What I would like to see is a proposal that is firmly based on effectiveness: what does it do, how much is it going to cost, and how much warming is it going to save? I have read many people saying, "we need to do something -- anything is better than nothing" but that's not the case. Sometimes nothing is better than something, if the something is going to be expensive enough and do little enough to reverse warming.
From the link: "residents in deprived neighborhoods tend to stay where they associate themselves, and don't travel to neighborhoods outside their socioeconomic background. For example, a resident of a deprived neighborhood, living near the boundary shared with an affluent neighborhood, would not cross a street or walk a shorter distance to go visit a grocery store in an affluent neighborhood."
So it's a food desert if someone chooses not to walk to the nearest grocery store because it's in a different neighbourhood?
Accusing Republicans of being idiots is standard operating procedure for all liberals; it has nothing to do with Palin. They exaggerate Republican mis-statements and even true statements (Russia is visibile from Alaska), while ignoring similar statements by Democrats (e.g., Obama and Biden).
Private jets and designer clothes? Are you under the impression that Palin is rich? She may be now, after publishing two books, but she worked her way through college -- unlike Obama, Kerry, Gore, etc. She has no privileged background.
How in the world did his secretary pay 30% in taxes? Even if she's single with no kids, her total income tax would be significantly less than that. (Her marginal rate might be 30%, but that wouldn't count deductions and exemptions.) The only way you could get it up to 30% would be if you included other taxes -- FICA, Medicare, real estate, sales taxes, and so forth -- but Buffett had to pay those himself, and was surely not including them in his 17.7% rate. True, he doesn't pay FICA for income over some small amount ($80,000?), but that is because we maintain the fiction that FICA is a sort of savings account, and we don't give benefits for earnings over that amount. (Not that I agree that it works that way, but that is the justification for it -- if someone wants to argue for a reduction of the FICA tax, I'll be all for it.)
One might also point out that the government could tax Warren Buffett at a 90% rate and he would still be fabulously wealthy. That's not true for people making $250,000, which seems to be the magical point when one becomes classified as rich these days. How about a higher tax rate for people making over $1 billion per year? I'm not necessarily in favour of it, but at least they would be in a position to afford it.
I thought that at first. In fact, however, I constantly find a mouse cord getting stuck on something, so that I have to pull the cord out to move the mouse properly. Plus, I really haven't had any problems with cordless mice.
>If the speed limit is 50, it was set there for a reason.
For a reason, but perhaps not a good reason. In the example you give, there might very well be a good reason why the speed limit is 55, but elsewhere it could be something like fuel efficiency.
"The fact is, the Texas school board is teaching a revisionist history that is out of touch with the facts."
That's a strong claim. Have you actually read the changes that the Texas school board has recommended? Which ones, specifically, are out of touch with the facts?
You have got to be kidding. The new textbook standards are no more "thought control" than any of the other textbook standards, in Texas or anywhere else. They are the result of the interpretation of the members of the Texas school board, which is in charge of making such decisions. I don't think you would have such harsh words if they decided on a textbook standard more in accord with your views of history.
"In most of the world I'm categorized as a right-wing conservative, yet in the US I'd likely be labeled a "capitalism-hating socialist" for my political views. You there have Mussolini in one side and Hitler on the other, the middle ground between them is still fascism."
People need to get over the idea that the U.S. should be judged by the standards of the rest of the world. One, the U.S. is not the rest of the world, and thank goodness. I don't want to be like Italy or Greece. Two, it's not that the rest of the world is far to the left of the U.S.; it's that Europe is far to the left of the U.S. For theocracy, how about Saudi Arabia or Iran? For autocracy, how about Libya or North Korea? Nobody (I hope) wants to be like them. The U.S. should strive for the best government it can have, not a government in line with the rest of the world.
It's also interesting to note that the theory some people had that the student took webcam shots of himself and that's what the school was using is impossible. The webcam could be not be activated, used or deactivated by the students. Trying to Jailbreak the laptop to allow you to do things like disable the webcam was an offense punishable by expulsion. Oh, and just for good measure, students weren't allowed to use their own computers at school.
