While they may have told their superiors in Louisiana should be done, they totally screwed up the handling of the dams on the Missouri river.
They got so caught up in arguing about whether the water was needed downstream for navigation or upstream for recreational purposes, that they forgot that flood control was part of their mandate.
Why should a parent that is home schooling their children be required to teach evolution?
Maybe the child is very interested in Music. You don't need to know about evolution to learn about music. Maybe the child is interested in sculpting or painting. You don't need evolution to learn those things. Hell, perhaps the child is very interested in motion and kinetics. Even learning a hard science like physics does not require you to learn about evolution.
I understand the value of a classical liberal (in the old sense of the word) education. But everyone doesn't need that kind of education. What if the kid wants to be a plumber or an electrician like his mom or dad? Still don't need to learn evolution (I also think we've lost something by no longer really supporting apprenticeship styles of learning too).
What if the child wants to be a farmer like his mom or dad? Trick question, evolution might be helpful here. Farmers can directly utilize knowledge about hybridization of plants, which would require learning about evolution;-).
At the end of it all. I do not believe teaching of evolution should be mandated by the state.
We know there was a major impact event ~65 million years ago.
Our best calculations about the resulting environmental impacts of that event were mindblowingly calamitous. We're talking many orders of magnitude larger and faster than our current rate of change.
You can say the change in climate eventually killed the dinosaurs, but that change was a result of a global cataclysm.
But I do have to say that this brings forward and interesting debate as to whether working to mitigate/reduce climate change or identifying and assessing near earth asteroids is the more important effort for us to undertake. I'm kind of joking here, obviously we should do both. It'd really suck if we succeed in reigning in climate change and _then_ we get hit by an asteroid....
I think the dinosaurs said the same thing just a century or two before they were wiped out.
Seriously WTF, I mean WTF?!!!
Our ability to fix (or not fix) global warming has jack shit to do with the dinosaurs dying out or us facing the same fate as they did.
If we were talking about trying to mitigate the threat of near Earth asteroids hitting us then your post makes sense. But if your talking about how our fixing of global warming will save us from an asteroid strike, again I say, WTF??
The hyperbole on both sides of this debate is crazy. I mean this story is all OMG the sea will rise a meter in 100 years!!!! Yeah, that's not nearly enough time for us to build seawalls or canal systems to reroute water or levees or anything else like that. We have barely any time!! Give me a break.
I still would rather have Congress and the FCC do nothing to change the net, then have them "do something."
The FCC is especially dangerous. Look at how much they cater to the mobile companies' desires. Do we really want the determining what 'Net Neutrality' means.
As mentioned before, he didn't put money into an account that was owed to him by the government.
The Supreme Court decreed Social Security taxes to be taxes. As such the Congress can choose whatever they want to do with them (see raiding the "trust fund") and they can choose who to pay SS benefits to or not.
If Social Security is t be lauded as a great safety net, then lets make it a safety net, not a handout to everyone over a certain age.
His SS check (if he's actually getting one) would be the same size as someone who earned $75k per year before retirement. What I'd like to see is to have Buffett pay the same percentage as I do while working, but have a cap on the monthly amount that could be collected after retirement.
Can't say I'd disagree with that. It has means testing kind of built in.
It can't be treated the same as other debt because, as one poster has noted, the total liabilities of Social Security and Medicare amount to Hundreds of Trillions of dollars -- an order of magnitude larger than our current debt.
All the posturing about "defensive" patents is now gone, the patent war is on in full force. The only thing left to do now is to wait and see how much damage the tech sector needs to take before we outlaw all these fucking software (and even worse, business method) patents.
Will we be left with a technological innovation wasteland?
Is it wrong for me to hope that Samsung gets an injunction on the iPhone and iPad at the same time that Apple gets an injunction on the Galaxy and Galaxy Tab? How about six months of both sides NOT BEING ABLE TO SELL A SINGLE FUCKING PHONE!! If it brings a stop to this inane nonsense, I'm all for it.
This shit needs to stop. As much as I generally like Apple products, I have no remaining sympathy for them when a damned patent troll takes them for a few hundred million bucks. You made your own bed, now sleep in it. Or better yet, spend your money stockpiles on convincing congress to change the idiotic patent laws we have in this country.
