Indeed. Not even the result is the same (unless you only factor in "death," which would be odd), as I've pointed out numerous times. Lawyer 'logic' will not help you here. Telling me to study law will not help you, either; if you can't present a proper counterargument here and now, don't even bother spewing forth such garbage. If it wasn't clear, I did not find your 'logic' convincing.
That's because you don't understand the difference at a high level. Not lawyer logic, results logic. I'll try it one more time. You're the judge, here are your choices. You can let them go. You can put them in jail for a period of time or have probation or a combination of these two. The last two result in the same thing - execute them or life in prison. Either way, they're dead as a result of that sentence.
What is good to you is not necessarily good to me. The PATRIOT ACT is not good to me.
Or did you forget that, unlike you, I don't consider safety all-important? Don't pretend to care about freedom; you make those of us who actually do look bad.
Don't alienate people that can help you. Seems like people on our side are quick to pull out a knife and stab one another. We need to hang together or most assuredly we will hang separately. Safety and security are as relevant today as when Ben Franklin talked about it. Should everyone have the "freedom" to shout fire in a crowded movie theater? Of course not. This is why you need a background in law. Understand where a balance is. You won't get everything you want (unless you can make it seem like "no duh captain obvious"), don't piss others off or you may not get anything that you wanted. Please understand that if you get nothing else out of what I've said. You're talking to a guy that has actually worked with legislators, testified before assemblies to curb abuses. What about you? Have you even written a letter to a representative? Local, State, Fed? Do you even vote? Most of my representatives know me by by name. So don't tell me I don't care about freedom. I care and I actually do something about it. We need a few good men, maybe you can be one of them.
Of course it's not easy; that's why every government in history has abused their powers in horrendous ways, including the US government. Why anyone would trust these thugs with anything more than the bare essentials is beyond me.
Road to hell is paved with good intentions. That's where we're at now. This guy sums it up well - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML3qYHWRIZk . If we can get the central government back to where it should be it would be great. Of course some people don't want that. They want one stop shop legislation than to deal with 50 legislatures. It also means some people would lose a great deal of power. Good luck with that.
Just like not everyone understands that 1 + 1 = 3, and they shouldn't; it's nonsense. If you were merely saying that you personally believe the death penalty is ultimately a good thing, that would be one thing; trying to say that murdering someone and letting them die with time are the same is rather insane.
I did say I believed it was the best thing and offered support, that wasn't good enough for you. Of course allowing them to die in prison isn't the same thing literally. You're too dense or don't want to understand what I'm trying to tell you. Years from now you'll probably remember this and it will finally come to you. I'll be gone by then I bet.
I have a feeling that the law has little to do with logic; we have the TSA, the NSA, the Patriot Act, and tons of other garbage that can attest to that.
If you study law you find out why things are the way they are. I thought I knew the law when I took my first law course decades ago. Then I found out I knew nothing and worse had wrong knowledge. Take a course if you can, any beginning course, it's very useful.
By just throwing out TSA, NSA, Patriot act... you really shouldn't do that without a point. You come across as a nut. NSA dates back many decades and they've done very good work. I grew up knowing many of them in the days before we had personal computers and I've worked with them professionally since. It's so disingenuous how some of these leaders have responded. Mr. Heller of Israel summed it up well when he said it was like the chief of police in the movie Casablanca being surprised gambling was going on in the casino. They knew, they know and the participate. It's necessary.
The patriot act people love to hate on both sides, yet they keep renewing it and even extending it though at times they swore they wouldn't. Turns out for good reason. What I'm getting at is it isn't as simple as people want it to be. Especially with the regime in power right now.
Just hang in there. That's what makes life interesting. You wouldn't want it to be all easy, would you?
If I stab someone, that's the same as letting time 'kill' them because they would have died either way. That is your logic. The mere fact that they're locked in prison has nothing to do with their death; the simple fact is, it's time that 'kills' them off, and that would have happened regardless of whether they went to prison or not.
Saying that giving them the death penalty is the same as them dying naturally in prison is simply asinine.
Not true. You took an action against that other person. If you get about 1.5" of blade in his body area, he's done fairly soon unless he is able to get medical attention. In the old days that was often fatal. Even today that could be fatal. I'm also a fencer and have studied this. Most people would think you caused their demise if they died soon or you shortened their normal life through that action. It was something you did to them. Case in point, suppose you punctured an internal organ and through complications from that they die say 1 year later. An asshole, dumpy 20 year old male mostly drunk smoker (who gave you an atomic wedgy) subject that normally would have died by age 40. They would come after you for his death. Of course if I were on the jury, I'd argue and probably get you off. However others may not see it that way and you could get life or even execution.
They say that if you make it 20 years in jail that's like a lifetime. So you can say incarceration shortens their life. Something done to them just like your stabbing the other fellow.
That's ok. Not everyone understands this. I have a feeling some law courses would help you understand. Even then, some people can't come to terms with it. You may be one of those people and that's ok. They don't want to think they as a society killed someone. Even if the method they chose is a very violent, painful, long method. The only way out is death.
Maybe you should research a bit of history; it's not hard to reach that conclusion.
I disagree with you, so you think I'm clueless. You disagree with me, so I think you're clueless. Funny how that works, isn't it?
You're still here? I have to move on. I'll pitch one more ball to you, against my better judgement.
It isn't that I disagree with you so you're clueless, it's because you clearly lack background in this area that you are clueless. In fact you even admitted it saying that you haven't decided this yet. Either you're playing dumb or you're clueless. I don't think you're cleaver enough to be playing dumb. I don't know you well enough to definitively say you're not playing dumb.
Really? They'd die whether or not they were put in prison; time kills everyone, and it's not the fault of prison or the government. Equating a death from old age to killing someone is preposterous to begin with.
What's preposterous is you not realizing that either way something is being done to someone. The action will cause their death as it's life without parole which you seem to find acceptable. I just want you to admit it causes their death - because it does and it was something done to them. Therefore as far as a penal code order it's really the same thing. A distinction without a real difference. That's why I said you aren't thinking about it the right way. Don't just think that giving someone life is ok and wash your hands of it. "It's ok, we didn't execute him" and somehow that's right? Maybe you are just totally oblivious to what someone goes through being put into a cage for 30+ years?
Of course someone may read this and say - OMG, we're still giving them the DP and get upset. We're taking this poor murderer and instead of shooting him, we're caging him like an ANIMAL in a violent way for years causing his death. In fact now they don't even want Animals kept in such small areas. It's inhumane...
That's surprising. I've shown a depth of knowledge having researched the subject, talked to those involved and done the analysis. You on the other hand classify a whole sets of different people, at different levels of government (local, district, federal, SCOTUS) as thugs. You've make clearly off the cuff statements, accused me of mixing up terminology without any basis having looked or even asked about the data, and so on. I believe that describes clueless quite well. It's also very annoying.
I'm quite serious.
Really. I find that hard to believe. If you really are you need to work on that, be less flip.
