"A lot of states" require you to establish financial responsibility. In my state, besides automotive liability insurance, this can be a surety bond or a certificate of deposit.
This is also where the whole argument that forcibly requiring health insurance is the same as is already done with auto insurance falls on its face.
Heaven forbid the onus is put on the consumer to determine what they should and should not purchase. Would you let your child eat paint chips, today, now that you're so confident in the regulatory controls? If you buy your toddler a toy with paint that scrapes off or with detachable parts, the only explanation I'm left with is that you must have eaten paint chips, yourself, as a child.
And a "hardy FUCK YOU" back (do your arguments not hold up without the name calling)--it's you nanny-state socialists, on either side of the aisle, that removed all traces of personal responsibility and created a perfect breeding ground for sociopath CEOs. You first gave our power away to the government who then in turn sold it to the corporations, offering an attractive road to success through participation in a protection racket of lobbying. By creating this unfair system, you opened the flood gate to the amoral who wrongly believe the only way to success is through cheating and sociopath behavior.
Corporate lobbying gone amuck, there's something we both probably agree on, although, our solutions probably differ. I am guessing you would demand more regulation, but this will only serve to cause even more lobbying efforts by corporations (nobody can honestly want this outcome, except the politicians getting their pockets lined). A libertarian idea: strip away all powers not enumerated in the constitution. If the federal government had limited powers as it did at design, what would they be lobbying for (maybe excise taxes)? They would be forced to lobby to individual states who now hold more of the power, but at least it will make it harder to grease everybody's palms than the current system where there's a central clearinghouse to send all donations.
At least with corporations there's a choice to trust them or not; what choice does federal coercion and many times, outright extortion leave you? Our trust in a large central government was lost long ago. Others made that bed for you and we will forever fight against it.
Why did they all switch to safety glass, then, before the FMVSS&R became law? Using your logic, it was much more economically feasible to just keep letting their customers get decapitated.
The collapsible steering column was first introduced within the same decade as the regulations' passage, so it is not very fair to say that it would have never reached widespread adoption without Ralph Nader's prompting.
Does the italian version not list the "Official Site" right underneath the ads, with links to download 3 different versions and a textbox to search within the openoffice.org site?
This is exactly what google does, too, but instead of the official site being the first result, it separates the official site in it's own box (making it kind of look like an ad, at least to me, who is used to google).
Another similar cross-cutting of.NET and Ruby is with "Nu Gems for.NET", which is used to get.NET open-source dependencies. It blew my mind to be able to pull.net dependencies and alt.net projects from Ruby Gems.
I haven't been able to make it through the latest year's tax code, but it could be listed there as a tax incentive. Sort of like us buying an energy star appliance.
The NSA is not the only group. Defense agencies and contractors use it all the time. Here's the relevant section in the patent rules.
Also, the classified patent will not be revealed, if "somebody happens to also come about with the same thing"--their application will become classified under the same secrecy order. I wonder how they let that somebody know, besides just a rejection letter.
News at 11, people who are able to afford to eat and be lazy have more heart problems than those who eat nothing but rice and beans. What else will you shock us with? The fact that we can afford to have cars and actually drive them and so we have more car accidents.
If only there were some centralized planning committee who could redistribute the wealth for us plebes, then we would stop hurting ourselves, unnecessarily.
And what about government corruption, which can also be viewed as a tax.
A quite progressive tax at that, since the more money you make the more corrupt officials you have trying to milk from it.
Or maybe it's regressive, since by following the same argument for calling a consumption tax regressive, a larger percentage of a poor person's income goes to paying bribes than does a wealthier person's.
It wasn't always "a fiction" and there's no necessary requirement for it being so, today. In a pure consumption tax state you would have that $1000 until you bought something with it.
Rethinking it, I suppose there is one requirement that keeps it fiction: keeping the populace from being able to vote for your insane tax hikes with their pocketbooks.
That was the way we used to think. Now we look past the selfish material profit and focus more on the social benefit. We all now know that sacrifices must be made for the good of the world.
Why do some people still act in the old selfish ways? I don't know--Who is John Galt?
I wouldn't trust the politician who is attracted to the job for wealth any more than I trust the politician who is currently attracted to the job for power.
But one thing's for sure, if someone brings up "the values upon which the nation was founded", they're going to hear about slavery
That's right. The founders fought for independence, so they could have the right to own slaves. They also wore knee-high knickers back then; is that also a value upon which the nation was founded?
