Honestly, there's a part of me that kind of thinks that it's their own damned fault for living in the middle of nowhere and voting to destroy cities. When cities get their fair share of the tax revenue to fix our crumbling infrastructure, then we can start worrying about fixing things for people that are too stubborn to live with the choices they've made. But as long as we in cities have to worry about bridges collapsing because the rural voters are too greedy to let us keep a portion of our tax dollars to fix them it's hard for me to be too sympathetic.
But, the more democratic minded me thinks that getting broadband to those areas, at least into towns if not all the way to individual homes is good for public discourse and for making the country a better place.
It's not, it's just as criminal for them to do it as it would be for you or I. TSA does not employ LEOs and they are not trained as LEOs, consequently they do not have the legal authority to conduct searches anymore than your average mall security officer does. Which is to say that it's completely illegal.
They do still have to comply with state licensing requirements, even if they do work for a federal agency.
The problem is that there are only two times when it's acceptable for somebody to touch my junk, if I get sick and need medical assistance or with my consent. Telling children that there are times when somebody can flash a badge and touch their genitals is not something that is acceptable to any reasonable person.
I personally won't fly because I care about my body and my rights apparently more than you do. These machines are known to be ineffective and all the TSA is doing is moving the vulnerability from a plane with a fixed payload to a security checkpoint with a lot more people.
It's a first step, eventually they'll need to get that tested in those areas as well. But there's a large number of drivers in areas that don't get snow, or get it regularly. Which makes for an excellent place to get the gear working for times when it isn't snowing. Then, after they've got that down, they can finish the snow stuff.
But, at any rate, even without perfecting it on snow it's still beneficial during the parts of the year when there isn't any.
Having seen the way my relatives drive in the snow, if they tried to drive like that around here, they'd be in the ditch within a block. Fortunately, we don't get snow that often.
Around here if you're not keeping up with traffic you're not allowed on the street. And with good reason, impeding the flow of traffic is dangerous for everybody involved. It's even worse when it's a cyclist as they require even more attention from drivers when they're doing that.
It's not entirely unreasonable. I've noticed that cyclists seem to regularly ignore the laws when convenient. I'm not sure who gave them the idea that they can ride in the street just because they want to. But, they're only provisionally allowed to if they're going to follow the normal traffic laws. Which means that if they can't keep up with traffic that they can't be in the street.
It's just too much of a hazard to drivers to be stuck behind a cyclist that's going well under the speed limit. Worse is trying to get around them safely.
That would require a constitutional amendment in each of the affected states. Which isn't supposed to be easy to do. Particularly if its for the purpose of raising taxes.
You mean apart from the constitutional problem that represents? The big issue is that not all states have their taxes structured the same, around here we have a high sales tax and no income tax, in CA they have a high sales tax and a high income tax. In WI, they have both a sales and an income tax, but those are lower than the ones in CA.
Get the picture? Doing this would be tantamount to the Federal Government setting the budgets for all the states as the states would be unable to fully control their finances. Some states would have to cut spending, others would have to raise their income tax or implement one.
Not really, it ends up taxing the folks at the bottom much more than the folks at the top. The rich folks have the easiest time of avoiding the tax.
So, yes it does hurt the folks at the bottom more than at the top because the portion of their paycheck going to items subject to a sales tax are higher and the rich can easily avoid the tax by making their purchases out of state in a place that doesn't have sales tax if need be.
Because, they're not just not collecting it, they're not reporting it either. On top of which many states don't even provide the tax payers with a convenient way of paying. I'm not sure how I would go about paying the tax as there isn't any form that I know of that covers that. And that's ignoring the fact that the state doesn't even enforce it anyways.
People admit that, but that doesn't mean that the etailers are paid up. MS pays property tax and a few other taxes while being nearly $1bn in the hole on taxes from those licenses they sell out of NV. They sufficient presence in WA state to be on the hook for the taxes as well, but under Ballmer they've chosen to just not pay them.
It's not double dipping its a completely separate tax that retailers in the state have to pay.
Because many states don't provide the citizens with any way of paying the taxes even if we wanted to. Even ignoring the onerous requirements for keeping track of the money owed, I still have no idea how I would go about paying the taxes because the state doesn't exactly provide me with forms to do so.
I've heard that states that have an income tax are different, but around here, most citizens don't know how to pay the tax, assuming they even realize that they have to.
You don't have to pay your taxes, you do have options. You can make no money and be completely destitute, you can move to another country or you can go to prison. Taxes are how we pay for things like roads and emergency systems, failing to pay ones taxes is more or less theft of service. And unfortunately, the only way to opt out is to not live here.
I realize that it's a popular notion on the GOP side of things to pretend like all these government services we get are free, but they aren't, somebody has to pay for them, the fact that we've been spending so much on conservative causes and not taxing to pay for them is primarily how we got to be in the fiscal mess that we're currently in.