Again, being alive and being dead are two different things. Just because you view being in prison for the rest of your life the same as being dead doesn't mean everyone else feels that way.
That's because you are being pedantic. You're not thinking about it correctly. I keep telling you and it seems to keep on flying by you. When you see it, I'm sure it will be like a light turning on and you'll think - well yea!
Try it again - you've been accused of murdering 5 people on two separate occasions. We know you did it. You admit it, evidence definitively shows it was you - video tape, eye witnesses, you were arrested at the last scene being caught red handed. You're one bad dude. People are upset at you and want the DP. As a justice I can: A) Set you free. You're a good guy and I know you couldn't have done that. You must have been rail roaded. B) Jail you for a period of time - say 10 years. You're a bad dude, but we have to put some other group in jail so we need the space. C) Jail you for the rest of your life - as I said, you're one bad dude. D) Execute you. We give you your choice of execution - a) Hanging, b) Firing squad c) Stoning.
End result is C) and D) are really the same thing. You're still dead at the hand of the justice system. Method is different. The system can either use one of those choices in D or C - force you into a cell and use time to kill you. As I pointed out earlier there is a difference for the better in D. You get automatic appeals that you don't get with life. With luck you can show you really didn't do it, if you really didn't do it. If you did, then you should be executed. World is better off without you. No loss, just got rid of another mad dog.
Silly. You're talking about humans here, and not perfect angels. "They might abuse their powers in every other case... but they won't in this one!" This is naive. This is the sort of mindset we have to thank for garbage like the TSA.
You're showing me you really have no clue. Do this and you cross into being a psychopath as a judge and they understand that. No better than the murderer. Now if you raped the only judge for that county's daughter, well you could have a problem.
You've also demonstrated to me that you're not serious and this is a waste of time. I know that stuff didn't just fly over your head.
I'll just conclude this with - Once you've committed a murder you're a criminal. You lose your freedom. Kill just one person and it's really hard to end up with the DP in the USA. I'm sure it can be done if you're a big enough ass in court. You generally have to kill many people and on more than one occasion. Again, except for Texas. Difference between the needle, noose, bullet and time? Just the time really. A sentence of life W/O Parole is still a death sentence. You'll never be free again so don't kid yourself into thinking they didn't get the DP.
The same system has allowed many unjust things through it. Court decisions have caused war protestors to be arrested. Blatantly unconstitutional laws have been upheld. Government thugs simply should not be in the business of murdering people who have already been captured.
I'm highly cautious of giving the government any power it doesn't absolutely need, and for good reason.
Judges who are ruling based on their political views instead of the law. Understand, however I don't think many rule that way in the case of someone's life. I certainly hope that's not the case. I don't recall a case where I thought that happened. People being charged who clearly shouldn't have been. A recent case shows that, the Zimmerman case. They didn't bother with the grand jury. Justice department caused enough political racial tension that they went right to an trail and ended up with egg on their face when the inevitable verdict came in.
So... you changed your opinion because you believe that capital punishments makes us safer? What a freedom-minded individual you are. Again, I bring up the TSA: Would you agree with its existence if it actually kept us safe?
A very focused freedom minded guy. I've got to be missing something here. Flew right over my head? What does freedom for society and executing someone who is a murderer have to do with each other? I didn't address TSA because it's not that simple and it's off topic. I try to keep things on topic or it sometimes goes crazy. We need something. We don't necessarily need the TSA as such.
Some of those aren't merely "excuses." Trying to pinpoint a single cause is almost futile.
But while we're talking about excuses, add 'lack of the death penalty' to the list.
Did. The trouble is you want something that is definitive, black and white and there are no questions to be criticized about or feel bad about. We shouldn't feel good about executing someone. Life isn't like that. You take all of those causal relationships and they can be eliminated in different societies and circumstances one by one. What I had left at the end of many days was that the DP works as long as people are aware of it. The more public the better. I bet if I were to take you to Saudi Arabia for say a month stay, you'd be a totally different person. A lot of your doubts would vanish. They deal with even the common thief a whole lot differently than we do.
You really don't see a difference between being dead and being alive? Strange.
Context is important. I don't see much of a difference between being dead and being locked up in a cage like an animal for say 30+ years and then being dead. Of course that is assuming you meet a natural end in prison. Many don't.
You really don't see the difference between shooting someone and... not doing anything to them?
But that's the problem. You're not "not doing anything to them." You're locking them up for in most cases decades. They are able to still communicate with people on the outside, often they even have cell phones. They can still do a lot of harm behind bars. Dead, they tend to not harm anyone.
I'm not going to admit I agree with something I don't actually agree with.
And it also depends on perception. There have been many cases of people who have thought that someone committed some crime with 100% certainty but were later found out to be wrong. Plenty of checks are already in place, and yet innocent people have been (and will likely continue to be) murdered. There are not many things you can truly be 100% certain about.
Many cases they were 100% on and they weren't guilty? Ok, I'm game. Name three. I'm sure you have some or you wouldn't have offered, would you? What happened, where they executed then found to not be guilty or the system worked? I may not be able to respond for a while. I'd have to loo
Right. But policing is quite different from the outright murder of prisoners., which is huge.
Don't tell me that you want worthless, incompetent government thugs to have such a power?
How is a court of law with many levels to go through before they actually execute someone the same as incompetent government thugs? Indeed, the legal system and execution is the least of my worries. The cop pulling you over (aka a terry stop) is the biggest threat to our lives and freedom.
That shows the sort of 'homework' that you do; research that conforms with your own opinion.
No, that would be you I suspect (amazing how many people accuse others of doing exactly what they do). I went into it originally trying to show that capital punishment didn't work and should be abolished. When I completed what I was doing which took about 2 years it was very clear to me that it does work and shouldn't be abolished. It was a real eye opener.
Actually, it still wouldn't. Unless you can accurately pinpoint the exact cause and have taken into account every other explanation, then I'd refrain from trying to claim such things.
And the prime issue is about freedom and not letting the government have too much power, not safety.
Yes, like all the excuses they have out there - guns, socio-economics, geography, race and so on. I hate to admit it but man is much like a cave man when it comes to this. At least those that murder. If they know they'll be executed they don't do it unless they are really psychopaths. Maybe it would help if you met a few of these people. They can be nice and seem like the guy next door. They also don't think anything of doing things that I deleted in this space because it's just so terrible.
I think the way it is, as long as they have the DP with the process that we have isn't giving them too much power. Giving them the entire health care industry clearly is way too much power on the other hand. That's an entirely different discussion, however.
That's not the same as murdering them. When you kill them, they're simply dead and don't have the ability to live any sort of life at all (even one in prison). It is ridiculous to say that there is no difference.
I run into this every so often and I have never understood the reasoning. Somehow mother nature killing them after the legal system caged them for however many years took is ok? So why let them live? Is there somehow a deterrent in them living in prison because I've never seen anything to suggest that. Why let them continue to live? To me there really would be no difference. Life as I know it is over. Often their attitude becomes that they don't care and nobody is safe in that jail. They have nothing to lose.
