Can a state elect to locally invalidate the federal mandate that states that bills issued by the US Treasury are "Legal tender for all debts public and private"?
This is a common misunderstanding. The currency is legal tender for all DEBTS, not all transactions. When you purchase something, you are doing exactly that -- making a purchase, not paying off a debt.
Fine. You give me the widget you're selling and I owe you a debt of whatever you were selling it for. I pay you in cash, which "is legal tender for all debts, public and private".
The "transaction" was you giving me the widget. The paying of the debt was me giving you the cash.
Fine. You give me the widget you're selling and I owe you a debt of whatever you were selling it for. I pay you in cash, which "is legal tender for all debts, public and private"
As you can see from the list of US state GDP California has a massive economy and subsidizes many other states, such as the Dakotas.
California ranks 43rd in the country among states in the amount of tax dollars paid to the federal government versus the amount of federal aid that comes back to the state, according to the Washington-based Tax Foundation. The state gets 78 cents for every dollar sent to the federal government.
Sf Gate. Just seven other states receive a worse deal.
OK, fine. Turn it around. Why should the good people of California have to pay to salt the roads in N. Dakota? Maybe California would be in a better financial situation if they were not paying so much to subsidize those lazy N. Dakotans!
So much for providing for common defense and promoting general welfare.
Right! That is spelled out in the Constitution. No one is saying that we should do away with defense. We are saying that if California needs something, then CALIFORNIA should pay for it. Just as North Dakota should pay to salt their own roads in the winter.
General Welfare? Well, that's kinda vague. But I think we could narrow "General" to mean EVERYONE. That means, again, the government shouldn't do something unless it benefits EVERYONE. The salting of North Dakota's roads does not promote the general welfare of me and my Texan neighbors.
And don't even ask about basic science. There's no "profit motive" in it. Corporations don't do any worthwhile basic science. Not biology, not atmospheric, geological, astronomical, or even math. It's all applied science, with the goal of getting a profit next, or better "this quarter." Basic science is too long-range to be even considered.
You mean like: (from HERE) The National Science Foundation gave the Minnesota Zoo over $600,000 so that they could develop an online video game called "Wolfquest". Almost unbelievably, the National Institutes of Health was given $800,000 in "stimulus funds" to study the impact of a "genital-washing program" on men in South Africa. The National Institutes of Health spent approximately $442,340 to study the behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam. Approximately $1 million of U.S. taxpayer money was used to create poetry for the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Chicago zoos. The goal of the "poetry" is to help raise awareness on environmental issues. The National Science Foundation spent $216,000 to study whether or not politicians "gain or lose support by taking ambiguous positions." A total of $3 million has been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft. The goal of this "video game research" is reportedly to study how "emerging forms of communication, including multiplayer computer games and online virtual worlds such as World of Warcraft and Second Life can help organizations collaborate and compete more effectively in the global marketplace.
I had a long dissertation thought out, but man, this shit just boggles my mind. NOAA? Is he kidding? I'm sure all of you remember (probably not, but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt) the fact that he said that "Hurr, Galveston didn't have anyone to bail them out during their hurricane" totally forgetting how many people/died/ because of no hurricane warning and forecasting.
The next time there's a hurricane coming up Galveston Bay, I want Ron Paul to be out in the middle of it. Outside. Naked.
-- BMO
So you actually believe that without NOAA, we will be blind to hurricanes? You do realize that there are several other federal agencies that could take over that role, right? For example, the military depends on accurate weather forecasts. Why not turn the responsibility over to them? The airline industry relies on accurate weather forecasts. They could do the job as well. We could even make a deal where they have to make their forecasts publicly available in exchange for the free satellites they will be receiving.
Also, it's not like all the men and women on ships and oil platforms won't be able to call back to their loved ones in Galveston and say, "Sure is windy out here!"
Also, when that big hurricane hit Galveston over a century ago, we didn't have forecasting because there were no satellites, airplanes, communication channels or ships that would move faster than the hurricane itself. It wasn't because NOAA didn't exist. It was because even NOAA would have been blind to the coming hurricane.
Wait... You think the DOE is not necessary anymore with the looming energy crisis and all the talks about global warming? And when is education ever NOT necessary?..
