Never mind the fact that ocean acidification is caused by warming oceans, not just an ancillary effect of increased atmospheric CO2.
When you increase water temp, you decrease the dissolution rate of CO2 in the ocean, but you increase the amount of CO2 that is converted to H2CO3. The second impact is larger than the first.
OMG how the fuck is increasing taxes , i.e., money flowing to the government, going to increase the economy vs cutting out the middleman and just having the money flow in the economy in the first place??
Because a lot of the money flowing in the economy in the first place doesn't flow. It is hoarded, it leaves the local economy when used to purchase non-local goods, etc.
Never mind the fact that *some* public spending has a *positive* impact on the economy greater than the amount spent (public mental health services, for example).
And never mind that while the government is the "middleman" in the spending, they are not extracting profit. This is not like a creator-wholesaler-distributor transaction where the wholesaler takes some cash and runs off with it as profit. The tax money is returned to the economy, via employee wages, etc. The question is the return on that spending.
That money is best left in the hands of the individuals to spend as they will.
That's a bold assertion. What happens when they spend all the money on consumer goods produced in Asia?
What happens if, instead, the money was spent on infrastructure that directly benefits people in the state?
You cannot spend your way out of a recession.
On what basis do you make that assertion? Just regurgitating Austrian or Chicago precepts -- or do you really have an understanding of economics? Even the Austrians recognize that public spending in times of recession stimulates the private economy and can hasten the end of a recessionary period... the value judgment on whether this is the *optimal* course of action in the long run is a different matter.
Every dollar that goverment spends is one less dollar that the individual spends. In fact, the return on government spending is LESS than individual spending (I'm trying to dig up those numbers now).
Please do share them when you've found them. I hope they are broken down by sector. Do you have them by state, or just federal? Does the federal breakdown only include domestic spending? Are the societal benefits of the judiciary spending included?
If it were that easy to determine exactly how effective public spending is, we wouldn't be in this quagmire. I do hope you produce some data that is useful.
You can assume that sales tax is more of a burden on the poor, if you also assume the poor and the rich have similar spending habits. But they don't. When I was living up in washington, I spent 100$ a week at the grocery store. Meanwhile, my poor ass friends were spending 100$ a month. Pretty sure I paid more taxes than any two of them combined, given my income, that wasn't unreasonable.
You don't have to assume any such thing. If you want, you can actually check the data. It's available. The truth of the matter is that poor people spend a higher proportion of their income on taxable goods than wealthy people do. Keep in mind that "necessities" are exempt from sales tax in all, or almost all, states... this includes food.
Keep in mind that it's probalbe that you paid more in tax than your poor friends did... but as a percentage of your income? Not as likely... I think you're unclear on what a regressive tax is. It means that as a proportion of income, people with lower income pay more than those with higher income. So if you make $100,000 a year and pay out $1000 in sales tax (1 %), but they make $25,000 a year and pay out $300 (1.2%) in sales tax, it's an example of the regressive nature of sales tax. The math gets even worse for the poor when you compare disposable income, rather than total income.
Say if you make less than 25k a year you pay 1/2 taxes? Does that mean you support making the top 10% pay double? Because it's the same thing.
Yes, you just gave an example of how a progressive tax schedule could be implemented. And while I'm not the person you responded to, I do believe that a progressive tax is ideal.
Yeah, it's all done, except for those pesky State Senate vote and Governor sign/veto issues.
have completely inored the most obvious: closing the MS tax dodge instead of giving them a free pass that this bill just did.
It sounds good until you realize that MS have WA by the balls. Piss them off and they move employees out of state. Boeing did it... MS could too. Sure, there's no state income tax, but that's a lot of sales tax WA won't collect.
Or they could just I don't know cut all the extraneous crap that they shouldn't be doing to begin with but I suppose that actually solving the problem would piss off everyone dependent on the bloat.
Have you seen the WA budget over the past two years? They've made DRASTIC cuts in spending. The question is if they can find another $300 MM to cut, or if they're better off find additional $300 MM in revenue. In a poor economic situation, cutting spending is a hell of a anti-stimulus for economic activity... the better course of action is to wait for economic recovery to make additional budget cuts (whether or not that would actually happen is a different story).
What math are you doing where you take funds paid to the original developer ($60) and give it to another entity. Follow the logic there.