So why don't you understand that time can be a killer as well as a bullet? My point is either way we must have processes in place such that if you are innocent you go free. Often it's the case that for life once you're convicted you're screwed. If it's the DP, there are automatic appeals to help you.
(100%, Gacy, Dahmer) That'd do you no good. Your response was predictable.
They admitted it, found the bodies. There is no question they were guilty. Of course my response was predictable. Put nonsense out there, you're going to be called on it. Admit it, there are cases where we are 100% certain and trying to hide behind philosophy won't help. I've been down that road too.
Really? I'm in a naive fantasy for pointing out that proving something with 100% accuracy isn't feasibly possible in cases such as this?
In cases like Gacy and Dahmer that's right. There are cases where we can't be 100%, clearly. In fact the Texas case where they probably executed the wrong man comes to mind. That was by no means a 100% case. That case disturbed me for some time.
Right, but I'm saying that anyone who claims to want a small government but supports the death penalty doesn't actually want a small government. Killing imprisoned people is no small matter.
Ok, Perhaps what I should have said is smaller government. Clearly what we have is way too large and I think we agree on that. By small I don't mean say 100 people in Washington or something silly like that. I/ I think people saying that mean smaller as in get rid of EPA, BATF, Education, trim DHS and so on. Just because you have a small government doesn't mean it can't effectively do the job of policing society.
In case you weren't aware, plenty of countries have already gotten rid of the death penalty and no such thing has been observed. And actually, even if it has been observed in some cases, correlation != causation.
Plus, freedom is more important than safety. If you believe we should give worthless, incompetent government thugs
I am aware and that's not the case. This clearly shows me that you haven't done your homework or perhaps you don't know how to do your homework. I run into that a lot, especially with anyone born 1980 and later. I'll admit that they do whatever they can to confuse people so they don't realize what is going on. One data point doesn't prove it, however lots of data points from across the world does. Clearly it is a deterrent and it should be public. The more public the better. I'd be for hanging in front of the Washington Monument. Hang 'em, Hang 'em high! Not in the back room for next to no one to see. Get back to what life really is.
You know what's really BS? Arguing for something because you think it'll make us safer. That's not the attitude anyone living in a free country should have. I suppose you'd be okay with the TSA if it actually did make us safer? I hope not.
Really? Did you really understand what you wrote? It is people like you that make smaller government people like me look bad. So we should NOT arrest bad guys because we think it makes us safer either? You don't want any police or am I getting you wrong? I don't think I'm making a "do it for the children" argument (if you understand what I mean). The alternative is life in prison, usually without parole. So effectively your killing them by the use of time instead of something more expedient. I.e. It's a distinction without a difference (that Europe is too dumb to realize). Unless you are arguing that we shouldn't arrest them at all, you're not for that are you? If you are, please let me know. That'll end this conversation very quickly.
As for TSA, I refer to that as security theater.
This is a naive fantasy; you can't prove that someone is guilty with 100% accuracy. And frankly, even if they could, I still wouldn't want worthless government thugs in the business of murdering prisoners.
It seems your comment is the way it is because you completely misunderstood what I meant. I hope you don't claim to want a small government, because you don't seem to actually want one; people like that make the rest of us who truly do want a small government look bad.
Oh come on. You really think murder can't be proven with 100% accuracy? Don't make off the cuff silly statements like that. Should I point out cases like John Wayne Gacy? Jeff Dahmer? Many, Many others. You're in the naive fantasy if you believe that. Please wake up and smell the coffee. Otherwise, I predict you will be taken advantage of a lot.
If you are going to replace one brake light replace them all. If you are going to replace one headlight replace them both.
Also, the nice thing about LED lighting is that the way it fails is it just doesn't produce as much light as it once did. So in 20 years if they want to put off the costs for another couple of years, it's entirely possible to do so.
That's not right. Replace just that bad headlight unless the other one is so old it has had it or money is burning a hole in your pocket. I've never had the other headlamp go bad shortly after the first one. Maybe years later and I think that happened once in 40+ years. Now if the package comes in a two pack, yea I replace the other one as well because then it's in the garage and you'll never remember what it went to.
This is also true with CFL bulbs. I've kept track with my rentals. Some blow within 6 months, one has been burning for 10 years so far. These are outdoor lights that burn all night long. They last longer than incandescent bulbs. So far I haven't installed a LED light for an outdoor application.
So don't go and replace them all unless you want to. You're not saving yourself anything.
No. It is still the government carrying out the execution. People who actually want small government don't believe the government should have such a power to begin with, even if they have the 'consent' of the people.
I don't understand why you think that. Some people may, a very small number that probably oppose the death penalty in the first place. Did you take a US Civics class? The Constitution is for limited government. In fact the central government can only do what is in the Constitution. Something that is now way beyond what the original framers intended, clearly. Agencies such as BATF, Education, EPA (Created by Richard Nixon BTW) and a bunch more have no business being in existence.
As for governments - executed people back then too with limited Government. I know, hard to believe but they did. You want a Government to be involved in capital punishment cases. Otherwise you have a mob. Then none of us are safe. No executions and crime goes up. This is clear by looking at political boundaries. For example Baltimore City and Baltimore County. The County has the death penalty and the City doesn't. It's amazing the difference in crime on the sides of that political line. There is no white line to demark it, however they know where the boundary is. Same neighbourhood, same houses, same economic situations, different crime rates. So "it is not a deterrent" is BS.
We need to also hold our government accountable. Make sure it isn't used for murder. Also make sure they are doing their job by not letting murderers go free.
Living off a credit card has been happening since Bush, technically most of the recent POTUS except maybe Clinton.
The only time since WWII that we had a balanced budget was when the Republicans controlled Congress in the 1990s. They shut down the government and made Clinton capitulate. Worked great. Would work now. When W came to office (and I'm no advocate of W) we actually were given rebates because we paid too much. Then Republicans were promptly voted out and here we are again. People are so stupid, believe the liberal lies time and time again.
Will the automated cars obey the posted speed limits? That would be horrible as the whole city where I live has 25mph limits posted everywhere. No one obeys them except the occasional freak. If you drive at the posted limit it will take forever to cross town, it would make commuting not practical.
The speed limits are intentionally low. Helps with government revenue. Especially in neighbourhoods where they can only go to the minimum for the state. In Maryland that's 25 MPH. Used to be 35. Should be at least 35 in my neighbourhood. We're all on 2 acre lots and visibility from the road is good so I'd feel comfortable at 50 to be honest. For those on 1/4 acre lots and smaller it probably should be 35 or slower.
They'll have to increase speeds to what they should be. Remember 55 killed people. That's a fact. Increasing speeds clearly saved lives.
That's not true. I'm a pilot and I've landed at airports that the RC folks were using as well. They were even using the active runway in Nebraska. Granted that airport probably had maybe 3 takeoffs and landings a day. Most of the time it isn't a problem and I don't mind as long as they keep it safe. Certainly at an airport in the middle of nowhere that barely sees any traffic. However in the pilot forums I see more and more people complaining about RC planes and they are 1000' AGL and above. I understand from a pilot that I know and is also a RC guy that this topic is coming up in his club more.
