Which is kind off point. Believing that Jesus lived – which is what we are talking about - is a point of evidence, not of faith.
In evolution theory, there are 2 schools of thought: Natural selection and Lamarckism. Should we accept Lamarckism regardless of evidence? The theory has some attractions, regardless of the evidence against it. But no, we do not. Natural selection wins because the evidence is stronger.
One would be hard pressed to put together a cohesive theory that Jesus did not exist. There are too many eye-witnesses accounts. To the point that Jesus was the son of God, the miracles, etc. – that is for faith.
Yes, there are written records from that time but they are not many. Historians (or even journalist), as a class barely existed. Paper was expensive. And a couple of wars, rebellions, sieges etc. destroyed much of what existed. The existence and execution of a single preacher is not something that would normally be captured. Jesus was (probably) not that well know during his lifetime.
It is one of the reasons why the Dead Sea Scrolls are so important. From an absolute viewpoint there is not a lot there. From a relative viewpoint, since so little exists from that era, it was a huge find.
Let’s consider you point. What is your Epistemology in this situation?
Do you reject evolution? It’s got massive holes. There are bits that don’t (yet) make sense. Yet I still believe it because of the strong evidence. The holes take some extrapolation to move from point to point, but the logic to do so is consistent.
Or, let’s choose an example more on point. Should I disbelieve in Socrates? Like Jesus no primary source material exists. None of his writings exist. Should I take the position that he was just the figment of somebody’s imagination?
Do you consider power to a absolute or relative measure? If absolute one might be able to make the argument that Luxemburg was more power.
If we are talking about relative, we are talking about one small tribe that was able to conquer Russia, China, raid Poland at will, etc. Nobody ever even came close at being able to match Khan’s army.
Basically what it boils down to is that there are multiple independent sources attesting to his existence. See Q Source and the Gospel of Mark. Or the Gospel of Thomas. Those are the 2 big ones I can think of. I will grant you that they were oral traditions before being written traditions. I will grant you that there are differences and contradictions between the various sources. But the differences are consistent with the way that oral history spreads.
You might want to reread the article – he is not making that assumption. He knows that there is an international treaty that the US has signed. He knows the US government can’t act unilaterally, which is why he is asking for the US to renegotiate the treaty.
It depends on what you mean by hotel. If you mean “resort hotel for tourist”, then I would agree.
But I am thinking “extended stay hotels for workers”. Build a research stations then rent out rooms and lab space. I think that could work if there were any serious need for commercial research. Unfortunately I can’t think of any demand for that type of research over the next 10 to 20 years. (Please do not confuse commercial research with basic research. They are 2 different animals.)
The guy is what – 67 years old. Another 10 years until the first flight. 77 seems old to be a astronaut. And this is going to be team effort. Or are you suggesting that JFK should have been the first man on the moon because he pitched and backed the idea?
As for property - how would you handle somebody wanting to build a multibillion dollar research facility on the moon? Should the people who built it be able to run it or should it be the people with the biggest guns? If I wanted to build a Helim-3 mine can I build it anywhere that I wanted because nobody owns anything so nobody controls anything?
Not sure what the answer is but I might lean towards the UN granting 99 year leases or something along those lines.
Well, that is kind of his point. He is asking for the US to try to amend the treaty. Even if he gets the US to ask for an amendment it does not mean it will be granted. The way I read this, Bigwlow wants to open preliminary discussions.
Ford is moving to "world cars". Figure out how to build a car really well and then sell the same car around the world. Honestly it is a great idea.
The problem is that the replacement for the Ranger is basicly a F-100 - just a hair smaller then the 150. Ford figured it did not make that much sense.
What I think you are referring to is the expense accounting of capital interest charges, depreciation of intangibles, etc. These areas are actually codified. Except the code did not expect such a creative / aggressive approach.