The original developer (by which I believe he means publisher) was not paid $60. They were likely paid $45 by the original retailer, who then turned around and sold it for $60, with a profit of $15.
So after one used sale:
Developer/publisher: $45 (wholesale) Original retailer:1530 ($60 sale minus $45 paid for wholesale) Original Consumer: $-30 (bought for $60, sold for $30) Secondhand retailer: $25 ($55 sale minues $30 purchase) Secondhand consumer: -$55 (bought the game)
The issues here are that (1) It's cheaper for Gamestop to buy the game used than to but it wholesale (2) The developer/publisher has trouble covering costs when a large portion of sales are second-hand, where they don't get a cut of the profit.
Here's the complication: If the developer/publisher tries to raise prices so that they can make their money off of wholesale, then *more* people buy used games, which lowers their revenue.
The real problem is that most of the costs of producing a game are fixed, while the producer of the game doesn't see any revenue from a good portion of the retail sales. So we're either going to get games with lower budgets, or we're going to see the developers/publishers figure out ways, such as single-use activation codes and DLC.
It's also why I-95 stops in Philadelphia instead of continuing onward to New York.
What?
I've driven 95 from NY to Boston, from NY to DC, many times.
Sure, a portion is the NJ Turnpike, but it still connects. And it's cheaper to use the NJ Turnpike than it would be to have a redundant superhighway (although I'm not a fan of paying tolls).
There's an old saying about not killing the messenger...
You make it seem like there's more to the saying that we're supposed to recall. Like, we lean back and think for a second, and then our eyes light up as we have an epiphany about how that multi-part proverb that relates to not killing the messenger is the perfect metaphor for the OP's lack of analytical thought.
When, in reality, the entire proverb is:
Don't kill the messenger.
So I vote we come up with some new clauses to add to that proverb. Like:
Don't kill the messenger, lest he rise from the dead with a hunger for brains.
Or:
Don't kill the messenger, because he might not have given you the whole message yet, in which case you have less information and so you might make an uninformed decision.
Firefox crashes frequently - at least a couple times a week - but I've never had problems with Safari or Chrome.
Wimp. Firefox is open source. Why didn't you fork the project, fix the crashing problem, and then offer the patch code upstream while distributing Firefox under your own branding?
That's how open source is supposed to work, you ninny. Why don't you actually participate in it once in a while, instead of just being an end user?
The lint that collects in your dryer is not made up of sock-matter. Dryer lint is mass created via the conversion of static electricity that accumulates while your dryer is running. If it weren't for the clever device to capture this energy and turn it into lint, running your dryer would cause an electrical discharge that makes a lightning bolt seem like a bee sting -- remember, E = mc^2.
The concundrum of missing socks remains unsolved, but the leading theory is that dark-matter socks spontaneously come into existence in your dryer, then meet your regular-matter socks, and puff out of existence with a corresponding release of a preposterous amount of energy (this, of course, is the source of energy that is converted into dryer-lint).
This theory is under fire, though, as a controlled study at the Institute for Laundering Science determined that socks sometimes disappear in the washer, not just the dryer -- explanation for what happens to the energy released in the dark/normal sock in the ashing cycle has not yet been determined.
Note also that this is why we wear dark socks to bed -- if we were to put them in the hamper with regular socks, the dark socks might come into contact with our light socks and explode.
I've got a Welsh friend who refers to particular nice ones as "cheddar biscuits". Maybe it's because "cheddar" means good, and "biscuits" follows naturally. But then again, he makes a point of using unusual slang in a kind of try-to-figure-out-what-I'm-saying way that he claims is very common in Wales.
That is wrong, sir. Find me someone that opposes embryonic stem cell work on religious or ethical grounds. Then ask if they're opposed to non-embryonic stem cell work. To a man, you'll find almost no one.
Ask those same people, without preamble, if they oppose stem cell work on religious or ethical grounds.
Almost none of them will qualify their answer with a distinction of embryonic vs. non-embryonic.
The people who have truly considered in the issue in light of religion or ethics likely would make that distinction -- but I believe there are far fewer of them that have really considered or researched the issue than you might suppose.
Every single one of them, and major political and religious organizations... even the most conservative of churches... support non-embryonic work. And they've made this clear from the very beginning.