There is also the Police starting to use RC aircraft. They are the ones that I'm really worried about because they don't seem to give a damn about rules. They seem content to do whatever they want, legal or illegal.
My hobby eye in the sky is legal....Completely legal as I'm doing it for fun.
Maybe. I understand you can't fly it at all inside of Washington DC. Actually, what is known as the FRZ or Flight Restricted Zone. Defined all the way down to the surface. So is Washington special or doesn't apply or not sure?
The Slashdot summary already nicely shows why the Chinese do have a point of sorts...the only thing they seem to be able to come up with is a deal to kick the can down the road for four months.
There is a way to fix it. The Republicans did it back in the 1990s with Gingrich. The only four years in our lifetimes that we had a balanced budget. Of course I'm assuming that if you are reading this, you're not over 75. We had balanced budgets before WWII, when Republicans used to control Congress.
I really don't see why this is so hard for people to understand. These services are shut down because the money to pay people to open and run them is simply not appropriated and wont be till congress stops dicking around with the ACA and actually passes a meaningful budget. You can not open a large service with out the personal to support it, and volunteers have no accountability with out oversight.
It's hard to understand because they never closed these things down in the past when we had a shutdown. There is no law that says they have to close them. If you disagree before you respond find the law and cite it. I'm not interested in your opinion or what MSM said. Close Federal Building - yea, probably. Close a neighborhood childrens park that is about 100 square feet of kids equipment, nope. It's clearly part of Obama's "make it hurt" campaign.
In my experience, that happens right around the time accountants start micro-managing everything, and when winning "buzzword bingo" happens in every company call.
Exactly. I've seen it personally too. Stood by and watched it happen to companies like HP. Somehow HP has managed to survive the micro accountants best efforts to destroy it. We used to call it the Harvard MBA fungus. They would come in and destroy. "This makes more business sense." Sure if that's all you consider, however you're MISSING THE BIG PICTURE! Won't listen because they're from Harvard. Fortunately they've been slapped down for the most part now.
From the UN report they admit temperatures haven't risen for 15 years and they admit they don't know why. This breaks their models that depend on CO2 as the cause.
Ok Slashdot guys, you act as if you're scientists. What did they teach you in grade school about the scientific method? A hypothesis is valid until there is a counter example. With the CO2 levels now over 400 PPM, we have our counter example. This is not hard guys. In fact it's obvious.
Something caused temperatures to rise. Clearly it wasn't CO2.
As for the weather, that's funny. In 1893 Hogg island was mostly wiped off the face of the earth - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hog_Island_(New_York) . Of course today that would somehow be "proof". Other storms, I remember real bad storms going back decades. Mud slides in California, etc. In short - mother nature being mother nature. I don't see a change and as for the hurricanes this season has been way below what they had predicted - again due to bad models.
Time all scientists admit the obvious. CO2 is a symptom and not the cause. Greenhouses are not hot due to CO2 by the way. It isn't as if they pump CO2 into the house.
Only the US, UK and 'friends' have the crypto standards, global locations, satellites, cpu power, cash, skill set, storage to keep it all going.
You really think that? Did you know I own a bridge in Brooklyn? Just $1000. Comes with toll booths and everything. Even the surley coin taker.
Seriously, China has a big program with some very talented people. So does Australia, Russia, France. I know of others that spy on their population very much. Not just for the USA. China does very well, however Australia has some people that can crack your stuff and you don't even know it.
And now you all proper slashdotters are thanking God that something named "postgresql" has basically no marketing value, aren't you.
I used postgre and learned to love it, then they were bought out by CA I think. Lost them for years and picked them up when RedHat offered it. Then put some big data into it. Then they lost me when I upgraded and lost access to all my data. All of my fucking data! Live system. No idea that would happen. I had a bunch of names that went through my mind from grade school to describe them. I had to move the data to another big machine that hadn't been upgraded, run it and dump the data. Load it into the new system. I think that took me about 18 hours or so. Then I upgraded it to mysql where it still runs today. Hasn't missed a beat I bet in 10 years.
Sadly some stuff still runs under postgress as it has the geospatial extensions that I need. If it weren't for that, I'd kick it to the side so fast. I feel almost as if it's time for them to screw me again. I know they'll wait until it is a really bad time.
.... Compliance with paying income tax was low to the point of being nonexistent.
Al Capone was convicted for tax evasion in 1931. He's probably the most famous, however there are cases going back into the twenties. Social Security was voluntary and was never meant to be a retirement. It was supposed to be supplemental, so at least you had something coming in. It's really rough if you have nothing coming in.
It is in fact a ponzi scheme. The only difference is time. They hope you die before you collect. Worse, when you do die you have to pay that last month back. Even if you die on the last day. Also, no mention is generally given to how they've raided the fund for years.
It still cracks me up when I run across people who think there's an account some place with all their money in it. As if SS is a bank account.
I've been trying to figure out how to get out of SS. I understand that once you've paid your 40 quarters (i.e. 10 years) you can opt out of it. When you hit 40 quarters you are a "fully insured individual" and can collect when you hit whatever the moving target is then as far as age. When you do collect they will average what you've paid last I knew for the last 5 years and your payment is based on that. Anyone know how to do it? I asked the IRS and they said there was no way to opt out.
...only difference between bb's and buckyballs is buckyballs are magnets... so what, they don't want kids to learn about magnets? cause they can definitely buy bb's at any age.
Big diff is buckyballs are strong magnets. Really strong magnets. So strong the concern is if they are swallowed they get into the intestines. If two of them are in the intestine they can attract and lock together. Inside the intestine that's a really bad thing. It COULD kill someone. AFAIK, it hasn't.
Just another thing to add to my Consumer Protection Commission ban list. Lawn darts, toy cork gun, Gilbert U-238 science kit, slip and slide, etc. I never owned the U-238 science kit. Had a toy cork gun, Jarts, Slip and slide, and TWO packages of those magnets. Man-o-man, it's a wonder I'm alive? Especially with that cork gun.
The plan was to suck value out of the parents houses and into the professors pockets. Pure greed by liberal professors. I know a few of them. Absolutely no guilt on their part either.
I graduated from Maryland in 1990. 7 year plan. Seems to me tuition was just $760 back then for full time. I recently was back on campus. When I was there everything was adequate. I had everything I needed. Bathrooms in the Chem building were a time capsule from the 1950s. That's fine, they still worked and looked ok. Nothing cracked or anything like that. Now, it's almost like the Ritz there. Way better than anything available to me and I honestly don't understand how this will help students. Maryland was a tough school, probably still is. No getting around having to learn. It is simply much, much, much more expensive than it has to be. Crazy professors totally out of touch with reality.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. Not even the result is the same (unless you only factor in "death," which would be odd), as I've pointed out numerous times. Lawyer 'logic' will not help you here. Telling me to study law will not help you, either; if you can't present a proper counterargument here and now, don't even bother spewing forth such garbage. If it wasn't clear, I did not find your 'logic' convincing.
