You don't really understand the difference between wanting control over how your own work is reproduced and sold and wanting control over what other people can say, do you? No, I didn't think so. I'm not censoring you if I don't want to give you my work. I'm censoring you if I'm preventing you from creating and expressing your own work.
The USA is only 200 years old. It has no culture whatsoever.
Wrong. The US was born out of rejection of the culture in which it had been living as colonies of the British crown. The charter that formed the new country IS the culture, at least in every way that counts. Because it lays out a system of governance that doesn't allow the government to create a crown-like culture, and the resulting liberty is the central theme of US culture, warts and all.
It seems Trumps policy is to abandon the region and leave South Korea and Japan to worry about the problem. Sounds more like he is happy to let North Korea go on their merry way.
No, his policy seems to be more oriented around getting those parties to pick up more of the tab for using the US military as their muscle. Which seems very reasonable. Obviously we (in the US) have a strong vested interest in not having chaos erupt there (we do tons of trade with Japan and South Korea, as well as their many neighbors), so it's not like we'd just leave. But there's no reason that J&K can't shoulder more of the costs. Much like Europe ought to.
How long again did it take in the US for it to go from "destroying my own property" to "murder" for black slaves?
Why are you fixated on "black?" That same sentiment also applied to indentured servants. And to the slaves that "native" (transplanted Asian) Americans kept for centuries before Europeans ever showed up, let alone after buying boat loads of slaves from African slave-holding/slave-selling cultures on that continent. But regardless of your particular choice of words, the shift from being a European culture that kept slaves in the colonies to being a new nation that didn't have slaves started before the new nation was even chartered, and took a few decades to completely go away - a blink of the eye, in historical terms. Way too long if you were personally a slave, of course. But in the scheme of things, yes, it happened quite quickly. For an institution that thrived from before recorded history and still lives on today in many places around the globe, the passage of time between the tail end of the 18th century and the middle of the 19th - as it relates to the US's long fight over the matter - was a short time indeed.
And no, generally we don't want anything that can fundamentally change our nation's legal structure and the your relationship with the government to EVER be able to happen "instantly" - because that leaves us open to dictatorial "executive action" type changes that are counter-constitutional. The checks and balances built into our system are SUPPOSED to make things go slowly, and for good reason.
Right. So, the point is that mentioning the AMA's toy-flying insurance in the context of a discussion about capricious, meaningless, and highly random government regulations surrounding the need for 12 year old girls to register their 9-ounce "aircraft" with the federal government, or for a person who's flying a 4-pound quadcopter for fun legally, but who's subject to massive fines if he does exactly the same thing but happens to click "monetize" on his YouTube channel after the fact... isn't really meaningful.
It's one of those phrases that don't mean anything and take up space.
No, the problem is that it DOES mean something, and that people still go ahead and use a bastardization of it, and in the wrong context anyway - thus making what they are saying that moment meaningless and taking up space.
"For all intents and purposes" refers to the (described, referred-to) thing's purpose, and the intentions of the person using/deploying/offering/whatever it. The phrase is correctly trotted out when the use to which something has been put is (or is perhaps anticipated to be) wrong... NOT the intended purpose.
Alas, it's now right up there "I could care less," when it comes to people uttering syllables that sound vaguely like what someone else said, and to which they haven't applied a moment's thought - to realize they're just making noises instead of communicating what they really mean.
Caught red handed with a "smart tablet." As opposed to... a stone tablet? I think those caused more trouble in Egypt back in the day than anything made by Samsung or ASUS. And... caught with $13k in cash? Like... enough to buy a modest used car? Criminal Super Villains just ain't what they used to be.
Of course, if you wanted to know why there's a difference between hobbyist use and commercial or professional use, you could inquire, and find that it predates Obama's presidency by a considerable period.
No, it does not. Because there wasn't then (and still isn't) a law on the books that actually spells that out. People have been using RC machines for commercial activities for decades. The FAA's counter-law "clarification" on this happened squarely within the current administration's ownership of the agency. Their current get-around-congress shenanigans (through the DoT) putting kids with 9-ounce plastic mall kiosk toy copters in the way of multi-thousand-dollar fines is just more of the same.