On top of that, all of this is just cents compared to the overall budget, yet the sacred cows like the DOD never get cut.
Slippery Slope Fallacy.
Just because the FEDERAL government gets out of something, doesn't mean it will fail to exist. For example, the DOE didn't exist until 1980. Did public education exist before 1980?
Doesn't the DOE spend a good deal of its time dealing with nukes?
Isn't that kind of important? Even to libertarians?
Shouldn't the military be dealing with Nukes? The military, by the way, is an enumerated power in the Constitution, so even Ron Paul supports the federal role.
He is assuming the slack will be picked up by corporate America and independent agencies, or perhaps he wants to offer research grants later?
The states. If it's profitable, private industry will do it. If it's necessary but not profitable, then the states will do it. Should the people in Illinois pay for hurricane monitoring for the people of Florida? Let the coastal states form their own Hurricane Center and pay for it themselves. Just as parks, roads, housing and education should all be state funded and controlled.
Ron Paul is a 10th Amendment guy. Anything not specified in the Constitution as a federal power is the state's responsibility.
private corporations are always willing to fill in the gap...the only difference here would be that you would have to pay for getting those warnings.
Right. You would pay by having to watch commercials. It's not like the Haliburton Hurricane Center is going to take you credit card number before telling you the latest models.
You are aware, I trust, that the USGS is responsible for a large number of monitoring programs. Basically, killing it would essentially leave the West Coast of the United States without tsunami, earthquake or volcano alerts. I'm sure the people that live along that very geologically active strip of turf will be happy to know that Ron Paul considers them essentially expendable in his quest for ideological purity.
Why should the people of North Dakota pay for tsunami monitoring for California? If the west coast wants earth quake and tsunami warning, they can pay for it.
No more energy research, no more parks, no more public education, no more low income housing, no more roads & bridges. What a grand utopia he has planned for us.
No more energy research: The private sector can handle this just fine.
no more parks, no more public education, no more low income housing, no more roads & bridges: These can, and are handled at a state level more efficiently and more responsive to the public's need than their federal program counterparts.
So don't say that there will be "no more" of any of this stuff as it will be handled via the states or industries that will profit from it anyway.
If the NATO countries really cared for the Libyan people then they would have killed that asshole DECADES ago.
Actually Reagan tried that decades ago. Remember, Spain wouldn't let him fly over Spanish territory and our F111's had to fly all the way around Europe? Remember all the flack Reagan took for the collateral damage, including the death of a little girl?
Taking out an entrenched dictator is not as easy as it would seem, as recent history has shown.
Working your way through school is now impossible with a minimum wage job, since, you're looking at 35 hours a week at minimum wage to be able to afford only tuition - that doesn't include books or board. In 1970, people were looking at 14 hours a week to be able to pay for school. This math also points out that its idiotic when baby boomers say, "people should work through college, that's what I did" because times are completely different. And as parent said, things are only going to get worse.
It is possible to work your way through college. Here is what I did:
Went to college right after high school. Lived with mom. Went to school from 8:00am until noon, then worked from 3:00pm 'til 11:00pm. That left me two hours a day to study and roughly 6.5 hrs sleep per night. However, this meant that I had to leave the house by 7:00am and I wouldn't get home until midnight, M-F. This didn't work out for me as I didn't have the discipline to actually study when I was supposed to and partied an awful lot, meaning that 6.5 hrs sleep was usually 3 hrs sleep and my 2+ hrs study time per day was spent chasing skirts around campus. FAIL! Not because I couldn't pay for it. It's because I lacked the discipline to make it happen.
So, I joined the Army. I did two years. Paid my $100/mo for my first year for the GI Bill.
Got out, went to school where I could live in a dorm, not with mom. Went to school M-F 8-noon as before. Worked at a computer lab on campus for about 4 hrs a day for minimum wage and worked 8:00 to 8:00 Saturday and Sunday doing tech support for about $10.00/hr. I was able to pay for everything, but asking a 23 year old to work every weekend when his neighbors are partying until 4:00am Friday and Saturday with a bunch of drunk, 18 year old girls in the "experimental phase" is not realistic, either. I did better, but still failed. Again, it wasn't the bills that caused me drop out, but the lifestyle was just too much fun.