That's because you don't understand the difference at a high level. Not lawyer logic, results logic. I'll try it one more time. You're the judge, here are your choices. You can let them go. You can put them in jail for a period of time or have probation or a combination of these two. The last two result in the same thing - execute them or life in prison. Either way, they're dead as a result of that sentence.
What is good to you is not necessarily good to me. The PATRIOT ACT is not good to me.
Or did you forget that, unlike you, I don't consider safety all-important? Don't pretend to care about freedom; you make those of us who actually do look bad.
Don't alienate people that can help you. Seems like people on our side are quick to pull out a knife and stab one another. We need to hang together or most assuredly we will hang separately. Safety and security are as relevant today as when Ben Franklin talked about it. Should everyone have the "freedom" to shout fire in a crowded movie theater? Of course not. This is why you need a background in law. Understand where a balance is. You won't get everything you want (unless you can make it seem like "no duh captain obvious"), don't piss others off or you may not get anything that you wanted. Please understand that if you get nothing else out of what I've said. You're talking to a guy that has actually worked with legislators, testified before assemblies to curb abuses. What about you? Have you even written a letter to a representative? Local, State, Fed? Do you even vote? Most of my representatives know me by by name. So don't tell me I don't care about freedom. I care and I actually do something about it. We need a few good men, maybe you can be one of them.
Of course it's not easy; that's why every government in history has abused their powers in horrendous ways, including the US government. Why anyone would trust these thugs with anything more than the bare essentials is beyond me.
Road to hell is paved with good intentions. That's where we're at now. This guy sums it up well - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML3qYHWRIZk . If we can get the central government back to where it should be it would be great. Of course some people don't want that. They want one stop shop legislation than to deal with 50 legislatures. It also means some people would lose a great deal of power. Good luck with that.
Just like not everyone understands that 1 + 1 = 3, and they shouldn't; it's nonsense. If you were merely saying that you personally believe the death penalty is ultimately a good thing, that would be one thing; trying to say that murdering someone and letting them die with time are the same is rather insane.
I did say I believed it was the best thing and offered support, that wasn't good enough for you. Of course allowing them to die in prison isn't the same thing literally. You're too dense or don't want to understand what I'm trying to tell you. Years from now you'll probably remember this and it will finally come to you. I'll be gone by then I bet.
I have a feeling that the law has little to do with logic; we have the TSA, the NSA, the Patriot Act, and tons of other garbage that can attest to that.
If you study law you find out why things are the way they are. I thought I knew the law when I took my first law course decades ago. Then I found out I knew nothing and worse had wrong knowledge. Take a course if you can, any beginning course, it's very useful.
By just throwing out TSA, NSA, Patriot act... you really shouldn't do that without a point. You come across as a nut. NSA dates back many decades and they've done very good work. I grew up knowing many of them in the days before we had personal computers and I've worked with them professionally since. It's so disingenuous how some of these leaders have responded. Mr. Heller of Israel summed it up well when he said it was like the chief of police in the movie Casablanca being surprised gambling was going on in the casino. They knew, they know and the participate. It's necessary.
The patriot act people love to hate on both sides, yet they keep renewing it and even extending it though at times they swore they wouldn't. Turns out for good reason. What I'm getting at is it isn't as simple as people want it to be. Especially with the regime in power right now.
Just hang in there. That's what makes life interesting. You wouldn't want it to be all easy, would you?
If I stab someone, that's the same as letting time 'kill' them because they would have died either way. That is your logic. The mere fact that they're locked in prison has nothing to do with their death; the simple fact is, it's time that 'kills' them off, and that would have happened regardless of whether they went to prison or not.
Saying that giving them the death penalty is the same as them dying naturally in prison is simply asinine.
Not true. You took an action against that other person. If you get about 1.5" of blade in his body area, he's done fairly soon unless he is able to get medical attention. In the old days that was often fatal. Even today that could be fatal. I'm also a fencer and have studied this. Most people would think you caused their demise if they died soon or you shortened their normal life through that action. It was something you did to them. Case in point, suppose you punctured an internal organ and through complications from that they die say 1 year later. An asshole, dumpy 20 year old male mostly drunk smoker (who gave you an atomic wedgy) subject that normally would have died by age 40. They would come after you for his death. Of course if I were on the jury, I'd argue and probably get you off. However others may not see it that way and you could get life or even execution.
They say that if you make it 20 years in jail that's like a lifetime. So you can say incarceration shortens their life. Something done to them just like your stabbing the other fellow.
That's ok. Not everyone understands this. I have a feeling some law courses would help you understand. Even then, some people can't come to terms with it. You may be one of those people and that's ok. They don't want to think they as a society killed someone. Even if the method they chose is a very violent, painful, long method. The only way out is death.
Maybe you should research a bit of history; it's not hard to reach that conclusion.
I disagree with you, so you think I'm clueless. You disagree with me, so I think you're clueless. Funny how that works, isn't it?
You're still here? I have to move on. I'll pitch one more ball to you, against my better judgement.
It isn't that I disagree with you so you're clueless, it's because you clearly lack background in this area that you are clueless. In fact you even admitted it saying that you haven't decided this yet. Either you're playing dumb or you're clueless. I don't think you're cleaver enough to be playing dumb. I don't know you well enough to definitively say you're not playing dumb.
Really? They'd die whether or not they were put in prison; time kills everyone, and it's not the fault of prison or the government. Equating a death from old age to killing someone is preposterous to begin with.
What's preposterous is you not realizing that either way something is being done to someone. The action will cause their death as it's life without parole which you seem to find acceptable. I just want you to admit it causes their death - because it does and it was something done to them. Therefore as far as a penal code order it's really the same thing. A distinction without a real difference. That's why I said you aren't thinking about it the right way. Don't just think that giving someone life is ok and wash your hands of it. "It's ok, we didn't execute him" and somehow that's right? Maybe you are just totally oblivious to what someone goes through being put into a cage for 30+ years?
Of course someone may read this and say - OMG, we're still giving them the DP and get upset. We're taking this poor murderer and instead of shooting him, we're caging him like an ANIMAL in a violent way for years causing his death. In fact now they don't even want Animals kept in such small areas. It's inhumane...
You're showing me you really have no clue.
I think the same, but about you.
That's surprising. I've shown a depth of knowledge having researched the subject, talked to those involved and done the analysis. You on the other hand classify a whole sets of different people, at different levels of government (local, district, federal, SCOTUS) as thugs. You've make clearly off the cuff statements, accused me of mixing up terminology without any basis having looked or even asked about the data, and so on. I believe that describes clueless quite well. It's also very annoying.
I'm quite serious.
Really. I find that hard to believe. If you really are you need to work on that, be less flip.
Again, being alive and being dead are two different things. Just because you view being in prison for the rest of your life the same as being dead doesn't mean everyone else feels that way.