You could even find out about the reasoning, which basically boils down to the odds of litigation.
No, the FAA says it's all about safety. They're not clear on why two people flying right next to each other with the same equipment in exactly the same way following all of the same exact safety protocols aren't equally safe if one of them is making $5 to take a picture while the other person is doing it for fun.
Thanks. That is really much too much money. They should not be allowed to earn money like that. Nobody who has Walmart stock in their retirement accounts should be allowed to share in any of that enormous, evil profit. We have to Bern this down, along with any banks that help them do their evil business with those enormous profits that are keeping 47% of the people in the country from making enough money to pay income taxes.
This is the same administration that considers it necessary for a guy who does roofing repair to become an actual licensed general aviation pilot (and then file for a 333 exemption) in order to send a 2-pound plastic quadcopter up 20 feet in the air below tree tops to check out your gutters before he puts up a ladder. If he flies his toy copter for fun in exactly the same place in exactly the same way for fun, he's OK. The administration considers that to be perfectly safe. But if he does it to avoid putting up a ladder, he faces a $20,000 fine. Five minutes later, he can go back to doing it for fun, and he's fine. Thanks, Obama.
You do understand that the executive pay, and dividends, are both cash that's taxed as it goes to its recipients, right? Regardless, there are overhead issues that go WAY beyond the difference between wholesale costs and retail prices, minus paychecks/dividends.
I do wonder how this exact same story would be playing here and elsewhere in the media if the exact same guy had walked up to the exact same professor and for all of the exact same reasons, stuck a steak knife through his eye and killed him that way, before hanging himself. The normal media outlets keep referring to this guy as a "shooter," rather than "murderer." Would they be calling him a "stabber" if he'd gone old-school, instead? What if he'd simply beaten him to death with a crowbar? What would the media call him then?
Good for you, that your income is substantial enough to make these price hikes irrelevant to you, or that your employer has decided to eat the difference on your behalf (which is costing you money whether you know it or not). Or, you're just a shill. Either way. If you like the situation, and are happy to see millions of your fellow citizens be shut out of health care or facing IRS fines because they can't afford it, than get some help - you have a serious empathy deficit, and may have other problems. Your employer's generous health insurance policy probably covers that sort of treatment - check it out.
There was no "good bill handed to congress." But Obama's vote-buying, pandering wish list (which was nothing more than a craven bit of theater, part of the overall scam) he asked Pelosi and Reid to incorporate was even WORSE that what we're now stuck with. His own party, and ONLY his own party, pushed it through on lies and obfuscation, with every single member of the other party pointing out what a disaster it would be, and giving it not even the cover a single vote in its favor. Splitting hairs over whether some priority bending policy detail or another in the law as written would have been better or worse as tweaked by the Democrats running the legislature or the Democrats running the executive branch at the time the con job was carried out - it's just silly. The main point is that the entire concept of the thing is fundamentally flawed, as it bears in reality no resemblance to the frothy talking point lies that Obama and his partners in the House and Senate spun for months ahead of time, and which have been shown to have been purposeful deception.
Deliberate, knowing lies. Intended specifically to deceive people into providing political support for a bill that nobody could bother themselves to read. There was no "good version," there was only a pile of crap from the beginning, made even worse by Obama's capricious, unconstitutional use of his "pen" to unilaterally change the law's purpose and implementation after the fact once people started to catch on to what a disaster it was. And his executive action along those lines? All it did was push the consequences of this disaster back a few months so it would be after the more recent election.
Welcome to The People's Republic of Maryland. No - we are perfectly healthy, 50's, no smoking, nothing. That's just the going rate for two adults who aren't having part of their bill paid for by everybody else. It sure is nice, though, to know that one of the things we get for "free," per the law, is all sorts of maternity-related care which we could never possibly use. They make 90-year-old nuns buy plans that provide that, too.
Glad you only pay $250. Ours will have gone UP by over $250 in just 24 months. And even then, multiple insurers are now leaving the market because they are losing money with every new customer. I think this is all intentional, and is aimed at producing such a failure that people will give in and ask for an even more ruinous medicare-for-all style all-government program to magically "solve" all of their issues. Won't THAT be fun (just ask anyone who gets care through the VA).