Wrong way around, an open standard is one that anybody can use. As a result of that it has to be free otherwise it prevents parties that give away their software from participating. The openness of the process to create it is not at all involved.
That was the WTF part of this, Zuckerberg the douche that regularly changes the privacy policy to catch people off guard is complaining about Google+'s privacy policy? Seriously, Google doesn't randomly change the privacy policy to find people that missed the memo so that they can release the information without consent.
Not really, he's getting an extra 16 years because he wasn't smart enough to realize that he was getting off extremely lightly. If you read even the summary, it's clear that he's guilty on most if not all counts. He could have taken the deal knowing that there was a lot more that they could have gotten him on.
This is just another case of somebody that's too stupid to realize that they'd get caught.
People aren't animals as the term "animals" is typically used. It's something that people use to erode the line people humans and animals. And it's a really important line to draw.
Why don't we just save some time and just arrest all the Democrats and civil libertarians as clearly they are opposed to incarcerating child molesters without a proper trial.
For one thing, I doubt I'm the only one, and for another thing I don't really care what they choose to do. I'm perfectly fine not using Google+ the way that I didn't use Facebook, MySpace or Orkut. The point is that it would have been nice to be able to use something like this at times.
For folks with a really common name like say John Smith or Dan Johnson it's not much of an issue, but for those of us who have a relatively unusual last name, it is a lot more significant. I'm fortunate in that I share my name with somebody that's a lot more known than I am, but that's mostly because he's a physicist with a lot of papers written and I keep my name pretty much completely off the net.
The problem is that you're never sure how little bits of information will be accumulated and put back together. Virtually everybody that's being trained to not let information slip has that oh shit moment when they let the entire thing slip piece by piece and are confronted with it. Which is why it's fairly standard for training.
With the internet, if anybody does take an interest in a given person they can typically get an amazing amount of information, even if the person was discreet in the first place.
Not really, I'm a douche in real life, consequently, I go online to be friendly and helpful, if people ever found out that I was helping people and being nice, my life as I know it would be over.
Not really, there's those of us that are too cheap to plunk down hundreds of dollars for commercial software as well. If you're a professional that's already gotten a career up and running it's probably not that big of a deal, but for those just starting to go pro, $500 or more can easily eat up several weeks worth of profits.
I don't think it's really Netflix. I think it's the same reason why shows routinely become unavailable for streaming, the content producers. They're the ones that need to know that people are canceling and not paying elsewhere for the content.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly, there's a part of me that kind of thinks that it's their own damned fault for living in the middle of nowhere and voting to destroy cities. When cities get their fair share of the tax revenue to fix our crumbling infrastructure, then we can start worrying about fixing things for people that are too stubborn to live with the choices they've made. But as long as we in cities have to worry about bridges collapsing because the rural voters are too greedy to let us keep a portion of our tax dollars to fix them it's hard for me to be too sympathetic.
But, the more democratic minded me thinks that getting broadband to those areas, at least into towns if not all the way to individual homes is good for public discourse and for making the country a better place.
It's not, it's just as criminal for them to do it as it would be for you or I. TSA does not employ LEOs and they are not trained as LEOs, consequently they do not have the legal authority to conduct searches anymore than your average mall security officer does. Which is to say that it's completely illegal.
They do still have to comply with state licensing requirements, even if they do work for a federal agency.
The problem is that there are only two times when it's acceptable for somebody to touch my junk, if I get sick and need medical assistance or with my consent. Telling children that there are times when somebody can flash a badge and touch their genitals is not something that is acceptable to any reasonable person.
I personally won't fly because I care about my body and my rights apparently more than you do. These machines are known to be ineffective and all the TSA is doing is moving the vulnerability from a plane with a fixed payload to a security checkpoint with a lot more people.
It's a first step, eventually they'll need to get that tested in those areas as well. But there's a large number of drivers in areas that don't get snow, or get it regularly. Which makes for an excellent place to get the gear working for times when it isn't snowing. Then, after they've got that down, they can finish the snow stuff.
But, at any rate, even without perfecting it on snow it's still beneficial during the parts of the year when there isn't any.
Having seen the way my relatives drive in the snow, if they tried to drive like that around here, they'd be in the ditch within a block. Fortunately, we don't get snow that often.
Around here if you're not keeping up with traffic you're not allowed on the street. And with good reason, impeding the flow of traffic is dangerous for everybody involved. It's even worse when it's a cyclist as they require even more attention from drivers when they're doing that.
It's not entirely unreasonable. I've noticed that cyclists seem to regularly ignore the laws when convenient. I'm not sure who gave them the idea that they can ride in the street just because they want to. But, they're only provisionally allowed to if they're going to follow the normal traffic laws. Which means that if they can't keep up with traffic that they can't be in the street.
It's just too much of a hazard to drivers to be stuck behind a cyclist that's going well under the speed limit. Worse is trying to get around them safely.
That would require a constitutional amendment in each of the affected states. Which isn't supposed to be easy to do. Particularly if its for the purpose of raising taxes.