For example, if it takes me 3 years to build a skyscraper I can take the interest that I was charged on the construction loan, capitalize it, roll into the costs basis of the building and depreciate over the life of the building - 30 years. That’s legit.
If it takes me 3 years to produce a movie, (from a mere idea to being on the silver screen), can I capitalize my costs and depreciate them over the life of the movie - 50 years? I would say no, but.
McDonalds I can understand. Starbucks I can’t. Running a server farm is on the commodity end of the business. You are not looking to be fancy or cutting edge, you are looking to be reliable, low cost, and dull.
Sears has gobs of real-estate coming out of its ears. This is one of the better ideas that I have heard. (Not saying it is a winner of an idea, just better than the other plans I have seen.)
There is another angle to this – the REIT tax exemption. Sears is cash poor but land rich.
There is a quirk that Real Estate Investment Trusts don’t have to pay corporate tax if they pay out most of their profits. REITs included apartment and office buildings, public storage, warehouses, and maybe server farms. (IIRC Rackspace was trying to convert. I don’t know what become of that.)
Sears is trying to figure out how to move it assets over. This could be a angle where they rent the building but outsource the server farms to their partners.
There have been various schemes to avoid taxation and/or for criminal use. I.O.U.s, scripts, payment-in-kind, coupons, assets swaps, forward contracts, loan forgiveness gifting techniques, etc. Each of these techniques have legitimate purposes but at times are just way to circumnavigate the law.
If I swap my services for goods – US Dollars, BitCoins, an old car, credits towards baby-sitting – I have earned income that I need to declare at fair market value on my income tax. Now determining the fair market value for some of these goods are easier than others but the principal remains the same.
O.K. – I will bite. If Ireland can’t structure its tax code and shouldn’t determine how their economy should run, who should? And if the answer is Italy, does that mean Argentina gets to run Italy’s revenue service?
It is closer than you think. Neither case is about lying.
In Apple’s case they are shifting the profit (and thus taxes) from Italy to Ireland. Is Apple doing this to boost profits? Yes. Is there a large amount of subjectivity in meshing Irish and Italian tax codes together? Yes. Should a country be able to structure its tax code to boost growth? Yes.
In Hollywood they shift revenue (and thus payouts) from the movie to the production and distribution companies. I have a lower regard for Hollywood accounting because the movie, production, and distribution companies are all controlled by the same group of people and is a example of self-dealing but that is a different story.
Not it’s not. Let’s talk about “Transfer Pricing” which is subjective. Issue like this happen because the tax rules in the two different countries and not aligned. It is a subjective quagmire with no correct answer. Heck, I am hard pressed to think of 2 countries where they are aligned. However, there are rational solutions out there.
Apple (Ireland) and Apple (Italy) sell a product and make $100 in profit.
Apple claims most of the profit was made in Ireland and is subject to Ireland’s low taxes. But then again they structure the prices (and thus profits) at which the two units transfer goods between them to minimize the taxes.
Italy claims 100% of the profit was made in Italy and should pay Italian taxes. But then again they are broke and looking to tax anyone except their own voters.
If I take the vaccine I will not get the disease. However, most vaccines that a rare occurrence of really nasty side effects. However, on average, I am better off taking the vaccine.
But there is an alternative – the herd effect. If part of the population is vaccinated the disease has a hard time jumping from host to host because the chain of transfer is broken too often. Sometimes a vaccination rate as low as 1/3 of the population will do the trick.
So we have an issue of the Free Rider Effect. As long as everybody else takes the vaccine the chance of me being exposed to the disease and contracting is low. Of course if everybody did this then the whole thing would collapse.
On a more serious note, I though the next big project was going to be a linear accelerator. Anybody know why they picked the round one over the straight one?
BTW, where did you get the 35b in reserves? I have not been able to find reliable numbers. Venezuela’s is not exactly independent and I have heard rumors that their books are not exactly square.