Finally, I signed up for an online school, University of Phoenix. Here, I was able to work full time and do my coursework at my leisure. The GI Bill still paid enough to make it possible, if not everything (don't remember). I still took loans as it was stupid not to. It was an interest free loan. That's free money! I graduated with a 3.5 GPA and now pay $150/month in student loans. Certainly doable. Of course, I'm in Texas where jobs are still available, regardless of what you hear in the Republican debates.
So, it can be done. Yes, this was over 10 years ago, but not much has changed since then. Even today, I can still take courses, tuition free at any state sponsored school via Texas' own version of the GI Bill called the Hazelwood Act. I've taken MSCE and MSSQL certification courses completely free at the local community college.
Sure thing, we will ship immediately after your payment clears. Our account 129417 is with Zimbabwe Banking Corp/Bulawayo, SWIFT ZBCOZWHXBYO. $750 per slave, $2785 for the virgin. Do you have any preference for the gender? If not, we will ship all male.
These are Greeks we are talking about here. The "females" are simply males with nipples tattooed on their backs.
So what do you think the end result is if this trend continues? Either large segments of the population are going to have to give up on college or they're going to have to put themselves in a position where default is almost an inevitability. I guess that could actually have one positive effect. It could finally dispel the idea that everyone can or should go to college (or that a college degree should be considered a prerequisite for any white collar job).
Or they could join the military. Do two years and your schooling is paid for. Even if you are not a fighter, every branch has openings for cooks and truck drivers. Yeah, the military sux, but it's no worse than trying to wash dishes to pay for college and the benefits are SOOOO much better.
Just wait until you see what happens if THIS group starts going en masse into default. At least with houses, there is some collateral there. What are you going to foreclose on when little Johnny goes into default on his $100,000 loan debt because he can't find a job? You going to foreclose on and resell his worthless degree?
Well, they can still take your house if you don't pay your student loans, or at least put a lien on it. They can also garnish your wages, so no matter what crappy job you get, they will make sure it pays less. Your only hope for not paying your student loans is to be unemployed or work under the table.
is the miserable battery life. My droid Incredible goes barely a day and a half with little to no good smartphone usage. If I use the internet or video at all the battery is gone in less than a day. I even have all the default auto-running programs deleted. I will probably go back to iphone after this just because of its incredible battery life. I had the 3g and it was amazing.
I hear that complaint a lot, and even made it myself when I had an Evo4G. However, I found that if you disable all the features that are not present in the iPhone, like 4G, live wallpaper, widgets, flash, live weather, etc, I think you'll find the battery life to be comparable to what you had on your iPhone. My Evo3D is as good or better than my buddy's iPhone4 by simply turning off live wallpaper and 4G.
I suppose it would be more "pure" to eschew anything produced by a corporation while protesting their influence, but then the protesters would need to carry around stone tablets and chisels to communicate, all while wearing animal skins (or protesting in the nude). However, I see no hypocrisy in using all available technologies at their disposal to make their point. After all, the protests are not against technology, but rather corporate greed, government corruption and the undue influence of power and money on the political system.
I see it as people having liberals having Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speak about human rights. I have no problem with them using technology, as long as the tech they use is not produced by the very people they are protesting. If they have a problem with Haliburton or Bank of America, they should protest Haliburton or Bank of America, not all of Wall St. See, much of my retirement is tied up in Wall St and I'm the working class schlub they are supposed to be protesting for. They are NOT helping!
Perhaps (as your post seems to infer) everyone should just STFU and accept the wonderful economic condition the US is in, due in no small part by the factors mentioned above, eh? I'm sure "Corporate America" thanks you for your support.
Taking down corporations is not going to improve our economic situation. It will put a bunch of people out of work and turn us into a country like India with an even more defined caste system. Lower energy prices, lower taxes, less regulation, and most importantly, STABILITY, are ways to improve our economic situation. Then again, I don't see these guys as Nobel Laureate Economists.
As usual, the "Conservative" agenda is to lie by attacking their opponent falsely for precisely what the "Conservatives" actually are.
You mean "racists"? Yeah! Herman Cain is the worst! Don't even get me started on that Bobby Jindal. Arnold Schwarzenegger will be the first to tell you how us "Conservatives" won't tolerate them damn foreigners!