That's because you are being pedantic. You're not thinking about it correctly. I keep telling you and it seems to keep on flying by you. When you see it, I'm sure it will be like a light turning on and you'll think - well yea!
Try it again - you've been accused of murdering 5 people on two separate occasions. We know you did it. You admit it, evidence definitively shows it was you - video tape, eye witnesses, you were arrested at the last scene being caught red handed. You're one bad dude. People are upset at you and want the DP. As a justice I can:
A) Set you free. You're a good guy and I know you couldn't have done that. You must have been rail roaded.
B) Jail you for a period of time - say 10 years. You're a bad dude, but we have to put some other group in jail so we need the space.
C) Jail you for the rest of your life - as I said, you're one bad dude.
D) Execute you. We give you your choice of execution - a) Hanging, b) Firing squad c) Stoning.
End result is C) and D) are really the same thing. You're still dead at the hand of the justice system. Method is different. The system can either use one of those choices in D or C - force you into a cell and use time to kill you. As I pointed out earlier there is a difference for the better in D. You get automatic appeals that you don't get with life. With luck you can show you really didn't do it, if you really didn't do it. If you did, then you should be executed. World is better off without you. No loss, just got rid of another mad dog.
I know, you still don't get it? Think about it.
Silly. You're talking about humans here, and not perfect angels. "They might abuse their powers in every other case... but they won't in this one!" This is naive. This is the sort of mindset we have to thank for garbage like the TSA.
You're showing me you really have no clue. Do this and you cross into being a psychopath as a judge and they understand that. No better than the murderer. Now if you raped the only judge for that county's daughter, well you could have a problem.
You've also demonstrated to me that you're not serious and this is a waste of time. I know that stuff didn't just fly over your head.
I'll just conclude this with - Once you've committed a murder you're a criminal. You lose your freedom. Kill just one person and it's really hard to end up with the DP in the USA. I'm sure it can be done if you're a big enough ass in court. You generally have to kill many people and on more than one occasion. Again, except for Texas. Difference between the needle, noose, bullet and time? Just the time really. A sentence of life W/O Parole is still a death sentence. You'll never be free again so don't kid yourself into thinking they didn't get the DP.
The same system has allowed many unjust things through it. Court decisions have caused war protestors to be arrested. Blatantly unconstitutional laws have been upheld. Government thugs simply should not be in the business of murdering people who have already been captured.
I'm highly cautious of giving the government any power it doesn't absolutely need, and for good reason.
Judges who are ruling based on their political views instead of the law. Understand, however I don't think many rule that way in the case of someone's life. I certainly hope that's not the case. I don't recall a case where I thought that happened. People being charged who clearly shouldn't have been. A recent case shows that, the Zimmerman case. They didn't bother with the grand jury. Justice department caused enough political racial tension that they went right to an trail and ended up with egg on their face when the inevitable verdict came in.
So... you changed your opinion because you believe that capital punishments makes us safer? What a freedom-minded individual you are. Again, I bring up the TSA: Would you agree with its existence if it actually kept us safe?
A very focused freedom minded guy. I've got to be missing something here. Flew right over my head? What does freedom for society and executing someone who is a murderer have to do with each other? I didn't address TSA because it's not that simple and it's off topic. I try to keep things on topic or it sometimes goes crazy. We need something. We don't necessarily need the TSA as such.
Some of those aren't merely "excuses." Trying to pinpoint a single cause is almost futile.
But while we're talking about excuses, add 'lack of the death penalty' to the list.
Did. The trouble is you want something that is definitive, black and white and there are no questions to be criticized about or feel bad about. We shouldn't feel good about executing someone. Life isn't like that. You take all of those causal relationships and they can be eliminated in different societies and circumstances one by one. What I had left at the end of many days was that the DP works as long as people are aware of it. The more public the better. I bet if I were to take you to Saudi Arabia for say a month stay, you'd be a totally different person. A lot of your doubts would vanish. They deal with even the common thief a whole lot differently than we do.
You really don't see a difference between being dead and being alive? Strange.
Context is important. I don't see much of a difference between being dead and being locked up in a cage like an animal for say 30+ years and then being dead. Of course that is assuming you meet a natural end in prison. Many don't.
You really don't see the difference between shooting someone and... not doing anything to them?
But that's the problem. You're not "not doing anything to them." You're locking them up for in most cases decades. They are able to still communicate with people on the outside, often they even have cell phones. They can still do a lot of harm behind bars. Dead, they tend to not harm anyone.
I'm not going to admit I agree with something I don't actually agree with.
And it also depends on perception. There have been many cases of people who have thought that someone committed some crime with 100% certainty but were later found out to be wrong. Plenty of checks are already in place, and yet innocent people have been (and will likely continue to be) murdered. There are not many things you can truly be 100% certain about.
Many cases they were 100% on and they weren't guilty? Ok, I'm game. Name three. I'm sure you have some or you wouldn't have offered, would you? What happened, where they executed then found to not be guilty or the system worked? I may not be able to respond for a while. I'd have to loo
Right. But policing is quite different from the outright murder of prisoners., which is huge.
Don't tell me that you want worthless, incompetent government thugs to have such a power?
How is a court of law with many levels to go through before they actually execute someone the same as incompetent government thugs? Indeed, the legal system and execution is the least of my worries. The cop pulling you over (aka a terry stop) is the biggest threat to our lives and freedom.
That shows the sort of 'homework' that you do; research that conforms with your own opinion.
No, that would be you I suspect (amazing how many people accuse others of doing exactly what they do). I went into it originally trying to show that capital punishment didn't work and should be abolished. When I completed what I was doing which took about 2 years it was very clear to me that it does work and shouldn't be abolished. It was a real eye opener.
Actually, it still wouldn't. Unless you can accurately pinpoint the exact cause and have taken into account every other explanation, then I'd refrain from trying to claim such things.
And the prime issue is about freedom and not letting the government have too much power, not safety.
Yes, like all the excuses they have out there - guns, socio-economics, geography, race and so on. I hate to admit it but man is much like a cave man when it comes to this. At least those that murder. If they know they'll be executed they don't do it unless they are really psychopaths. Maybe it would help if you met a few of these people. They can be nice and seem like the guy next door. They also don't think anything of doing things that I deleted in this space because it's just so terrible.
I think the way it is, as long as they have the DP with the process that we have isn't giving them too much power. Giving them the entire health care industry clearly is way too much power on the other hand. That's an entirely different discussion, however.
That's not the same as murdering them. When you kill them, they're simply dead and don't have the ability to live any sort of life at all (even one in prison). It is ridiculous to say that there is no difference.
I run into this every so often and I have never understood the reasoning. Somehow mother nature killing them after the legal system caged them for however many years took is ok? So why let them live? Is there somehow a deterrent in them living in prison because I've never seen anything to suggest that. Why let them continue to live? To me there really would be no difference. Life as I know it is over. Often their attitude becomes that they don't care and nobody is safe in that jail. They have nothing to lose.