But let’s assume the 35b is right. The 35b means nothing in itself. It is a stock value – a snapshot. Think of your checkbook. It only has meaning if you compare it to a flow value – the amount of money coming in and out. A rule of thumb is that a central bank should have about 1 years’ worth of reserves. Venezuela imports/ exports about 90b a year.
That is true but that is not exactly the point I was trying to make. Dale Carnegie was a salesperson and that is the focus of his book – how to sell yourself. These are useful skills.
This kind of assumes that you are taking an active, engaged role in the conversation. However, this can precluded deeper conversations. Active, engaged conversation tends to be higher energy and more to the point. However it discourages long contemplative pauses, digressions. Etc. Conversations tend to close faster and be more superficial. Not always but it is a bias in Carnegie’s system.
FYI, overrated does not mean bad. I do give the book high marks. It is just that I think the book gives too much weight to having a likeable personality.
Yes, that is about the age of the oldest physical coin. However, the Code of Hammurabi, which dates back to 1750 BCE, includes sections on money, loans, and debt forgiveness. So debasement could have occurred back then.
I have limited time and my books are at home so I can’t dig up the example that I am thinking about, but it was during accident Babylonian, Sumerian, or somewhere in that time era. The king needed more money so he recalled all of the coinage in his empire, made possession of the old currency illegal and reissued debased currency.
It’s a great book but I find it a bit overrated. It focuses on acting like an extrovert and surface characteristics.
I would counter balance that book with one on listening, the other half (and much neglected part) of communication. Unfortunately I can’t think of any off the top of my head. Susan Cain put out a excellent book called “Quite”. It’s not quite on point for this topic but it may be worth a read.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is kind off point. Believing that Jesus lived – which is what we are talking about - is a point of evidence, not of faith.
In evolution theory, there are 2 schools of thought: Natural selection and Lamarckism. Should we accept Lamarckism regardless of evidence? The theory has some attractions, regardless of the evidence against it. But no, we do not. Natural selection wins because the evidence is stronger.
One would be hard pressed to put together a cohesive theory that Jesus did not exist. There are too many eye-witnesses accounts. To the point that Jesus was the son of God, the miracles, etc. – that is for faith.
Yes, there are written records from that time but they are not many. Historians (or even journalist), as a class barely existed. Paper was expensive. And a couple of wars, rebellions, sieges etc. destroyed much of what existed. The existence and execution of a single preacher is not something that would normally be captured. Jesus was (probably) not that well know during his lifetime.
It is one of the reasons why the Dead Sea Scrolls are so important. From an absolute viewpoint there is not a lot there. From a relative viewpoint, since so little exists from that era, it was a huge find.
Let’s consider you point. What is your Epistemology in this situation?
Do you reject evolution? It’s got massive holes. There are bits that don’t (yet) make sense. Yet I still believe it because of the strong evidence. The holes take some extrapolation to move from point to point, but the logic to do so is consistent.
Or, let’s choose an example more on point. Should I disbelieve in Socrates? Like Jesus no primary source material exists. None of his writings exist. Should I take the position that he was just the figment of somebody’s imagination?
Do you consider power to a absolute or relative measure? If absolute one might be able to make the argument that Luxemburg was more power.
If we are talking about relative, we are talking about one small tribe that was able to conquer Russia, China, raid Poland at will, etc. Nobody ever even came close at being able to match Khan’s army.
The guy cited the wrong source. Here is a better one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_for_the_Historicity_of_Jesus
Basically what it boils down to is that there are multiple independent sources attesting to his existence.
See Q Source and the Gospel of Mark. Or the Gospel of Thomas. Those are the 2 big ones I can think of. I will grant you that they were oral traditions before being written traditions. I will grant you that there are differences and contradictions between the various sources. But the differences are consistent with the way that oral history spreads.
You might want to reread the article – he is not making that assumption. He knows that there is an international treaty that the US has signed. He knows the US government can’t act unilaterally, which is why he is asking for the US to renegotiate the treaty.