Oh wait! You probably actually believe it. See, it's funny because you accuse conservatives of lying, all while believing and even perpetuating lies AGAINST conservatives.
The "politically correct" thinking on climate change is the denial. The polluters pay for politics to fight the science that might make them pay for the pollution.
Yeah, that worked out so well for Rick Perry. Fact is, if you so much as say, "Maybe we don't know all there is to know about climate change" you are instantly labeled "anti-science", even though the statement is 100% accurate. It's like you are questioning evolution. Matter of fact, it is EXACTLY like asking questions about evolution. Are you seeing a pattern here? Question Obama, you are a racist. Question man made climate change and you are anti-science. Question Social Security and you are anti-grandma. Question abortion and you are anti-woman. Wasn't the entire liberal platform based on "Questioning Authority" and keeping an open mind? Sorry, but "politically correct" simply means "the liberal position".
It's funny how liberals like to call those that question climate models "flat-earthers", but if people were not allowed to question what some accept as fact, we'd all still be "flat-earthers".
Thanks for your contribution to our public demonstration.
Previous climate change, along with continental drift, continental forest fires, and the other big changes you invoked - all happened over thousands and millions of years. The current climate change you deniers no longer bother to deny is actually in progress is happening over just a few decades and centuries. Which is totally unprecedented.
OK then. What caused the "little ice age" to begin with? Didn't it start within a few decades or centuries? If we are to assume that Europeans deforested the Americas causing an end to the little ice age, then how did it ever start since Europeans had been deforesting Europe for centuries? Shouldn't it have been warmer in 1600's than it was in the 1400's, which should have been warmer than the 1200's and then the 800's and so on? How on earth did a little ice age form in the 1800's? Also, what ended the "big ice age" about 10,000 before Columbus was ever born?
See, this is the problem with the whole AGW argument. Man spots a trend like, the climate is warming or it's raining, and then wonder what HE did to cause it. Maybe, just maybe whatever change happened with no help from man at all. Maybe that dance really didn't cause it to rain and it was going to rain whether you danced or not.
This is awesome. So while I'm out protesting corporations, I can use my phone, produced by a corporation, to notify my family that I've been arrested. Maybe I can get one of them to bring me a frapacino.
I honestly can never see teachers becoming redundant. Sure, their usefulness may decline as technology grows; but I highly doubt they will ever become completely redundant. If you've ever had a really good teacher, you should know that there is no real substitute for how well you will learn from them. Even watching a video of a really good teacher explaining something is not going to be nearly as effective as actually being there in person with a very talented teacher and being able to interact with them and ask questions. So no, I do not think teachers will be going the way of whip-crackers at all. I would gladly support teachers, as they really do help build our future.
Well said. However, don't discount distance learning. Teachers are still needed, even for an online class. My wife teaches online courses as well as "in class" courses. Both sets of students do about the same. For my wife, she prefers the online courses as she can do her part any time of the day without leaving the house. It won't put her out of a job as the courses constantly change from one semester to the next, requiring tweaking or a complete rewrite of the course.
As for me, I actually did better taking online courses than I did having to show up for a class. The same benefits the teachers enjoy also apply to the students in that I merely had a deadline as to when the work had to be done. I did not have someone holding my hand telling me at what time of day I had to spend time on the course work.
Online teaching is merely another way of teaching, but it is still teaching and still requires teachers. The difference is that instead of spending 8 hrs a day in a school building, teachers are able put the time in BEFORE the semester begins and then does the work at any hour of the day, answering any questions the students may have.
Good teachers are still good teachers. It doesn't matter if they are communicating via email or in a classroom.
Slashdot Mirror
Can a state elect to locally invalidate the federal mandate that states that bills issued by the US Treasury are "Legal tender for all debts public and private"?
This is a common misunderstanding. The currency is legal tender for all DEBTS, not all transactions. When you purchase something, you are doing exactly that -- making a purchase, not paying off a debt.
Fine. You give me the widget you're selling and I owe you a debt of whatever you were selling it for. I pay you in cash, which "is legal tender for all debts, public and private".
The "transaction" was you giving me the widget. The paying of the debt was me giving you the cash.