Sure they have. But that's not what most people remember. What most people remember is "stem cells are bad". Four-syllable words like "embryonic" are confusing, and thus meaningless.
I don't want to sound overly condescending towards a good portion of the public... but my personal experience in a very well-educated region leads me to believe as I do about misconceptions in re: stem cells -- though I suppose it is possible that people in less educated areas have a more reasoned opinion than those in a well-educated area, I doubt it.
The experiments are so abhorent its urban legend whether they have been tried or not
From some of the links I've seen in my internet expeditions, not so abhorrent as you might think -- there appears to be a cottage industry devoted to inter-species sex.
The only reason, IMO, we don't see it more with primates is because (1) there are not a huge amount of domesticated primates and (2) those with access to primates are not the same people producing porn.
I don't want to conflate attitudes towards inter-species sexual activity in porn with attitudes towards inter-species sex/reproduction in scientific research -- but I do think that it is highly likely experiments have been done, just that the results are basically unpublishable and thus lost to posterity.
Yes, but you can reduce (thought not eliminate) this risk by making sure you pull out and climax on her tits.I believe in the UK the proper term is "put some gravy on her biscuits".
No, you don't need to register for the warranty to apply.
The only real reasons to send in the information card is to be contacted should there be a product recall, or to be on the list of people to be contacted if someone files a class-action lawsuit against the manufacturer.
Or, I guess, if you REALLY like getting sent advertising and marketing materials, that would be a good reason to fill out and send a product registration card.
Offer to help him, and when he agrees, reach into your desk for the 3 pound hammer, smash the damned phone, and tell him that it just your little secret - you won't tell management that he's a senile moron who is losing his tenuous grip on reality.
Who amongst the horde of slashdotters can lift a 3-lb hammer, let alone use it to smash something?
No. Crystalline fructose is no more harmful that HFCS (aside from the trace heavy metals, which I haven't seen verified). Once ingested, it dissolves, and behaves like any other source of fructose.
That's bullshit. Either your bullshit, or your employer/insurance company's bullshit.
There is no way an insurance company has done the actuarial work necessary in just a couple days to determine how much your rate will go up, much less communicated that information to clients, which requires legal review, etc.
And do you mean your actual premiums, or the portion that you pay? Because it wouldn't surprise me if some employers used this health care bill as an excuse to jack up the employee-paid portion, so that they pay less.
The only "stuff" we have on slashdot is our userID... why in the hell would you want to trade a 4-digit ID for a 7-digit ID?
So you can troll other Ancients* pretending to be a noob?
I'm confused.
*By the way, I'm now referring to all 5-digit IDs as "Old Ones", all 4-digit IDs as "Ancients", all 3-digit IDs as "Methuselahs", and I dare not refer to anyone of lower userID lest my eyes be rent from their sockets and my bones ground to dust.
Slashdot Mirror
I see... the smell of burnt sulfur is better at overpowering bad odors than perfumes are?
Contrary to popular belief, lighting amatch does not "burn away" all the bad odor chemicals. It just masks them.
If that's the goal, why not just smear some camphor on your upper lip when you drop a poo bomb? Works for pathologists doing autopsies...
Never mind the fact that ocean acidification is caused by warming oceans, not just an ancillary effect of increased atmospheric CO2.
When you increase water temp, you decrease the dissolution rate of CO2 in the ocean, but you increase the amount of CO2 that is converted to H2CO3. The second impact is larger than the first.
FTS:
Either this physicist is full of shit, or Don Ho was.
Because a lot of the money flowing in the economy in the first place doesn't flow. It is hoarded, it leaves the local economy when used to purchase non-local goods, etc.
Never mind the fact that *some* public spending has a *positive* impact on the economy greater than the amount spent (public mental health services, for example).
And never mind that while the government is the "middleman" in the spending, they are not extracting profit. This is not like a creator-wholesaler-distributor transaction where the wholesaler takes some cash and runs off with it as profit. The tax money is returned to the economy, via employee wages, etc. The question is the return on that spending.
But, like, OMG, whatever...
That's a bold assertion. What happens when they spend all the money on consumer goods produced in Asia?
What happens if, instead, the money was spent on infrastructure that directly benefits people in the state?