In this case perhaps inverse, suicides may decline somewhat.
Why? Fewer people can now afford basic health care. Deductibles have jumped hugely, and rates are going up at several times the rate of inflation in order to subsidize the demographic that the target of this vote-buying scam. Of course there are more people deciding to end their lives in lieu of bankrupting their families.
This. That's the key to the whole "Affordable" act scam. My wife and I were very happy with our previous plan at $2500 deductible. It just jumped to $12,000 and our rates have more than tripled, even as we've lost choices of doctors and hospitals. This was all utterly predictable, and WAS predicted by the people who opposed the bill. But Pelosi, Reid, and Obama deliberately and knowingly lied about it in order to get it passed, and now we're all wearing it. As a result, fewer people are getting basic health care. No surprise that there's more death across the board, including suicide by people who used to be able to afford care and now no longer can.
Indeed. The "rest of the world" is full of power-hungry bureaucrats, kleptocrats, theocrats, autocrats and worse. Half of the UK is looking to leave the EU because of the nearly totalitarian weight of existing under that organization's screwed up priorities and sense of righteousness about getting into everyone's business (literally and figuratively). Eastern Europe is watching a replay of 100 years ago, the Middle East hasn't changed a bit, China is literally manufacturing military islands in its bid to take over other nations' coastal waters, South America multiple fine displays of corrupt, imploding socialists doing what socialists always do, and so, so, so much more everywhere we look.
Yeah, we should definitely be lectured by the "rest of the world."
So what you're saying is that you are too dumb to vote your own principles, and so is everyone else. Or are you saying that candidates literally force people to vote for them, somehow using money to do that? Be specific.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't really understand the difference between wanting control over how your own work is reproduced and sold and wanting control over what other people can say, do you? No, I didn't think so. I'm not censoring you if I don't want to give you my work. I'm censoring you if I'm preventing you from creating and expressing your own work.
The USA is only 200 years old. It has no culture whatsoever.
Wrong. The US was born out of rejection of the culture in which it had been living as colonies of the British crown. The charter that formed the new country IS the culture, at least in every way that counts. Because it lays out a system of governance that doesn't allow the government to create a crown-like culture, and the resulting liberty is the central theme of US culture, warts and all.
It seems Trumps policy is to abandon the region and leave South Korea and Japan to worry about the problem. Sounds more like he is happy to let North Korea go on their merry way.
No, his policy seems to be more oriented around getting those parties to pick up more of the tab for using the US military as their muscle. Which seems very reasonable. Obviously we (in the US) have a strong vested interest in not having chaos erupt there (we do tons of trade with Japan and South Korea, as well as their many neighbors), so it's not like we'd just leave. But there's no reason that J&K can't shoulder more of the costs. Much like Europe ought to.
Sales taxes, perhaps. But he's talking about income taxes.
How long again did it take in the US for it to go from "destroying my own property" to "murder" for black slaves?
Why are you fixated on "black?" That same sentiment also applied to indentured servants. And to the slaves that "native" (transplanted Asian) Americans kept for centuries before Europeans ever showed up, let alone after buying boat loads of slaves from African slave-holding/slave-selling cultures on that continent. But regardless of your particular choice of words, the shift from being a European culture that kept slaves in the colonies to being a new nation that didn't have slaves started before the new nation was even chartered, and took a few decades to completely go away - a blink of the eye, in historical terms. Way too long if you were personally a slave, of course. But in the scheme of things, yes, it happened quite quickly. For an institution that thrived from before recorded history and still lives on today in many places around the globe, the passage of time between the tail end of the 18th century and the middle of the 19th - as it relates to the US's long fight over the matter - was a short time indeed.
And no, generally we don't want anything that can fundamentally change our nation's legal structure and the your relationship with the government to EVER be able to happen "instantly" - because that leaves us open to dictatorial "executive action" type changes that are counter-constitutional. The checks and balances built into our system are SUPPOSED to make things go slowly, and for good reason.