You're ignoring the keyword "debt".
Fine. You give me the widget you're selling and I owe you a debt of whatever you were selling it for. I pay you in cash, which "is legal tender for all debts, public and private"
Do you even know which state pays the most? Do you know which state has the largest economy? The most people? Federal tax revenue by state. Maybe when those state(s) actually contribute more than they leech out you can say that.
As you can see from the list of US state GDP California has a massive economy and subsidizes many other states, such as the Dakotas.
California ranks 43rd in the country among states in the amount of tax dollars paid to the federal government versus the amount of federal aid that comes back to the state, according to the Washington-based Tax Foundation. The state gets 78 cents for every dollar sent to the federal government.
Sf Gate. Just seven other states receive a worse deal.
OK, fine. Turn it around. Why should the good people of California have to pay to salt the roads in N. Dakota? Maybe California would be in a better financial situation if they were not paying so much to subsidize those lazy N. Dakotans!
So much for providing for common defense and promoting general welfare.
Right! That is spelled out in the Constitution. No one is saying that we should do away with defense. We are saying that if California needs something, then CALIFORNIA should pay for it. Just as North Dakota should pay to salt their own roads in the winter.
General Welfare? Well, that's kinda vague. But I think we could narrow "General" to mean EVERYONE. That means, again, the government shouldn't do something unless it benefits EVERYONE. The salting of North Dakota's roads does not promote the general welfare of me and my Texan neighbors.
Let the states pay for what the states need.
And don't even ask about basic science. There's no "profit motive" in it. Corporations don't do any worthwhile basic science. Not biology, not atmospheric, geological, astronomical, or even math. It's all applied science, with the goal of getting a profit next, or better "this quarter." Basic science is too long-range to be even considered.
You mean like:
(from HERE)
The National Science Foundation gave the Minnesota Zoo over $600,000 so that they could develop an online video game called "Wolfquest".
Almost unbelievably, the National Institutes of Health was given $800,000 in "stimulus funds" to study the impact of a "genital-washing program" on men in South Africa.
The National Institutes of Health spent approximately $442,340 to study the behavior of male prostitutes in Vietnam.
Approximately $1 million of U.S. taxpayer money was used to create poetry for the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Chicago zoos. The goal of the "poetry" is to help raise awareness on environmental issues.
The National Science Foundation spent $216,000 to study whether or not politicians "gain or lose support by taking ambiguous positions."
A total of $3 million has been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft. The goal of this "video game research" is reportedly to study how "emerging forms of communication, including multiplayer computer games and online virtual worlds such as World of Warcraft and Second Life can help organizations collaborate and compete more effectively in the global marketplace.
is a nutjob.
I had a long dissertation thought out, but man, this shit just boggles my mind. NOAA? Is he kidding? I'm sure all of you remember (probably not, but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt) the fact that he said that "Hurr, Galveston didn't have anyone to bail them out during their hurricane" totally forgetting how many people /died/ because of no hurricane warning and forecasting.
The next time there's a hurricane coming up Galveston Bay, I want Ron Paul to be out in the middle of it. Outside. Naked.
--
BMO
So you actually believe that without NOAA, we will be blind to hurricanes? You do realize that there are several other federal agencies that could take over that role, right? For example, the military depends on accurate weather forecasts. Why not turn the responsibility over to them? The airline industry relies on accurate weather forecasts. They could do the job as well. We could even make a deal where they have to make their forecasts publicly available in exchange for the free satellites they will be receiving.
Also, it's not like all the men and women on ships and oil platforms won't be able to call back to their loved ones in Galveston and say, "Sure is windy out here!"
Also, when that big hurricane hit Galveston over a century ago, we didn't have forecasting because there were no satellites, airplanes, communication channels or ships that would move faster than the hurricane itself. It wasn't because NOAA didn't exist. It was because even NOAA would have been blind to the coming hurricane.
Try again please.
Wait... You think the DOE is not necessary anymore with the looming energy crisis and all the talks about global warming? And when is education ever NOT necessary?..
On top of that, all of this is just cents compared to the overall budget, yet the sacred cows like the DOD never get cut.
Slippery Slope Fallacy.