On what basis do you make that assertion? Just regurgitating Austrian or Chicago precepts -- or do you really have an understanding of economics? Even the Austrians recognize that public spending in times of recession stimulates the private economy and can hasten the end of a recessionary period... the value judgment on whether this is the *optimal* course of action in the long run is a different matter.
Please do share them when you've found them. I hope they are broken down by sector. Do you have them by state, or just federal? Does the federal breakdown only include domestic spending? Are the societal benefits of the judiciary spending included?
If it were that easy to determine exactly how effective public spending is, we wouldn't be in this quagmire. I do hope you produce some data that is useful.
You don't have to assume any such thing. If you want, you can actually check the data. It's available. The truth of the matter is that poor people spend a higher proportion of their income on taxable goods than wealthy people do. Keep in mind that "necessities" are exempt from sales tax in all, or almost all, states... this includes food.
Keep in mind that it's probalbe that you paid more in tax than your poor friends did... but as a percentage of your income? Not as likely... I think you're unclear on what a regressive tax is. It means that as a proportion of income, people with lower income pay more than those with higher income. So if you make $100,000 a year and pay out $1000 in sales tax (1 %), but they make $25,000 a year and pay out $300 (1.2%) in sales tax, it's an example of the regressive nature of sales tax. The math gets even worse for the poor when you compare disposable income, rather than total income.
Yes, you just gave an example of how a progressive tax schedule could be implemented. And while I'm not the person you responded to, I do believe that a progressive tax is ideal.
Yeah, it's all done, except for those pesky State Senate vote and Governor sign/veto issues.
It sounds good until you realize that MS have WA by the balls. Piss them off and they move employees out of state. Boeing did it... MS could too. Sure, there's no state income tax, but that's a lot of sales tax WA won't collect.
Have you seen the WA budget over the past two years? They've made DRASTIC cuts in spending. The question is if they can find another $300 MM to cut, or if they're better off find additional $300 MM in revenue. In a poor economic situation, cutting spending is a hell of a anti-stimulus for economic activity... the better course of action is to wait for economic recovery to make additional budget cuts (whether or not that would actually happen is a different story).
The original developer (by which I believe he means publisher) was not paid $60. They were likely paid $45 by the original retailer, who then turned around and sold it for $60, with a profit of $15.
So after one used sale:
Developer/publisher: $45 (wholesale)
Original retailer:1530 ($60 sale minus $45 paid for wholesale)
Original Consumer: $-30 (bought for $60, sold for $30)
Secondhand retailer: $25 ($55 sale minues $30 purchase)
Secondhand consumer: -$55 (bought the game)
The issues here are that
(1) It's cheaper for Gamestop to buy the game used than to but it wholesale
(2) The developer/publisher has trouble covering costs when a large portion of sales are second-hand, where they don't get a cut of the profit.
Here's the complication: If the developer/publisher tries to raise prices so that they can make their money off of wholesale, then *more* people buy used games, which lowers their revenue.
The real problem is that most of the costs of producing a game are fixed, while the producer of the game doesn't see any revenue from a good portion of the retail sales. So we're either going to get games with lower budgets, or we're going to see the developers/publishers figure out ways, such as single-use activation codes and DLC.
What?
I've driven 95 from NY to Boston, from NY to DC, many times.
Sure, a portion is the NJ Turnpike, but it still connects. And it's cheaper to use the NJ Turnpike than it would be to have a redundant superhighway (although I'm not a fan of paying tolls).
Aw darn.
Looks like my loony science idea bin needs re-stocking.
You make it seem like there's more to the saying that we're supposed to recall. Like, we lean back and think for a second, and then our eyes light up as we have an epiphany about how that multi-part proverb that relates to not killing the messenger is the perfect metaphor for the OP's lack of analytical thought.
.
When, in reality, the entire proverb is:
Don't kill the messenger
So I vote we come up with some new clauses to add to that proverb. Like:
Don't kill the messenger, lest he rise from the dead with a hunger for brains.
Or:
Don't kill the messenger, because he might not have given you the whole message yet, in which case you have less information and so you might make an uninformed decision.
Wimp. Firefox is open source. Why didn't you fork the project, fix the crashing problem, and then offer the patch code upstream while distributing Firefox under your own branding?
That's how open source is supposed to work, you ninny. Why don't you actually participate in it once in a while, instead of just being an end user?
Hogwash.