It depends on what you mean by hotel. If you mean “resort hotel for tourist”, then I would agree.
But I am thinking “extended stay hotels for workers”. Build a research stations then rent out rooms and lab space. I think that could work if there were any serious need for commercial research. Unfortunately I can’t think of any demand for that type of research over the next 10 to 20 years. (Please do not confuse commercial research with basic research. They are 2 different animals.)
The guy is what – 67 years old. Another 10 years until the first flight. 77 seems old to be a astronaut. And this is going to be team effort. Or are you suggesting that JFK should have been the first man on the moon because he pitched and backed the idea?
As for property - how would you handle somebody wanting to build a multibillion dollar research facility on the moon? Should the people who built it be able to run it or should it be the people with the biggest guns? If I wanted to build a Helim-3 mine can I build it anywhere that I wanted because nobody owns anything so nobody controls anything?
Not sure what the answer is but I might lean towards the UN granting 99 year leases or something along those lines.
Well, that is kind of his point. He is asking for the US to try to amend the treaty. Even if he gets the US to ask for an amendment it does not mean it will be granted. The way I read this, Bigwlow wants to open preliminary discussions.
Partly.
Ford is moving to "world cars". Figure out how to build a car really well and then sell the same car around the world. Honestly it is a great idea.
The problem is that the replacement for the Ranger is basicly a F-100 - just a hair smaller then the 150. Ford figured it did not make that much sense.
It's bad but not that bad.
What I think you are referring to is the expense accounting of capital interest charges, depreciation of intangibles, etc. These areas are actually codified. Except the code did not expect such a creative / aggressive approach.
For example, if it takes me 3 years to build a skyscraper I can take the interest that I was charged on the construction loan, capitalize it, roll into the costs basis of the building and depreciate over the life of the building - 30 years. That’s legit.
If it takes me 3 years to produce a movie, (from a mere idea to being on the silver screen), can I capitalize my costs and depreciate them over the life of the movie - 50 years? I would say no, but.
McDonalds I can understand. Starbucks I can’t. Running a server farm is on the commodity end of the business. You are not looking to be fancy or cutting edge, you are looking to be reliable, low cost, and dull.
Sears has gobs of real-estate coming out of its ears. This is one of the better ideas that I have heard. (Not saying it is a winner of an idea, just better than the other plans I have seen.)
There is another angle to this – the REIT tax exemption. Sears is cash poor but land rich.
There is a quirk that Real Estate Investment Trusts don’t have to pay corporate tax if they pay out most of their profits. REITs included apartment and office buildings, public storage, warehouses, and maybe server farms. (IIRC Rackspace was trying to convert. I don’t know what become of that.)
Sears is trying to figure out how to move it assets over. This could be a angle where they rent the building but outsource the server farms to their partners.
Maybe Unpowered Ranger. Ford has stop production of the Ranger line. Well, of all light trucks in the USA.
That’s not exactly the issue.
There have been various schemes to avoid taxation and/or for criminal use. I.O.U.s, scripts, payment-in-kind, coupons, assets swaps, forward contracts, loan forgiveness gifting techniques, etc. Each of these techniques have legitimate purposes but at times are just way to circumnavigate the law.
If I swap my services for goods – US Dollars, BitCoins, an old car, credits towards baby-sitting – I have earned income that I need to declare at fair market value on my income tax. Now determining the fair market value for some of these goods are easier than others but the principal remains the same.
O.K. – I will bite. If Ireland can’t structure its tax code and shouldn’t determine how their economy should run, who should? And if the answer is Italy, does that mean Argentina gets to run Italy’s revenue service?
It is closer than you think. Neither case is about lying.
In Apple’s case they are shifting the profit (and thus taxes) from Italy to Ireland. Is Apple doing this to boost profits? Yes. Is there a large amount of subjectivity in meshing Irish and Italian tax codes together? Yes. Should a country be able to structure its tax code to boost growth? Yes.