Just because the FEDERAL government gets out of something, doesn't mean it will fail to exist. For example, the DOE didn't exist until 1980. Did public education exist before 1980?
Doesn't the DOE spend a good deal of its time dealing with nukes?
Isn't that kind of important? Even to libertarians?
Shouldn't the military be dealing with Nukes? The military, by the way, is an enumerated power in the Constitution, so even Ron Paul supports the federal role.
For the record, the hole was dug by that bloody moron called GWB
Wow! If you hate Bush for the deficit, you must REALLY hate Obama. He's grown the deficit more than Bush did in less than half the time!
He is assuming the slack will be picked up by corporate America and independent agencies, or perhaps he wants to offer research grants later?
The states. If it's profitable, private industry will do it. If it's necessary but not profitable, then the states will do it. Should the people in Illinois pay for hurricane monitoring for the people of Florida? Let the coastal states form their own Hurricane Center and pay for it themselves. Just as parks, roads, housing and education should all be state funded and controlled.
Ron Paul is a 10th Amendment guy. Anything not specified in the Constitution as a federal power is the state's responsibility.
warnings about hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis.
private corporations are always willing to fill in the gap...the only difference here would be that you would have to pay for getting those warnings.
Right. You would pay by having to watch commercials. It's not like the Haliburton Hurricane Center is going to take you credit card number before telling you the latest models.
You are aware, I trust, that the USGS is responsible for a large number of monitoring programs. Basically, killing it would essentially leave the West Coast of the United States without tsunami, earthquake or volcano alerts. I'm sure the people that live along that very geologically active strip of turf will be happy to know that Ron Paul considers them essentially expendable in his quest for ideological purity.
Why should the people of North Dakota pay for tsunami monitoring for California? If the west coast wants earth quake and tsunami warning, they can pay for it.
No more energy research, no more parks, no more public education, no more low income housing, no more roads & bridges. What a grand utopia he has planned for us.
No more energy research: The private sector can handle this just fine.
no more parks, no more public education, no more low income housing, no more roads & bridges: These can, and are handled at a state level more efficiently and more responsive to the public's need than their federal program counterparts.
So don't say that there will be "no more" of any of this stuff as it will be handled via the states or industries that will profit from it anyway.
If the NATO countries really cared for the Libyan people then they would have killed that asshole DECADES ago.
Actually Reagan tried that decades ago. Remember, Spain wouldn't let him fly over Spanish territory and our F111's had to fly all the way around Europe? Remember all the flack Reagan took for the collateral damage, including the death of a little girl?
Taking out an entrenched dictator is not as easy as it would seem, as recent history has shown.
Working your way through school is now impossible with a minimum wage job, since, you're looking at 35 hours a week at minimum wage to be able to afford only tuition - that doesn't include books or board. In 1970, people were looking at 14 hours a week to be able to pay for school. This math also points out that its idiotic when baby boomers say, "people should work through college, that's what I did" because times are completely different. And as parent said, things are only going to get worse.
It is possible to work your way through college. Here is what I did:
Went to college right after high school. Lived with mom. Went to school from 8:00am until noon, then worked from 3:00pm 'til 11:00pm. That left me two hours a day to study and roughly 6.5 hrs sleep per night. However, this meant that I had to leave the house by 7:00am and I wouldn't get home until midnight, M-F. This didn't work out for me as I didn't have the discipline to actually study when I was supposed to and partied an awful lot, meaning that 6.5 hrs sleep was usually 3 hrs sleep and my 2+ hrs study time per day was spent chasing skirts around campus. FAIL! Not because I couldn't pay for it. It's because I lacked the discipline to make it happen.
So, I joined the Army. I did two years. Paid my $100/mo for my first year for the GI Bill.
Got out, went to school where I could live in a dorm, not with mom. Went to school M-F 8-noon as before. Worked at a computer lab on campus for about 4 hrs a day for minimum wage and worked 8:00 to 8:00 Saturday and Sunday doing tech support for about $10.00/hr. I was able to pay for everything, but asking a 23 year old to work every weekend when his neighbors are partying until 4:00am Friday and Saturday with a bunch of drunk, 18 year old girls in the "experimental phase" is not realistic, either. I did better, but still failed. Again, it wasn't the bills that caused me drop out, but the lifestyle was just too much fun.