You mean apart from the constitutional problem that represents? The big issue is that not all states have their taxes structured the same, around here we have a high sales tax and no income tax, in CA they have a high sales tax and a high income tax. In WI, they have both a sales and an income tax, but those are lower than the ones in CA.
Get the picture? Doing this would be tantamount to the Federal Government setting the budgets for all the states as the states would be unable to fully control their finances. Some states would have to cut spending, others would have to raise their income tax or implement one.
Not really, it ends up taxing the folks at the bottom much more than the folks at the top. The rich folks have the easiest time of avoiding the tax.
So, yes it does hurt the folks at the bottom more than at the top because the portion of their paycheck going to items subject to a sales tax are higher and the rich can easily avoid the tax by making their purchases out of state in a place that doesn't have sales tax if need be.
Because, they're not just not collecting it, they're not reporting it either. On top of which many states don't even provide the tax payers with a convenient way of paying. I'm not sure how I would go about paying the tax as there isn't any form that I know of that covers that. And that's ignoring the fact that the state doesn't even enforce it anyways.
People admit that, but that doesn't mean that the etailers are paid up. MS pays property tax and a few other taxes while being nearly $1bn in the hole on taxes from those licenses they sell out of NV. They sufficient presence in WA state to be on the hook for the taxes as well, but under Ballmer they've chosen to just not pay them.
It's not double dipping its a completely separate tax that retailers in the state have to pay.
Because many states don't provide the citizens with any way of paying the taxes even if we wanted to. Even ignoring the onerous requirements for keeping track of the money owed, I still have no idea how I would go about paying the taxes because the state doesn't exactly provide me with forms to do so.
I've heard that states that have an income tax are different, but around here, most citizens don't know how to pay the tax, assuming they even realize that they have to.
You don't have to pay your taxes, you do have options. You can make no money and be completely destitute, you can move to another country or you can go to prison. Taxes are how we pay for things like roads and emergency systems, failing to pay ones taxes is more or less theft of service. And unfortunately, the only way to opt out is to not live here.
I realize that it's a popular notion on the GOP side of things to pretend like all these government services we get are free, but they aren't, somebody has to pay for them, the fact that we've been spending so much on conservative causes and not taxing to pay for them is primarily how we got to be in the fiscal mess that we're currently in.
Wrong way around, an open standard is one that anybody can use. As a result of that it has to be free otherwise it prevents parties that give away their software from participating. The openness of the process to create it is not at all involved.
That was the WTF part of this, Zuckerberg the douche that regularly changes the privacy policy to catch people off guard is complaining about Google+'s privacy policy? Seriously, Google doesn't randomly change the privacy policy to find people that missed the memo so that they can release the information without consent.
Not really, he's getting an extra 16 years because he wasn't smart enough to realize that he was getting off extremely lightly. If you read even the summary, it's clear that he's guilty on most if not all counts. He could have taken the deal knowing that there was a lot more that they could have gotten him on.
This is just another case of somebody that's too stupid to realize that they'd get caught.
People aren't animals as the term "animals" is typically used. It's something that people use to erode the line people humans and animals. And it's a really important line to draw.
Why don't we just save some time and just arrest all the Democrats and civil libertarians as clearly they are opposed to incarcerating child molesters without a proper trial.
Aren't those public records. I'm not from VA, but aren't campaign contributions typically subject to recording requirements.
For one thing, I doubt I'm the only one, and for another thing I don't really care what they choose to do. I'm perfectly fine not using Google+ the way that I didn't use Facebook, MySpace or Orkut. The point is that it would have been nice to be able to use something like this at times.
For folks with a really common name like say John Smith or Dan Johnson it's not much of an issue, but for those of us who have a relatively unusual last name, it is a lot more significant. I'm fortunate in that I share my name with somebody that's a lot more known than I am, but that's mostly because he's a physicist with a lot of papers written and I keep my name pretty much completely off the net.
The problem is that you're never sure how little bits of information will be accumulated and put back together. Virtually everybody that's being trained to not let information slip has that oh shit moment when they let the entire thing slip piece by piece and are confronted with it. Which is why it's fairly standard for training.
With the internet, if anybody does take an interest in a given person they can typically get an amazing amount of information, even if the person was discreet in the first place.
Not really, I'm a douche in real life, consequently, I go online to be friendly and helpful, if people ever found out that I was helping people and being nice, my life as I know it would be over.
I was going to check it out, but if they're requiring real names, then I'm not going to use it.
Not really, there's those of us that are too cheap to plunk down hundreds of dollars for commercial software as well. If you're a professional that's already gotten a career up and running it's probably not that big of a deal, but for those just starting to go pro, $500 or more can easily eat up several weeks worth of profits.
I don't think it's really Netflix. I think it's the same reason why shows routinely become unavailable for streaming, the content producers. They're the ones that need to know that people are canceling and not paying elsewhere for the content.