In Hollywood they shift revenue (and thus payouts) from the movie to the production and distribution companies. I have a lower regard for Hollywood accounting because the movie, production, and distribution companies are all controlled by the same group of people and is a example of self-dealing but that is a different story.
Not it’s not. Let’s talk about “Transfer Pricing” which is subjective. Issue like this happen because the tax rules in the two different countries and not aligned. It is a subjective quagmire with no correct answer. Heck, I am hard pressed to think of 2 countries where they are aligned. However, there are rational solutions out there.
Apple (Ireland) and Apple (Italy) sell a product and make $100 in profit.
Apple claims most of the profit was made in Ireland and is subject to Ireland’s low taxes. But then again they structure the prices (and thus profits) at which the two units transfer goods between them to minimize the taxes.
Italy claims 100% of the profit was made in Italy and should pay Italian taxes. But then again they are broke and looking to tax anyone except their own voters.
If I take the vaccine I will not get the disease. However, most vaccines that a rare occurrence of really nasty side effects. However, on average, I am better off taking the vaccine.
But there is an alternative – the herd effect. If part of the population is vaccinated the disease has a hard time jumping from host to host because the chain of transfer is broken too often. Sometimes a vaccination rate as low as 1/3 of the population will do the trick.
So we have an issue of the Free Rider Effect. As long as everybody else takes the vaccine the chance of me being exposed to the disease and contracting is low. Of course if everybody did this then the whole thing would collapse.
hmmm....I wonder where they could build it. Oh - I know. Dallas. The tunnel has been dug so all they have to do is drop in a few magnates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider
On a more serious note, I though the next big project was going to be a linear accelerator. Anybody know why they picked the round one over the straight one?
On the other hand, the USPS is not supposed to losing money. It is supposed to be self-sufficient.
It might make more sense to have direct subsidizes from the government to provided universal access in the more remote areas.
BTW, where did you get the 35b in reserves? I have not been able to find reliable numbers. Venezuela’s is not exactly independent and I have heard rumors that their books are not exactly square.
But let’s assume the 35b is right. The 35b means nothing in itself. It is a stock value – a snapshot. Think of your checkbook. It only has meaning if you compare it to a flow value – the amount of money coming in and out. A rule of thumb is that a central bank should have about 1 years’ worth of reserves. Venezuela imports/ exports about 90b a year.
So even by your standards the reserves are thin.
Here is a link to a more pessimistic article.
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588093-latin-america-must-press-nicol-s-maduro-not-use-decree-powers-throttle-his-opposition
That is true but that is not exactly the point I was trying to make. Dale Carnegie was a salesperson and that is the focus of his book – how to sell yourself. These are useful skills.
This kind of assumes that you are taking an active, engaged role in the conversation. However, this can precluded deeper conversations. Active, engaged conversation tends to be higher energy and more to the point. However it discourages long contemplative pauses, digressions. Etc. Conversations tend to close faster and be more superficial. Not always but it is a bias in Carnegie’s system.
FYI, overrated does not mean bad. I do give the book high marks. It is just that I think the book gives too much weight to having a likeable personality.
Yes, that is about the age of the oldest physical coin. However, the Code of Hammurabi, which dates back to 1750 BCE, includes sections on money, loans, and debt forgiveness. So debasement could have occurred back then.
I have limited time and my books are at home so I can’t dig up the example that I am thinking about, but it was during accident Babylonian, Sumerian, or somewhere in that time era. The king needed more money so he recalled all of the coinage in his empire, made possession of the old currency illegal and reissued debased currency.
It’s a great book but I find it a bit overrated. It focuses on acting like an extrovert and surface characteristics.
I would counter balance that book with one on listening, the other half (and much neglected part) of communication. Unfortunately I can’t think of any off the top of my head. Susan Cain put out a excellent book called “Quite”. It’s not quite on point for this topic but it may be worth a read.