So why don't you understand that time can be a killer as well as a bullet? My point is either way we must have processes in place such that if you are innocent you go free. Often it's the case that for life once you're convicted you're screwed. If it's the DP, there are automatic appeals to help you.
(100%, Gacy, Dahmer) That'd do you no good. Your response was predictable.
They admitted it, found the bodies. There is no question they were guilty. Of course my response was predictable. Put nonsense out there, you're going to be called on it. Admit it, there are cases where we are 100% certain and trying to hide behind philosophy won't help. I've been down that road too.
Really? I'm in a naive fantasy for pointing out that proving something with 100% accuracy isn't feasibly possible in cases such as this?
In cases like Gacy and Dahmer that's right. There are cases where we can't be 100%, clearly. In fact the Texas case where they probably executed the wrong man comes to mind. That was by no means a 100% case. That case disturbed me for some time.
Right, but I'm saying that anyone who claims to want a small government but supports the death penalty doesn't actually want a small government. Killing imprisoned people is no small matter.
Ok, Perhaps what I should have said is smaller government. Clearly what we have is way too large and I think we agree on that. By small I don't mean say 100 people in Washington or something silly like that. I/ I think people saying that mean smaller as in get rid of EPA, BATF, Education, trim DHS and so on. Just because you have a small government doesn't mean it can't effectively do the job of policing society.
In case you weren't aware, plenty of countries have already gotten rid of the death penalty and no such thing has been observed. And actually, even if it has been observed in some cases, correlation != causation.
Plus, freedom is more important than safety. If you believe we should give worthless, incompetent government thugs
I am aware and that's not the case. This clearly shows me that you haven't done your homework or perhaps you don't know how to do your homework. I run into that a lot, especially with anyone born 1980 and later. I'll admit that they do whatever they can to confuse people so they don't realize what is going on. One data point doesn't prove it, however lots of data points from across the world does. Clearly it is a deterrent and it should be public. The more public the better. I'd be for hanging in front of the Washington Monument. Hang 'em, Hang 'em high! Not in the back room for next to no one to see. Get back to what life really is.
You know what's really BS? Arguing for something because you think it'll make us safer. That's not the attitude anyone living in a free country should have. I suppose you'd be okay with the TSA if it actually did make us safer? I hope not.
Really? Did you really understand what you wrote? It is people like you that make smaller government people like me look bad. So we should NOT arrest bad guys because we think it makes us safer either? You don't want any police or am I getting you wrong? I don't think I'm making a "do it for the children" argument (if you understand what I mean). The alternative is life in prison, usually without parole. So effectively your killing them by the use of time instead of something more expedient. I.e. It's a distinction without a difference (that Europe is too dumb to realize). Unless you are arguing that we shouldn't arrest them at all, you're not for that are you? If you are, please let me know. That'll end this conversation very quickly.
As for TSA, I refer to that as security theater.
This is a naive fantasy; you can't prove that someone is guilty with 100% accuracy. And frankly, even if they could, I still wouldn't want worthless government thugs in the business of murdering prisoners.
It seems your comment is the way it is because you completely misunderstood what I meant. I hope you don't claim to want a small government, because you don't seem to actually want one; people like that make the rest of us who truly do want a small government look bad.
Oh come on. You really think murder can't be proven with 100% accuracy? Don't make off the cuff silly statements like that. Should I point out cases like John Wayne Gacy? Jeff Dahmer? Many, Many others. You're in the naive fantasy if you believe that. Please wake up and smell the coffee. Otherwise, I predict you will be taken advantage of a lot.
If you are going to replace one brake light replace them all. If you are going to replace one headlight replace them both.
Also, the nice thing about LED lighting is that the way it fails is it just doesn't produce as much light as it once did. So in 20 years if they want to put off the costs for another couple of years, it's entirely possible to do so.
That's not right. Replace just that bad headlight unless the other one is so old it has had it or money is burning a hole in your pocket. I've never had the other headlamp go bad shortly after the first one. Maybe years later and I think that happened once in 40+ years. Now if the package comes in a two pack, yea I replace the other one as well because then it's in the garage and you'll never remember what it went to.
This is also true with CFL bulbs. I've kept track with my rentals. Some blow within 6 months, one has been burning for 10 years so far. These are outdoor lights that burn all night long. They last longer than incandescent bulbs. So far I haven't installed a LED light for an outdoor application.
So don't go and replace them all unless you want to. You're not saving yourself anything.
No. It is still the government carrying out the execution. People who actually want small government don't believe the government should have such a power to begin with, even if they have the 'consent' of the people.
I don't understand why you think that. Some people may, a very small number that probably oppose the death penalty in the first place. Did you take a US Civics class? The Constitution is for limited government. In fact the central government can only do what is in the Constitution. Something that is now way beyond what the original framers intended, clearly. Agencies such as BATF, Education, EPA (Created by Richard Nixon BTW) and a bunch more have no business being in existence.
As for governments - executed people back then too with limited Government. I know, hard to believe but they did. You want a Government to be involved in capital punishment cases. Otherwise you have a mob. Then none of us are safe. No executions and crime goes up. This is clear by looking at political boundaries. For example Baltimore City and Baltimore County. The County has the death penalty and the City doesn't. It's amazing the difference in crime on the sides of that political line. There is no white line to demark it, however they know where the boundary is. Same neighbourhood, same houses, same economic situations, different crime rates. So "it is not a deterrent" is BS.
We need to also hold our government accountable. Make sure it isn't used for murder. Also make sure they are doing their job by not letting murderers go free.
Living off a credit card has been happening since Bush, technically most of the recent POTUS except maybe Clinton.
The only time since WWII that we had a balanced budget was when the Republicans controlled Congress in the 1990s. They shut down the government and made Clinton capitulate. Worked great. Would work now. When W came to office (and I'm no advocate of W) we actually were given rebates because we paid too much. Then Republicans were promptly voted out and here we are again. People are so stupid, believe the liberal lies time and time again.
Will the automated cars obey the posted speed limits? That would be horrible as the whole city where I live has 25mph limits posted everywhere. No one obeys them except the occasional freak. If you drive at the posted limit it will take forever to cross town, it would make commuting not practical.
The speed limits are intentionally low. Helps with government revenue. Especially in neighbourhoods where they can only go to the minimum for the state. In Maryland that's 25 MPH. Used to be 35. Should be at least 35 in my neighbourhood. We're all on 2 acre lots and visibility from the road is good so I'd feel comfortable at 50 to be honest. For those on 1/4 acre lots and smaller it probably should be 35 or slower.
They'll have to increase speeds to what they should be. Remember 55 killed people. That's a fact. Increasing speeds clearly saved lives.
That's not true. I'm a pilot and I've landed at airports that the RC folks were using as well. They were even using the active runway in Nebraska. Granted that airport probably had maybe 3 takeoffs and landings a day. Most of the time it isn't a problem and I don't mind as long as they keep it safe. Certainly at an airport in the middle of nowhere that barely sees any traffic. However in the pilot forums I see more and more people complaining about RC planes and they are 1000' AGL and above. I understand from a pilot that I know and is also a RC guy that this topic is coming up in his club more.