Right. So, the point is that mentioning the AMA's toy-flying insurance in the context of a discussion about capricious, meaningless, and highly random government regulations surrounding the need for 12 year old girls to register their 9-ounce "aircraft" with the federal government, or for a person who's flying a 4-pound quadcopter for fun legally, but who's subject to massive fines if he does exactly the same thing but happens to click "monetize" on his YouTube channel after the fact ... isn't really meaningful.
It's one of those phrases that don't mean anything and take up space.
No, the problem is that it DOES mean something, and that people still go ahead and use a bastardization of it, and in the wrong context anyway - thus making what they are saying that moment meaningless and taking up space.
... NOT the intended purpose.
"For all intents and purposes" refers to the (described, referred-to) thing's purpose, and the intentions of the person using/deploying/offering/whatever it. The phrase is correctly trotted out when the use to which something has been put is (or is perhaps anticipated to be) wrong
Alas, it's now right up there "I could care less," when it comes to people uttering syllables that sound vaguely like what someone else said, and to which they haven't applied a moment's thought - to realize they're just making noises instead of communicating what they really mean.
Caught red handed with a "smart tablet." As opposed to ... a stone tablet? I think those caused more trouble in Egypt back in the day than anything made by Samsung or ASUS. And ... caught with $13k in cash? Like ... enough to buy a modest used car? Criminal Super Villains just ain't what they used to be.
The AMA's insurance, of course, applies in virtually no circumstances outside of flying around in circles on an AMA-chartered club field.
Do you consider the teenager from next door who charges you $10 to mow your lawn to be a "professional?" Yes, or no.
Of course, if you wanted to know why there's a difference between hobbyist use and commercial or professional use, you could inquire, and find that it predates Obama's presidency by a considerable period.
No, it does not. Because there wasn't then (and still isn't) a law on the books that actually spells that out. People have been using RC machines for commercial activities for decades. The FAA's counter-law "clarification" on this happened squarely within the current administration's ownership of the agency. Their current get-around-congress shenanigans (through the DoT) putting kids with 9-ounce plastic mall kiosk toy copters in the way of multi-thousand-dollar fines is just more of the same.
You could even find out about the reasoning, which basically boils down to the odds of litigation.
No, the FAA says it's all about safety. They're not clear on why two people flying right next to each other with the same equipment in exactly the same way following all of the same exact safety protocols aren't equally safe if one of them is making $5 to take a picture while the other person is doing it for fun.
Thanks. That is really much too much money. They should not be allowed to earn money like that. Nobody who has Walmart stock in their retirement accounts should be allowed to share in any of that enormous, evil profit. We have to Bern this down, along with any banks that help them do their evil business with those enormous profits that are keeping 47% of the people in the country from making enough money to pay income taxes.
This is the same administration that considers it necessary for a guy who does roofing repair to become an actual licensed general aviation pilot (and then file for a 333 exemption) in order to send a 2-pound plastic quadcopter up 20 feet in the air below tree tops to check out your gutters before he puts up a ladder. If he flies his toy copter for fun in exactly the same place in exactly the same way for fun, he's OK. The administration considers that to be perfectly safe. But if he does it to avoid putting up a ladder, he faces a $20,000 fine. Five minutes later, he can go back to doing it for fun, and he's fine. Thanks, Obama.
You do understand that the executive pay, and dividends, are both cash that's taxed as it goes to its recipients, right? Regardless, there are overhead issues that go WAY beyond the difference between wholesale costs and retail prices, minus paychecks/dividends.
How high do you imagine their actual net margins to be? Specifically.
I do wonder how this exact same story would be playing here and elsewhere in the media if the exact same guy had walked up to the exact same professor and for all of the exact same reasons, stuck a steak knife through his eye and killed him that way, before hanging himself. The normal media outlets keep referring to this guy as a "shooter," rather than "murderer." Would they be calling him a "stabber" if he'd gone old-school, instead? What if he'd simply beaten him to death with a crowbar? What would the media call him then?