Ironically the only reason your company is a certified "woman owned" business by the government(s) is so that you can do business with the government(s).
In the private sector no one gives a shit who owns your company, they just care about what and how you provide your goods/services.
But the SS surplus was spent over the course of 40 years. Now we have to replace that over a span of less than 40 years. That will require very large tax increases for everyone.
I am so fickin pissed about this kind of sentiment. As if all old people are poor.
The real fact is that the elderly are the RICHEST segment of the population.
But any time you bring up the fact that we're paying for Warren Buffet's health care and have been writing him a monthly Social Security check for a few decades, the progressives are "lalalalalal I can't hear you!". Instead they insist on raising capital gains taxes on everyone because because Buffet.
Means testing solves this problem, right now. It also hits the "evil rich" too. But progressives don't want to stop handouts to the rich, they just want more taxes. The magic of more taxes will save us -- Bulllshit.
Obama is continuing at least half the stuff Bush was doing. Hell he liked attacking countries in the middle east so much he added another one. Sure, he doesn't do torture, but you can't torture someone you blew up with a drone. Oh and ain't it neat that the banks, and hell even the insurance companies seem to get the treatment they want no matter who's in power.
Yeah, one party rule works great EVERYWHERE it's tried. The Soviets thought they were righteously correct too.
The Democrats in 2008 scared the hell out of me. They were spouting things like "we will rule for a generation". They scared everyone else too, when you look at what happened in 2010.
And as for libertarians, they happen to be the only poeple to have enough principle to be pissed about Bush's torture AND Obama's drone executions.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. Well stated.
Anyone who insists there is actually SS Trust fund is just plain wrong.
While they may have told their superiors in Louisiana should be done, they totally screwed up the handling of the dams on the Missouri river.
They got so caught up in arguing about whether the water was needed downstream for navigation or upstream for recreational purposes, that they forgot that flood control was part of their mandate.
Why should a parent that is home schooling their children be required to teach evolution?
Maybe the child is very interested in Music. You don't need to know about evolution to learn about music. Maybe the child is interested in sculpting or painting. You don't need evolution to learn those things. Hell, perhaps the child is very interested in motion and kinetics. Even learning a hard science like physics does not require you to learn about evolution.
I understand the value of a classical liberal (in the old sense of the word) education. But everyone doesn't need that kind of education. What if the kid wants to be a plumber or an electrician like his mom or dad? Still don't need to learn evolution (I also think we've lost something by no longer really supporting apprenticeship styles of learning too).
What if the child wants to be a farmer like his mom or dad? Trick question, evolution might be helpful here. Farmers can directly utilize knowledge about hybridization of plants, which would require learning about evolution ;-).
At the end of it all. I do not believe teaching of evolution should be mandated by the state.
Amen, brother.
Hope that doesn't offend. ;-)
We know there was a major impact event ~65 million years ago.
Our best calculations about the resulting environmental impacts of that event were mindblowingly calamitous. We're talking many orders of magnitude larger and faster than our current rate of change.
You can say the change in climate eventually killed the dinosaurs, but that change was a result of a global cataclysm.
But I do have to say that this brings forward and interesting debate as to whether working to mitigate/reduce climate change or identifying and assessing near earth asteroids is the more important effort for us to undertake. I'm kind of joking here, obviously we should do both. It'd really suck if we succeed in reigning in climate change and _then_ we get hit by an asteroid....
When you look at what the government is looking to require them to do in the name of "security" it may be the better option...
Dang, someone should get you a sense of humor for Christmas....
I think the dinosaurs said the same thing just a century or two before they were wiped out.
Seriously WTF, I mean WTF?!!!
Our ability to fix (or not fix) global warming has jack shit to do with the dinosaurs dying out or us facing the same fate as they did.
If we were talking about trying to mitigate the threat of near Earth asteroids hitting us then your post makes sense. But if your talking about how our fixing of global warming will save us from an asteroid strike, again I say, WTF??
The hyperbole on both sides of this debate is crazy. I mean this story is all OMG the sea will rise a meter in 100 years!!!! Yeah, that's not nearly enough time for us to build seawalls or canal systems to reroute water or levees or anything else like that. We have barely any time!! Give me a break.