There is also the Police starting to use RC aircraft. They are the ones that I'm really worried about because they don't seem to give a damn about rules. They seem content to do whatever they want, legal or illegal.
My hobby eye in the sky is legal....Completely legal as I'm doing it for fun.
Maybe. I understand you can't fly it at all inside of Washington DC. Actually, what is known as the FRZ or Flight Restricted Zone. Defined all the way down to the surface. So is Washington special or doesn't apply or not sure?
The Slashdot summary already nicely shows why the Chinese do have a point of sorts...the only thing they seem to be able to come up with is a deal to kick the can down the road for four months.
There is a way to fix it. The Republicans did it back in the 1990s with Gingrich. The only four years in our lifetimes that we had a balanced budget. Of course I'm assuming that if you are reading this, you're not over 75. We had balanced budgets before WWII, when Republicans used to control Congress.
I really don't see why this is so hard for people to understand. These services are shut down because the money to pay people to open and run them is simply not appropriated and wont be till congress stops dicking around with the ACA and actually passes a meaningful budget. You can not open a large service with out the personal to support it, and volunteers have no accountability with out oversight.
It's hard to understand because they never closed these things down in the past when we had a shutdown. There is no law that says they have to close them. If you disagree before you respond find the law and cite it. I'm not interested in your opinion or what MSM said. Close Federal Building - yea, probably. Close a neighborhood childrens park that is about 100 square feet of kids equipment, nope. It's clearly part of Obama's "make it hurt" campaign.
In my experience, that happens right around the time accountants start micro-managing everything, and when winning "buzzword bingo" happens in every company call.
Exactly. I've seen it personally too. Stood by and watched it happen to companies like HP. Somehow HP has managed to survive the micro accountants best efforts to destroy it. We used to call it the Harvard MBA fungus. They would come in and destroy. "This makes more business sense." Sure if that's all you consider, however you're MISSING THE BIG PICTURE! Won't listen because they're from Harvard. Fortunately they've been slapped down for the most part now.
From the UN report they admit temperatures haven't risen for 15 years and they admit they don't know why. This breaks their models that depend on CO2 as the cause.
Ok Slashdot guys, you act as if you're scientists. What did they teach you in grade school about the scientific method? A hypothesis is valid until there is a counter example. With the CO2 levels now over 400 PPM, we have our counter example. This is not hard guys. In fact it's obvious.
Something caused temperatures to rise. Clearly it wasn't CO2.
As for the weather, that's funny. In 1893 Hogg island was mostly wiped off the face of the earth - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hog_Island_(New_York) . Of course today that would somehow be "proof". Other storms, I remember real bad storms going back decades. Mud slides in California, etc. In short - mother nature being mother nature. I don't see a change and as for the hurricanes this season has been way below what they had predicted - again due to bad models.
Time all scientists admit the obvious. CO2 is a symptom and not the cause. Greenhouses are not hot due to CO2 by the way. It isn't as if they pump CO2 into the house.
Only the US, UK and 'friends' have the crypto standards, global locations, satellites, cpu power, cash, skill set, storage to keep it all going.
You really think that? Did you know I own a bridge in Brooklyn? Just $1000. Comes with toll booths and everything. Even the surley coin taker.
Seriously, China has a big program with some very talented people. So does Australia, Russia, France. I know of others that spy on their population very much. Not just for the USA. China does very well, however Australia has some people that can crack your stuff and you don't even know it.
Then of course there's Isreal.
http://macdailynews.com/2013/07/15/apple-to-probe-electric-shock-death-of-chinese-woman-who-used-iphone-5-while-it-was-charging/
And now you all proper slashdotters are thanking God that something named "postgresql" has basically no marketing value, aren't you.
I used postgre and learned to love it, then they were bought out by CA I think. Lost them for years and picked them up when RedHat offered it. Then put some big data into it. Then they lost me when I upgraded and lost access to all my data. All of my fucking data! Live system. No idea that would happen. I had a bunch of names that went through my mind from grade school to describe them. I had to move the data to another big machine that hadn't been upgraded, run it and dump the data. Load it into the new system. I think that took me about 18 hours or so. Then I upgraded it to mysql where it still runs today. Hasn't missed a beat I bet in 10 years.
Sadly some stuff still runs under postgress as it has the geospatial extensions that I need. If it weren't for that, I'd kick it to the side so fast. I feel almost as if it's time for them to screw me again. I know they'll wait until it is a really bad time.
Let me clue you in.
.... Compliance with paying income tax was low to the point of being nonexistent.
Al Capone was convicted for tax evasion in 1931. He's probably the most famous, however there are cases going back into the twenties. Social Security was voluntary and was never meant to be a retirement. It was supposed to be supplemental, so at least you had something coming in. It's really rough if you have nothing coming in.
It is in fact a ponzi scheme. The only difference is time. They hope you die before you collect. Worse, when you do die you have to pay that last month back. Even if you die on the last day. Also, no mention is generally given to how they've raided the fund for years.
It still cracks me up when I run across people who think there's an account some place with all their money in it. As if SS is a bank account.
I've been trying to figure out how to get out of SS. I understand that once you've paid your 40 quarters (i.e. 10 years) you can opt out of it. When you hit 40 quarters you are a "fully insured individual" and can collect when you hit whatever the moving target is then as far as age. When you do collect they will average what you've paid last I knew for the last 5 years and your payment is based on that. Anyone know how to do it? I asked the IRS and they said there was no way to opt out.
...only difference between bb's and buckyballs is buckyballs are magnets... so what, they don't want kids to learn about magnets?
cause they can definitely buy bb's at any age.
Big diff is buckyballs are strong magnets. Really strong magnets. So strong the concern is if they are swallowed they get into the intestines. If two of them are in the intestine they can attract and lock together. Inside the intestine that's a really bad thing. It COULD kill someone. AFAIK, it hasn't.
Just another thing to add to my Consumer Protection Commission ban list. Lawn darts, toy cork gun, Gilbert U-238 science kit, slip and slide, etc. I never owned the U-238 science kit. Had a toy cork gun, Jarts, Slip and slide, and TWO packages of those magnets. Man-o-man, it's a wonder I'm alive? Especially with that cork gun.
I'll be using those lawn darts tomorrow.
The plan was to suck value out of the parents houses and into the professors pockets. Pure greed by liberal professors. I know a few of them. Absolutely no guilt on their part either.
I graduated from Maryland in 1990. 7 year plan. Seems to me tuition was just $760 back then for full time. I recently was back on campus. When I was there everything was adequate. I had everything I needed. Bathrooms in the Chem building were a time capsule from the 1950s. That's fine, they still worked and looked ok. Nothing cracked or anything like that. Now, it's almost like the Ritz there. Way better than anything available to me and I honestly don't understand how this will help students. Maryland was a tough school, probably still is. No getting around having to learn. It is simply much, much, much more expensive than it has to be. Crazy professors totally out of touch with reality.