Finally, I signed up for an online school, University of Phoenix. Here, I was able to work full time and do my coursework at my leisure. The GI Bill still paid enough to make it possible, if not everything (don't remember). I still took loans as it was stupid not to. It was an interest free loan. That's free money! I graduated with a 3.5 GPA and now pay $150/month in student loans. Certainly doable. Of course, I'm in Texas where jobs are still available, regardless of what you hear in the Republican debates.
So, it can be done. Yes, this was over 10 years ago, but not much has changed since then. Even today, I can still take courses, tuition free at any state sponsored school via Texas' own version of the GI Bill called the Hazelwood Act. I've taken MSCE and MSSQL certification courses completely free at the local community college.
Sure thing, we will ship immediately after your payment clears. Our account 129417 is with Zimbabwe Banking Corp/Bulawayo, SWIFT ZBCOZWHXBYO. $750 per slave, $2785 for the virgin. Do you have any preference for the gender? If not, we will ship all male.
These are Greeks we are talking about here. The "females" are simply males with nipples tattooed on their backs.
So what do you think the end result is if this trend continues? Either large segments of the population are going to have to give up on college or they're going to have to put themselves in a position where default is almost an inevitability. I guess that could actually have one positive effect. It could finally dispel the idea that everyone can or should go to college (or that a college degree should be considered a prerequisite for any white collar job).
Or they could join the military. Do two years and your schooling is paid for. Even if you are not a fighter, every branch has openings for cooks and truck drivers. Yeah, the military sux, but it's no worse than trying to wash dishes to pay for college and the benefits are SOOOO much better.
Just wait until you see what happens if THIS group starts going en masse into default. At least with houses, there is some collateral there. What are you going to foreclose on when little Johnny goes into default on his $100,000 loan debt because he can't find a job? You going to foreclose on and resell his worthless degree?
Well, they can still take your house if you don't pay your student loans, or at least put a lien on it. They can also garnish your wages, so no matter what crappy job you get, they will make sure it pays less. Your only hope for not paying your student loans is to be unemployed or work under the table.
is the miserable battery life. My droid Incredible goes barely a day and a half with little to no good smartphone usage. If I use the internet or video at all the battery is gone in less than a day. I even have all the default auto-running programs deleted. I will probably go back to iphone after this just because of its incredible battery life. I had the 3g and it was amazing.
I hear that complaint a lot, and even made it myself when I had an Evo4G. However, I found that if you disable all the features that are not present in the iPhone, like 4G, live wallpaper, widgets, flash, live weather, etc, I think you'll find the battery life to be comparable to what you had on your iPhone. My Evo3D is as good or better than my buddy's iPhone4 by simply turning off live wallpaper and 4G.
When you research Metabolic Boost for Zerglings they get wings that improve their running speed by 60%.
Any bronze level newbie knows wings improve land speed.
Which soon evolve to Muta's that enter from the back of the base and kill ur d00dz!
Why would I trust the opinion of someone who calls himself "The Bad Astronomer". I want the opinion of a GOOD Astronomer!
It's like wine. How about some fresh wine. And bring me those finger sandwiches you talked me out of!
I suppose it would be more "pure" to eschew anything produced by a corporation while protesting their influence, but then the protesters would need to carry around stone tablets and chisels to communicate, all while wearing animal skins (or protesting in the nude). However, I see no hypocrisy in using all available technologies at their disposal to make their point. After all, the protests are not against technology, but rather corporate greed, government corruption and the undue influence of power and money on the political system.
I see it as people having liberals having Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speak about human rights. I have no problem with them using technology, as long as the tech they use is not produced by the very people they are protesting. If they have a problem with Haliburton or Bank of America, they should protest Haliburton or Bank of America, not all of Wall St. See, much of my retirement is tied up in Wall St and I'm the working class schlub they are supposed to be protesting for. They are NOT helping!
Perhaps (as your post seems to infer) everyone should just STFU and accept the wonderful economic condition the US is in, due in no small part by the factors mentioned above, eh? I'm sure "Corporate America" thanks you for your support.