They may not have been able to deactivate the webcam electronically, but I'll be a piece of dark-coloured paper and some tape would have worked wonders. Not that the student should have known this, but maybe something to think about if you ever have a borrowed laptop with a webcam.
But America has far more premature births than other countries, for reasons that are not understood (and probably don't relate to healthcare). America does a better job of keeping those premature babies alive than any country in the world, but not enough to offset the fact that premature babies are more likely to die than full-term babies.
>You are close to the mark, but this is potentially worse than fascism as we have known it. It opens the possibility of an entirely new form of tyranny that the human race has not yet experienced.
I love Slashdot for statements like this. Because McCain-Feingold has been overturned, the U.S. is about to become worse that Stalinist Russia, Cambodia under Pol Pot, Uganda under Idi Amin...It is refreshing to see the imaginative leaps the human imagination can undertake.
I agree completely about MP3 players, but your anger is directed at the wrong side politically.
The stem cell debate is not about legality, it is about public funding. And no one is trying to tell you what religion to have.
It is the left who wants to tell us what size toilets we can have, what kind of light bulbs we can use, and what kind of safety devices need to be on our cars.
>Why does this ridiculous soundbite keep getting regurgitated *every single time* this topic comes up?
>If corporations don't pay tax as so many Internet corporate lick-spittles shriek, then they wouldn't need ridiculously twisted foreign tax accounts and be prancing around like sooks when someone comes along and tells them to meet their obligations in their home countries would they? They would just happily pass this tax burden it along.
>That's right logic doesn't come into a discussion where fanatical ideologists are hopping up and down does it?
Good, you first abuse your opponents' motives before claiming they are illogical. That's standard/. practice.
The reason the corporate tax matters, even though it gets passed on to the consumer, is that consumers are less willing to pay for things when prices are higher. The corporation can set a lower price point without the tax and sell more product, possibly making more profit along the way (depending on the exact elasticity of demand, tax amount, price change, etc.). I don't approve tax shelters in general, but you can't argue that raising taxes don't matter.
>That's right logic doesn't come into a discussion where fanatical ideologists are hopping up and down does it?
No, the salaries are decent (especially considering you get several months off every year). I've known quite a few people who were interested in teaching but decided against it because of the requirements for certification. Someone with a Ph.D. is qualified to teach college students, but not high school students. Even though certification is basically the equivalent of a master's, you have to have the specific courses required for certification, which typically means a year or two beyond a master's degree.
And what are those courses that give one a unique insight into teaching students under 18? I know someone who had to take a course on "Mental Hygiene in the Classroom," and another on world music. He wanted to teach German, but his undergraduate coursework had not included something to give him sufficient credentials in internationalism -- even though he had lived in several foreign countries while growing up.
Why is this? The NEA, which pushes for these barriers to entry -- ostensibly in the name of good teaching, but in reality to create an artificial shortage of teachers.
Yeah, people are screaming, but no one is blaming the Democrats. I saw one post that attacked Obama, and it was marked as flamebait. All of the other posts were about how awful this idea is...without mentioning anyone by name, or even any particular parties (such as the one currently in control of White House and Congress).
Didn't Obama win his first election by having his opponents thrown off the ballot after a team of his went over their voter signatures and found enough problems to get them disqualified?
Good point, Fox didn't have anything on the falling markets. They shouldn't carry any stories on the upcoming election while the economy is in a crisis.
Have you looked at the Daily Kos? They're not an official representative of the Democratic Party, but they're a major voice in it. The site is so full of Palin stories (including the most outrageous of them) that even its regular readers have complained (not that it attacks Palin, but that it has become all Palin, all the time).
This must be one of the most ingenious political moves of all time! Choose Palin as a running mate, knowing that Democrats will make fools of themselves attacking her, diverting attention from the issues.
Or maybe McCain chose her because she is a good candidate, and the fact that Democrats are going insane attacking her is a consequence, rather than a cause, of the selection.
Slashdot Mirror
What I would like to see is a proposal that is firmly based on effectiveness: what does it do, how much is it going to cost, and how much warming is it going to save? I have read many people saying, "we need to do something -- anything is better than nothing" but that's not the case. Sometimes nothing is better than something, if the something is going to be expensive enough and do little enough to reverse warming.