It doesn't sound that much different. Generally, our Auto Insurance is made of up of liability (i.e. required; you pay for other people's stuff you broke) and full-coverage policies (i.e. not required; it also pays for your damages). It is then up to the individual insurance company to offer the discount you describe (Allstate and Nationwide being two of the largest companies, that do so. They call it a "Safe Driver Discount").
The lawsuit the GP described is pretty much the "last-resort" option, here, too. How is your traffic insurance enforced and not abused?
A big problem here has been counterfeit insurance cards are easy to obtain. My state just recently began using a database that links the registered vehicle owner (tied to the license plate) to their insurance status, requiring the insurance companies to notify them of any changes.
My only problem with the handicap placards is the length of time they issue them for (temporary ones only, I guess). It could just be the inept bureaucracy of my state (or maybe a doctor, after all this is an anecdotal case), but I know a person who broke a leg and got a placard issued that was not going to expire for 2 years. Looking back at it, maybe it was just the fact that she is incredibly hot.
Don't be so cynical--it's not like The Masters of Mass Production* are sitting in a smoke-filled room thinking of the next LCD TV feature, just to sock it to the consumer.
It could be the fact that feature-creep comes into play when they want to differentiate themselves in a saturated market.
With Microsoft I think it was the fact that they recognize if you don't make it do anything new, nobody will want it. The fact that it has new process management model isn't exciting for most consumers, so they tack on a lot of "bloat" features and for better or for worse, let the marketing teams do their thing.
*Trademark Pending. This is the perfect villain for today's Saturday cartoons.
Slashdot Mirror
There are other ways to establish financial responsibility for your automobile than just liability insurance.
"A lot of states" require you to establish financial responsibility. In my state, besides automotive liability insurance, this can be a surety bond or a certificate of deposit.
This is also where the whole argument that forcibly requiring health insurance is the same as is already done with auto insurance falls on its face.
Heaven forbid the onus is put on the consumer to determine what they should and should not purchase. Would you let your child eat paint chips, today, now that you're so confident in the regulatory controls? If you buy your toddler a toy with paint that scrapes off or with detachable parts, the only explanation I'm left with is that you must have eaten paint chips, yourself, as a child.
And a "hardy FUCK YOU" back (do your arguments not hold up without the name calling)--it's you nanny-state socialists, on either side of the aisle, that removed all traces of personal responsibility and created a perfect breeding ground for sociopath CEOs. You first gave our power away to the government who then in turn sold it to the corporations, offering an attractive road to success through participation in a protection racket of lobbying. By creating this unfair system, you opened the flood gate to the amoral who wrongly believe the only way to success is through cheating and sociopath behavior.
Corporate lobbying gone amuck, there's something we both probably agree on, although, our solutions probably differ. I am guessing you would demand more regulation, but this will only serve to cause even more lobbying efforts by corporations (nobody can honestly want this outcome, except the politicians getting their pockets lined). A libertarian idea: strip away all powers not enumerated in the constitution. If the federal government had limited powers as it did at design, what would they be lobbying for (maybe excise taxes)? They would be forced to lobby to individual states who now hold more of the power, but at least it will make it harder to grease everybody's palms than the current system where there's a central clearinghouse to send all donations.
At least with corporations there's a choice to trust them or not; what choice does federal coercion and many times, outright extortion leave you? Our trust in a large central government was lost long ago. Others made that bed for you and we will forever fight against it.
Why did they all switch to safety glass, then, before the FMVSS&R became law? Using your logic, it was much more economically feasible to just keep letting their customers get decapitated.
The collapsible steering column was first introduced within the same decade as the regulations' passage, so it is not very fair to say that it would have never reached widespread adoption without Ralph Nader's prompting.
Did they keep misspelling colour and centre and have trouble locating the boot of a car?
Get's the girl at the end of a single Disney movie, no.
He did get to spend a rum-filled night with her on the beach, though.
It's really just a couple of simple unit tests:
Assert.IsTrue(false);
Assert.IsFalse(true);
Does the italian version not list the "Official Site" right underneath the ads, with links to download 3 different versions and a textbox to search within the openoffice.org site?
This is exactly what google does, too, but instead of the official site being the first result, it separates the official site in it's own box (making it kind of look like an ad, at least to me, who is used to google).