Good for you, that your income is substantial enough to make these price hikes irrelevant to you, or that your employer has decided to eat the difference on your behalf (which is costing you money whether you know it or not). Or, you're just a shill. Either way. If you like the situation, and are happy to see millions of your fellow citizens be shut out of health care or facing IRS fines because they can't afford it, than get some help - you have a serious empathy deficit, and may have other problems. Your employer's generous health insurance policy probably covers that sort of treatment - check it out.
There was no "good bill handed to congress." But Obama's vote-buying, pandering wish list (which was nothing more than a craven bit of theater, part of the overall scam) he asked Pelosi and Reid to incorporate was even WORSE that what we're now stuck with. His own party, and ONLY his own party, pushed it through on lies and obfuscation, with every single member of the other party pointing out what a disaster it would be, and giving it not even the cover a single vote in its favor. Splitting hairs over whether some priority bending policy detail or another in the law as written would have been better or worse as tweaked by the Democrats running the legislature or the Democrats running the executive branch at the time the con job was carried out - it's just silly. The main point is that the entire concept of the thing is fundamentally flawed, as it bears in reality no resemblance to the frothy talking point lies that Obama and his partners in the House and Senate spun for months ahead of time, and which have been shown to have been purposeful deception.
Deliberate, knowing lies. Intended specifically to deceive people into providing political support for a bill that nobody could bother themselves to read. There was no "good version," there was only a pile of crap from the beginning, made even worse by Obama's capricious, unconstitutional use of his "pen" to unilaterally change the law's purpose and implementation after the fact once people started to catch on to what a disaster it was. And his executive action along those lines? All it did was push the consequences of this disaster back a few months so it would be after the more recent election.
Welcome to The People's Republic of Maryland. No - we are perfectly healthy, 50's, no smoking, nothing. That's just the going rate for two adults who aren't having part of their bill paid for by everybody else. It sure is nice, though, to know that one of the things we get for "free," per the law, is all sorts of maternity-related care which we could never possibly use. They make 90-year-old nuns buy plans that provide that, too.
Glad you only pay $250. Ours will have gone UP by over $250 in just 24 months. And even then, multiple insurers are now leaving the market because they are losing money with every new customer. I think this is all intentional, and is aimed at producing such a failure that people will give in and ask for an even more ruinous medicare-for-all style all-government program to magically "solve" all of their issues. Won't THAT be fun (just ask anyone who gets care through the VA).
In this case perhaps inverse, suicides may decline somewhat.
Why? Fewer people can now afford basic health care. Deductibles have jumped hugely, and rates are going up at several times the rate of inflation in order to subsidize the demographic that the target of this vote-buying scam. Of course there are more people deciding to end their lives in lieu of bankrupting their families.
This. That's the key to the whole "Affordable" act scam. My wife and I were very happy with our previous plan at $2500 deductible. It just jumped to $12,000 and our rates have more than tripled, even as we've lost choices of doctors and hospitals. This was all utterly predictable, and WAS predicted by the people who opposed the bill. But Pelosi, Reid, and Obama deliberately and knowingly lied about it in order to get it passed, and now we're all wearing it. As a result, fewer people are getting basic health care. No surprise that there's more death across the board, including suicide by people who used to be able to afford care and now no longer can.
You know, if you just stop believing in the Illuminati, they'll go away. Sort of like that monster in your bedroom closet.
However, a recent election where both primary candidates were willing to admit they were Skull & Bones members...
As opposed to being frat members? Or part of a bowling league? Are you really seeing the world as a Marvel comic book?
Indeed. The "rest of the world" is full of power-hungry bureaucrats, kleptocrats, theocrats, autocrats and worse. Half of the UK is looking to leave the EU because of the nearly totalitarian weight of existing under that organization's screwed up priorities and sense of righteousness about getting into everyone's business (literally and figuratively). Eastern Europe is watching a replay of 100 years ago, the Middle East hasn't changed a bit, China is literally manufacturing military islands in its bid to take over other nations' coastal waters, South America multiple fine displays of corrupt, imploding socialists doing what socialists always do, and so, so, so much more everywhere we look.
Yeah, we should definitely be lectured by the "rest of the world."
So what you're saying is that you are too dumb to vote your own principles, and so is everyone else. Or are you saying that candidates literally force people to vote for them, somehow using money to do that? Be specific.