Taking down corporations is not going to improve our economic situation. It will put a bunch of people out of work and turn us into a country like India with an even more defined caste system. Lower energy prices, lower taxes, less regulation, and most importantly, STABILITY, are ways to improve our economic situation. Then again, I don't see these guys as Nobel Laureate Economists.
As usual, the "Conservative" agenda is to lie by attacking their opponent falsely for precisely what the "Conservatives" actually are.
You mean "racists"? Yeah! Herman Cain is the worst! Don't even get me started on that Bobby Jindal. Arnold Schwarzenegger will be the first to tell you how us "Conservatives" won't tolerate them damn foreigners!
Oh wait! You probably actually believe it. See, it's funny because you accuse conservatives of lying, all while believing and even perpetuating lies AGAINST conservatives.
The "politically correct" thinking on climate change is the denial. The polluters pay for politics to fight the science that might make them pay for the pollution.
Yeah, that worked out so well for Rick Perry. Fact is, if you so much as say, "Maybe we don't know all there is to know about climate change" you are instantly labeled "anti-science", even though the statement is 100% accurate. It's like you are questioning evolution. Matter of fact, it is EXACTLY like asking questions about evolution. Are you seeing a pattern here? Question Obama, you are a racist. Question man made climate change and you are anti-science. Question Social Security and you are anti-grandma. Question abortion and you are anti-woman. Wasn't the entire liberal platform based on "Questioning Authority" and keeping an open mind? Sorry, but "politically correct" simply means "the liberal position".
It's funny how liberals like to call those that question climate models "flat-earthers", but if people were not allowed to question what some accept as fact, we'd all still be "flat-earthers".
Thanks for your contribution to our public demonstration.
No, thank you!
Previous climate change, along with continental drift, continental forest fires, and the other big changes you invoked - all happened over thousands and millions of years. The current climate change you deniers no longer bother to deny is actually in progress is happening over just a few decades and centuries. Which is totally unprecedented.
OK then. What caused the "little ice age" to begin with? Didn't it start within a few decades or centuries? If we are to assume that Europeans deforested the Americas causing an end to the little ice age, then how did it ever start since Europeans had been deforesting Europe for centuries? Shouldn't it have been warmer in 1600's than it was in the 1400's, which should have been warmer than the 1200's and then the 800's and so on? How on earth did a little ice age form in the 1800's? Also, what ended the "big ice age" about 10,000 before Columbus was ever born?
See, this is the problem with the whole AGW argument. Man spots a trend like, the climate is warming or it's raining, and then wonder what HE did to cause it. Maybe, just maybe whatever change happened with no help from man at all. Maybe that dance really didn't cause it to rain and it was going to rain whether you danced or not.
Correlation does NOT equal Causation.
This is awesome. So while I'm out protesting corporations, I can use my phone, produced by a corporation, to notify my family that I've been arrested. Maybe I can get one of them to bring me a frapacino.
I honestly can never see teachers becoming redundant. Sure, their usefulness may decline as technology grows; but I highly doubt they will ever become completely redundant. If you've ever had a really good teacher, you should know that there is no real substitute for how well you will learn from them. Even watching a video of a really good teacher explaining something is not going to be nearly as effective as actually being there in person with a very talented teacher and being able to interact with them and ask questions.
So no, I do not think teachers will be going the way of whip-crackers at all. I would gladly support teachers, as they really do help build our future.
Well said. However, don't discount distance learning. Teachers are still needed, even for an online class. My wife teaches online courses as well as "in class" courses. Both sets of students do about the same. For my wife, she prefers the online courses as she can do her part any time of the day without leaving the house. It won't put her out of a job as the courses constantly change from one semester to the next, requiring tweaking or a complete rewrite of the course.
As for me, I actually did better taking online courses than I did having to show up for a class. The same benefits the teachers enjoy also apply to the students in that I merely had a deadline as to when the work had to be done. I did not have someone holding my hand telling me at what time of day I had to spend time on the course work.
Online teaching is merely another way of teaching, but it is still teaching and still requires teachers. The difference is that instead of spending 8 hrs a day in a school building, teachers are able put the time in BEFORE the semester begins and then does the work at any hour of the day, answering any questions the students may have.
Good teachers are still good teachers. It doesn't matter if they are communicating via email or in a classroom.