No they don't. Unless, they mistakenly consider the WWW and "the internet" as one in the same.
Another similar cross-cutting of .NET and Ruby is with "Nu Gems for .NET", which is used to get .NET open-source dependencies. It blew my mind to be able to pull .net dependencies and alt.net projects from Ruby Gems.
Here's the group page: Nu-NET
An overview from the makers: the-future-of-net-open-source-software-delivery
And just for completeness, Ayende's overview on it
I haven't been able to make it through the latest year's tax code, but it could be listed there as a tax incentive. Sort of like us buying an energy star appliance.
Who was invaded by the USA before this war?
The NSA is not the only group. Defense agencies and contractors use it all the time. Here's the relevant section in the patent rules.
Also, the classified patent will not be revealed, if "somebody happens to also come about with the same thing"--their application will become classified under the same secrecy order. I wonder how they let that somebody know, besides just a rejection letter.
News at 11, people who are able to afford to eat and be lazy have more heart problems than those who eat nothing but rice and beans. What else will you shock us with? The fact that we can afford to have cars and actually drive them and so we have more car accidents.
If only there were some centralized planning committee who could redistribute the wealth for us plebes, then we would stop hurting ourselves, unnecessarily.
Surely it will usher us into a new paradigm shift and allow us to focus all our energies on Web 2.0.
And what about government corruption, which can also be viewed as a tax.
A quite progressive tax at that, since the more money you make the more corrupt officials you have trying to milk from it.
Or maybe it's regressive, since by following the same argument for calling a consumption tax regressive, a larger percentage of a poor person's income goes to paying bribes than does a wealthier person's.
It wasn't always "a fiction" and there's no necessary requirement for it being so, today. In a pure consumption tax state you would have that $1000 until you bought something with it.
Rethinking it, I suppose there is one requirement that keeps it fiction: keeping the populace from being able to vote for your insane tax hikes with their pocketbooks.
That was the way we used to think. Now we look past the selfish material profit and focus more on the social benefit. We all now know that sacrifices must be made for the good of the world.
Why do some people still act in the old selfish ways? I don't know--Who is John Galt?
I wouldn't trust the politician who is attracted to the job for wealth any more than I trust the politician who is currently attracted to the job for power.
But one thing's for sure, if someone brings up "the values upon which the nation was founded", they're going to hear about slavery
That's right. The founders fought for independence, so they could have the right to own slaves. They also wore knee-high knickers back then; is that also a value upon which the nation was founded?
Ha. Like politicians would ever vote to tax themselves.
It doesn't sound that much different. Generally, our Auto Insurance is made of up of liability (i.e. required; you pay for other people's stuff you broke) and full-coverage policies (i.e. not required; it also pays for your damages). It is then up to the individual insurance company to offer the discount you describe (Allstate and Nationwide being two of the largest companies, that do so. They call it a "Safe Driver Discount").
The lawsuit the GP described is pretty much the "last-resort" option, here, too. How is your traffic insurance enforced and not abused?
A big problem here has been counterfeit insurance cards are easy to obtain. My state just recently began using a database that links the registered vehicle owner (tied to the license plate) to their insurance status, requiring the insurance companies to notify them of any changes.
"Why we think we need so much beef is another question, and one that does make me scratch my head a little."
I wondered that, once--then I ate a bite of a well prepared steak and then the answer struck me with a lightning bolt of crystal-clear epiphany.
My only problem with the handicap placards is the length of time they issue them for (temporary ones only, I guess). It could just be the inept bureaucracy of my state (or maybe a doctor, after all this is an anecdotal case), but I know a person who broke a leg and got a placard issued that was not going to expire for 2 years. Looking back at it, maybe it was just the fact that she is incredibly hot.
Don't be so cynical--it's not like The Masters of Mass Production* are sitting in a smoke-filled room thinking of the next LCD TV feature, just to sock it to the consumer.
It could be the fact that feature-creep comes into play when they want to differentiate themselves in a saturated market.
With Microsoft I think it was the fact that they recognize if you don't make it do anything new, nobody will want it. The fact that it has new process management model isn't exciting for most consumers, so they tack on a lot of "bloat" features and for better or for worse, let the marketing teams do their thing.
*Trademark Pending. This is the perfect villain for today's Saturday cartoons.