us are now reality today it is possible sending matter through a wormhole could be possible. Therefore, my core point stands that just because it really couldn't have traveled here under modes of travel we currently use doesn't mean it's impossible that it's an alien probe.
It's certainly incredibly unlikely it is an alien probe.
As I stated before though, I am only saying that just because it couldn't have realistically gotten here under currently proven means of travel does not mean it can't possibly be an alien probe.
How about it came in through a worm hole, natural or artificially made, just outside our solar system?
I'm not convinced that was an alien probe or anything but I don't think known travel speed restrictions disprove it being an alien probe. It only disproves it having come to our solar system by any means we currently use to move about which is a pretty easy conclusion to come to.
In other words, if it's an alien probe of course it didn't travel here at sub light speeds.
Following that logic, everything we know is false because it could be falsified some day.
That's stupid. You work with the best data you have available to you.
What if my car is a convertible!?
I'm not saying you're wrong but redwoods do have an impressive trait or two beyond height. The same bark that requires exposure to moist air also makes them mostly fire retardant. At least in the context of the type of fire present in wild fires.
I made a trip to the UK a few years ago and found quite a lot of really fucking good cheese of all kinds and varieties for very affordable prices. Over here, anything other than the fundamental basics for cheese are a small fortune. It seems to me our Dairy industry is pretty dysfunctional and I suspect government subsidies are discouraging them from innovating in the context of their surplus milk.
Clearly it's a big ass space battle!
Fucking kick ass!
It's almost like working class people are our equals. Who knew!?
I love your ignorant sig. How about "Every government on earth: Regulation of business, gun control, national healthcare"
The Nazis had a large military too. Does that mean those who favor large militaries are Nazis? The also had public schools and roads.
Dumbass...
Cool, so if I was an idiot with more money in my pocket than brain cells I'd hop right on an 8k TV when barely anyone makes media for 4k.
The more I think back on this the more I'm bothered by the stance of supposed leftist on slashdot.
How is a leftist a libertarian for simply acknowledging simple supply and demand economics? The lack of acknowledgement of free market economics is exactly why the Soviet Union failed and why Venezuela and North Korea are failing. Meanwhile, China's growth has been entirely driven by their embrace of a free market (more of their economy is privately owned than publicly. Hardly communist).
The ideology wars are over for any intelligent person. A hybrid economy is what clearly works and what that means for the Left is that we need to acknowledge how money works. Price controls simply do not work, we've seen this proven over and over again.