From the link: "residents in deprived neighborhoods tend to stay where they associate themselves, and don't travel to neighborhoods outside their socioeconomic background. For example, a resident of a deprived neighborhood, living near the boundary shared with an affluent neighborhood, would not cross a street or walk a shorter distance to go visit a grocery store in an affluent neighborhood." So it's a food desert if someone chooses not to walk to the nearest grocery store because it's in a different neighbourhood?
Mark Twain was from Missouri, not MIssissippi.
Have you looked at the rules involved in net neutrality? I guarantee you it will be a book, not a one-liner.
Accusing Republicans of being idiots is standard operating procedure for all liberals; it has nothing to do with Palin. They exaggerate Republican mis-statements and even true statements (Russia is visibile from Alaska), while ignoring similar statements by Democrats (e.g., Obama and Biden). Private jets and designer clothes? Are you under the impression that Palin is rich? She may be now, after publishing two books, but she worked her way through college -- unlike Obama, Kerry, Gore, etc. She has no privileged background.
When we get a "normal person" running for national office (Sarah Palin), she gets ripped to shreds for being plebeian.
How in the world did his secretary pay 30% in taxes? Even if she's single with no kids, her total income tax would be significantly less than that. (Her marginal rate might be 30%, but that wouldn't count deductions and exemptions.) The only way you could get it up to 30% would be if you included other taxes -- FICA, Medicare, real estate, sales taxes, and so forth -- but Buffett had to pay those himself, and was surely not including them in his 17.7% rate. True, he doesn't pay FICA for income over some small amount ($80,000?), but that is because we maintain the fiction that FICA is a sort of savings account, and we don't give benefits for earnings over that amount. (Not that I agree that it works that way, but that is the justification for it -- if someone wants to argue for a reduction of the FICA tax, I'll be all for it.) One might also point out that the government could tax Warren Buffett at a 90% rate and he would still be fabulously wealthy. That's not true for people making $250,000, which seems to be the magical point when one becomes classified as rich these days. How about a higher tax rate for people making over $1 billion per year? I'm not necessarily in favour of it, but at least they would be in a position to afford it.
How inhumane, deporting the poor man! This is just like those fascists in Arizona who want to send undocumented immigrants back to Mexico.
I thought that at first. In fact, however, I constantly find a mouse cord getting stuck on something, so that I have to pull the cord out to move the mouse properly. Plus, I really haven't had any problems with cordless mice.
>If the speed limit is 50, it was set there for a reason. For a reason, but perhaps not a good reason. In the example you give, there might very well be a good reason why the speed limit is 55, but elsewhere it could be something like fuel efficiency.
"The fact is, the Texas school board is teaching a revisionist history that is out of touch with the facts." That's a strong claim. Have you actually read the changes that the Texas school board has recommended? Which ones, specifically, are out of touch with the facts?
You have got to be kidding. The new textbook standards are no more "thought control" than any of the other textbook standards, in Texas or anywhere else. They are the result of the interpretation of the members of the Texas school board, which is in charge of making such decisions. I don't think you would have such harsh words if they decided on a textbook standard more in accord with your views of history.
"In most of the world I'm categorized as a right-wing conservative, yet in the US I'd likely be labeled a "capitalism-hating socialist" for my political views. You there have Mussolini in one side and Hitler on the other, the middle ground between them is still fascism." People need to get over the idea that the U.S. should be judged by the standards of the rest of the world. One, the U.S. is not the rest of the world, and thank goodness. I don't want to be like Italy or Greece. Two, it's not that the rest of the world is far to the left of the U.S.; it's that Europe is far to the left of the U.S. For theocracy, how about Saudi Arabia or Iran? For autocracy, how about Libya or North Korea? Nobody (I hope) wants to be like them. The U.S. should strive for the best government it can have, not a government in line with the rest of the world.
It's also interesting to note that the theory some people had that the student took webcam shots of himself and that's what the school was using is impossible. The webcam could be not be activated, used or deactivated by the students. Trying to Jailbreak the laptop to allow you to do things like disable the webcam was an offense punishable by expulsion. Oh, and just for good measure, students weren't allowed to use their own computers at school.