The lint that collects in your dryer is not made up of sock-matter. Dryer lint is mass created via the conversion of static electricity that accumulates while your dryer is running. If it weren't for the clever device to capture this energy and turn it into lint, running your dryer would cause an electrical discharge that makes a lightning bolt seem like a bee sting -- remember, E = mc^2.
The concundrum of missing socks remains unsolved, but the leading theory is that dark-matter socks spontaneously come into existence in your dryer, then meet your regular-matter socks, and puff out of existence with a corresponding release of a preposterous amount of energy (this, of course, is the source of energy that is converted into dryer-lint).
This theory is under fire, though, as a controlled study at the Institute for Laundering Science determined that socks sometimes disappear in the washer, not just the dryer -- explanation for what happens to the energy released in the dark/normal sock in the ashing cycle has not yet been determined.
Note also that this is why we wear dark socks to bed -- if we were to put them in the hamper with regular socks, the dark socks might come into contact with our light socks and explode.
I've got a Welsh friend who refers to particular nice ones as "cheddar biscuits". Maybe it's because "cheddar" means good, and "biscuits" follows naturally. But then again, he makes a point of using unusual slang in a kind of try-to-figure-out-what-I'm-saying way that he claims is very common in Wales.
Ask those same people, without preamble, if they oppose stem cell work on religious or ethical grounds.
Almost none of them will qualify their answer with a distinction of embryonic vs. non-embryonic.
The people who have truly considered in the issue in light of religion or ethics likely would make that distinction -- but I believe there are far fewer of them that have really considered or researched the issue than you might suppose.
Sure they have. But that's not what most people remember. What most people remember is "stem cells are bad". Four-syllable words like "embryonic" are confusing, and thus meaningless.
I don't want to sound overly condescending towards a good portion of the public... but my personal experience in a very well-educated region leads me to believe as I do about misconceptions in re: stem cells -- though I suppose it is possible that people in less educated areas have a more reasoned opinion than those in a well-educated area, I doubt it.
From some of the links I've seen in my internet expeditions, not so abhorrent as you might think -- there appears to be a cottage industry devoted to inter-species sex.
The only reason, IMO, we don't see it more with primates is because (1) there are not a huge amount of domesticated primates and (2) those with access to primates are not the same people producing porn.
I don't want to conflate attitudes towards inter-species sexual activity in porn with attitudes towards inter-species sex/reproduction in scientific research -- but I do think that it is highly likely experiments have been done, just that the results are basically unpublishable and thus lost to posterity.
No, you don't need to register for the warranty to apply.
The only real reasons to send in the information card is to be contacted should there be a product recall, or to be on the list of people to be contacted if someone files a class-action lawsuit against the manufacturer.
Or, I guess, if you REALLY like getting sent advertising and marketing materials, that would be a good reason to fill out and send a product registration card.
Who amongst the horde of slashdotters can lift a 3-lb hammer, let alone use it to smash something?
No. Crystalline fructose is no more harmful that HFCS (aside from the trace heavy metals, which I haven't seen verified). Once ingested, it dissolves, and behaves like any other source of fructose.
The link you provide confirms this.
Yes, but these attempts at suppression also feed into the PR maelstrom needed to draw attention to items of significance.
They need to draw a lot of eyeballs to be truly relevant, and of course some of those eyeballs will be government.
That's bullshit. Either your bullshit, or your employer/insurance company's bullshit.
There is no way an insurance company has done the actuarial work necessary in just a couple days to determine how much your rate will go up, much less communicated that information to clients, which requires legal review, etc.
And do you mean your actual premiums, or the portion that you pay? Because it wouldn't surprise me if some employers used this health care bill as an excuse to jack up the employee-paid portion, so that they pay less.
Hah... I love the Windows Progress Bar countdown... I'm afraid it isn't that obvious, though.
Wait... what?
The only "stuff" we have on slashdot is our userID... why in the hell would you want to trade a 4-digit ID for a 7-digit ID?
So you can troll other Ancients* pretending to be a noob?
I'm confused.
*By the way, I'm now referring to all 5-digit IDs as "Old Ones", all 4-digit IDs as "Ancients", all 3-digit IDs as "Methuselahs", and I dare not refer to anyone of lower userID lest my eyes be rent from their sockets and my bones ground to dust.