I still would rather have Congress and the FCC do nothing to change the net, then have them "do something."
The FCC is especially dangerous. Look at how much they cater to the mobile companies' desires. Do we really want the determining what 'Net Neutrality' means.
Yep, no arrest. They'll just be happy taking all the money you will make for the rest of your life....
As mentioned before, he didn't put money into an account that was owed to him by the government.
The Supreme Court decreed Social Security taxes to be taxes. As such the Congress can choose whatever they want to do with them (see raiding the "trust fund") and they can choose who to pay SS benefits to or not.
If Social Security is t be lauded as a great safety net, then lets make it a safety net, not a handout to everyone over a certain age.
His SS check (if he's actually getting one) would be the same size as someone who earned $75k per year before retirement. What I'd like to see is to have Buffett pay the same percentage as I do while working, but have a cap on the monthly amount that could be collected after retirement.
Can't say I'd disagree with that. It has means testing kind of built in.
It can't be treated the same as other debt because, as one poster has noted, the total liabilities of Social Security and Medicare amount to Hundreds of Trillions of dollars -- an order of magnitude larger than our current debt.
All the posturing about "defensive" patents is now gone, the patent war is on in full force. The only thing left to do now is to wait and see how much damage the tech sector needs to take before we outlaw all these fucking software (and even worse, business method) patents.
Will we be left with a technological innovation wasteland?
Is it wrong for me to hope that Samsung gets an injunction on the iPhone and iPad at the same time that Apple gets an injunction on the Galaxy and Galaxy Tab? How about six months of both sides NOT BEING ABLE TO SELL A SINGLE FUCKING PHONE!! If it brings a stop to this inane nonsense, I'm all for it.
This shit needs to stop. As much as I generally like Apple products, I have no remaining sympathy for them when a damned patent troll takes them for a few hundred million bucks. You made your own bed, now sleep in it. Or better yet, spend your money stockpiles on convincing congress to change the idiotic patent laws we have in this country.
Ironically the only reason your company is a certified "woman owned" business by the government(s) is so that you can do business with the government(s).
In the private sector no one gives a shit who owns your company, they just care about what and how you provide your goods/services.
But the SS surplus was spent over the course of 40 years. Now we have to replace that over a span of less than 40 years. That will require very large tax increases for everyone.
I am so fickin pissed about this kind of sentiment. As if all old people are poor.
The real fact is that the elderly are the RICHEST segment of the population.
But any time you bring up the fact that we're paying for Warren Buffet's health care and have been writing him a monthly Social Security check for a few decades, the progressives are "lalalalalal I can't hear you!". Instead they insist on raising capital gains taxes on everyone because because Buffet.
Means testing solves this problem, right now. It also hits the "evil rich" too. But progressives don't want to stop handouts to the rich, they just want more taxes. The magic of more taxes will save us -- Bulllshit.
My goodness you must have drunk all the koolaid.
Obama is continuing at least half the stuff Bush was doing. Hell he liked attacking countries in the middle east so much he added another one. Sure, he doesn't do torture, but you can't torture someone you blew up with a drone. Oh and ain't it neat that the banks, and hell even the insurance companies seem to get the treatment they want no matter who's in power.
By the time they had the primary in my state, the guy I wanted to vote for had already moved to an different party.
Your search results are interesting. So there will be more insured, but it is looking like there won't be enough doctors to treat them.
I completely agree, the pendulum swings both ways.
If you were to hand craft a candidate that would be impotent in arguing against Obama, you couldn't do much better than Romney.
That was the problem.
You really think the campaign didn't involve money??
It's all about money.
Yeah, one party rule works great EVERYWHERE it's tried. The Soviets thought they were righteously correct too.
The Democrats in 2008 scared the hell out of me. They were spouting things like "we will rule for a generation". They scared everyone else too, when you look at what happened in 2010.
And as for libertarians, they happen to be the only poeple to have enough principle to be pissed about Bush's torture AND Obama's drone executions.
You're suggesting that a tropical place is warm, thus more likely to have errors in co2 measurement. What?
No, they're suggesting that putting your CO2 detector by an active volcano might skew your results a bit....
The GP's suggestion was just that perhaps a different site would have been a better representative choice.