They may not have been able to deactivate the webcam electronically, but I'll be a piece of dark-coloured paper and some tape would have worked wonders. Not that the student should have known this, but maybe something to think about if you ever have a borrowed laptop with a webcam.
But America has far more premature births than other countries, for reasons that are not understood (and probably don't relate to healthcare). America does a better job of keeping those premature babies alive than any country in the world, but not enough to offset the fact that premature babies are more likely to die than full-term babies.
>You are close to the mark, but this is potentially worse than fascism as we have known it. It opens the possibility of an entirely new form of tyranny that the human race has not yet experienced.
I love Slashdot for statements like this. Because McCain-Feingold has been overturned, the U.S. is about to become worse that Stalinist Russia, Cambodia under Pol Pot, Uganda under Idi Amin...It is refreshing to see the imaginative leaps the human imagination can undertake.
I agree completely about MP3 players, but your anger is directed at the wrong side politically. The stem cell debate is not about legality, it is about public funding. And no one is trying to tell you what religion to have. It is the left who wants to tell us what size toilets we can have, what kind of light bulbs we can use, and what kind of safety devices need to be on our cars.
>Why does this ridiculous soundbite keep getting regurgitated *every single time* this topic comes up?
/. practice.
>If corporations don't pay tax as so many Internet corporate lick-spittles shriek, then they wouldn't need ridiculously twisted foreign tax accounts and be prancing around like sooks when someone comes along and tells them to meet their obligations in their home countries would they? They would just happily pass this tax burden it along.
>That's right logic doesn't come into a discussion where fanatical ideologists are hopping up and down does it?
Good, you first abuse your opponents' motives before claiming they are illogical. That's standard
The reason the corporate tax matters, even though it gets passed on to the consumer, is that consumers are less willing to pay for things when prices are higher. The corporation can set a lower price point without the tax and sell more product, possibly making more profit along the way (depending on the exact elasticity of demand, tax amount, price change, etc.). I don't approve tax shelters in general, but you can't argue that raising taxes don't matter.
>That's right logic doesn't come into a discussion where fanatical ideologists are hopping up and down does it?
Oh, I guess you can.
You can use the AltSearch extension to get that functionality.
No, the salaries are decent (especially considering you get several months off every year). I've known quite a few people who were interested in teaching but decided against it because of the requirements for certification. Someone with a Ph.D. is qualified to teach college students, but not high school students. Even though certification is basically the equivalent of a master's, you have to have the specific courses required for certification, which typically means a year or two beyond a master's degree.
And what are those courses that give one a unique insight into teaching students under 18? I know someone who had to take a course on "Mental Hygiene in the Classroom," and another on world music. He wanted to teach German, but his undergraduate coursework had not included something to give him sufficient credentials in internationalism -- even though he had lived in several foreign countries while growing up.
Why is this? The NEA, which pushes for these barriers to entry -- ostensibly in the name of good teaching, but in reality to create an artificial shortage of teachers.
Yeah, people are screaming, but no one is blaming the Democrats. I saw one post that attacked Obama, and it was marked as flamebait. All of the other posts were about how awful this idea is...without mentioning anyone by name, or even any particular parties (such as the one currently in control of White House and Congress).
Didn't Obama win his first election by having his opponents thrown off the ballot after a team of his went over their voter signatures and found enough problems to get them disqualified?
Good point, Fox didn't have anything on the falling markets. They shouldn't carry any stories on the upcoming election while the economy is in a crisis.
Have you looked at the Daily Kos? They're not an official representative of the Democratic Party, but they're a major voice in it. The site is so full of Palin stories (including the most outrageous of them) that even its regular readers have complained (not that it attacks Palin, but that it has become all Palin, all the time).
This must be one of the most ingenious political moves of all time! Choose Palin as a running mate, knowing that Democrats will make fools of themselves attacking her, diverting attention from the issues.
Or maybe McCain chose her because she is a good candidate, and the fact that Democrats are going insane attacking her is a consequence, rather than a cause, of the selection.