Didn't read the article I listed, did you? "In Hawthorne, firefighters were called after a lightpole on Chadron Avenue, near Crenshaw Boulevard, was damaged during the earthquake." There's a reason you post as AC - you've got a box of rocks for a brain...
Then how does Wall Street's financial sector continue to earn returns on their buying of candidates? After all, they spend the money supporting a selected candidate, they expect a return!
Federal spending on social services (pensions (driven by social security), health care, and welfare) and interest on the national debt already consume 69% of all Federal spending. Federal spending is about $4 trillion this year, so that spending is about $2.8 trillion. All the spending is also adding $1.4 trillion of that to the national debt, meaning we didn't have revenues to cover it - only the first $2.6 trillion.
So we're spending $2.8 trillion on pensions, healthcare, welfare and interest on the national debt, and that is more revenue than the Federal Government takes in. Completely eliminate - 100% - all military spending and you're still running a deficit. It's not military spending that is the problem - it's out-of-control social spending (which has far outstripped revenues and population on an inflation adjusted scale). And that's just the kind of spending that's easiest to buy votes and retain power...
What happened was that tax rates were monkeyed with, but exemptions that used to be allowed were dropped or heavily modified, and the result was a massive increase in the effective tax rate - witnessed by the massive rise in inflation-adjusted revenues per capita. The Governments today are fed 3 times what they had in 1957, and even so they combine to add over $1.5 trillion in debt just this year (don't let the reports fool you; the Federal Government is running a $1.3 trillion deficit this year, based upon the increase in the national debt). So even with 3 times the amount of funds - spending has skyrocketed even faster, building up massive debts.
There have been no effective tax cuts - there have been effective tax increases. That's the sad reality - that so many buy into the claims of tax cuts, while at the same time believing our Federal Government is only running a deficit 1/4 of what it actually is.
Oh, and there is a fault line that IS active in Hawthorne, and is capable of a 7.0 quake. It's just a matter of time. But that's OK, you PERSONALLY have never experienced it so you're all safe, right?
Hi there, I live in Ventura, and whilst our fault lines are FARTHER away than yours, you can still feel earthquakes, you still get cracks in plaster, and there are still concerns. I guess, though, you think that having lots of faults around you but not IN your little tiny ZIP code means you're immune. Nope. Not true. And that's not including the bigger fault along Palos Verdes, just to your SW. And I go through Hawthorne weekly as I commute down to Costa Mesa once a week...
Given that HST is going to cost at LEAST $70 billion in California, and the path under the mountains isn't even decided (not just where it could go, but if it could EVEN be made), and that a Hyperloop would face the same challenges, of not more so, because of the elevated nature of the track - no way in Hell that a Hyperloop from SF to LA comes in under $500 billion. Best case.
Yeah, that's right! I mean, there are only five fault lines within 3 miles of Hawthorne, and as EVERYONE in the Los Angeles region KNOWS, when an earthquake is more than a mile away, you can't feel it, it does nothing at all.
The same software and OS I use now? I have a few older PCs around that still have Win95 on them... And you know, I could be proactive - such as saving them out in a different format if it looked like it may be an issue in the future. Heck, given that LibreOffice can read most of the formats - and that software is open source - I have access to the file format itself, right? So I can always directly access them if I wanted.
I've seen this argument before and it never made sense to me. I have a physical copy of my data. I have a physical copy of the software. If Microsoft disappeared tomorrow, I'd still have my Excel, Word, Powerpoint, and Outlook files. Why would I suddenly lose access to my data because Microsoft went away?
Maybe that far West section of Palo Alto out towards Russian Ridge. The East part, along the bay, with all the businesses and where the downtown, is completely indistinguishable from Mountain View or Menlo Park - or basically anything south of SFO and north of San Jose. It literally runs right into its neighbors and one side of the street representing the border is indistiguishable from the other side in another city.
It's as far from a "small town" as Lynwood or Monterey Park are; nominally they are "cities", in reality they are incorporated neighborhoods in a much bigger, continuous metropolis. You wouldn't know it's a new place/city/town exept for a map or maybe a label on the street sign.
So there are minimum tax laws that Ireland is responsible for. And thus it's Apple's fault that Ireland broke its own agreements and laws. Doesn't make sense to me. Government has the ultimate power, the final call, and when it screws up somehow the private sector is responsible.
Exactly! People frothed at the mouth when President Clinton said something like that in the 90s. But it is a real problem. It seems to Average Joe that a word like "is" is very easy to understand, but then, they're also not used to communicating in forms that are capable of containing details.
But at the end of the day, the simple, plain Average Joe understanding of "is" won. The President was impeached, and he lost his law license. He tried to play the cute word game and lost. I think 99 times out of 100 it ends up that way - the usually, the other time, it's different because the judge just feels it's right. The 9th cicuit court is famous for that - and they get overturned with quite regular frequency.
Well, it depends upon what the meaning of "is", is.
Intent is purely subjective and subject to the whims of whomever is currently interpreting the law. The letter of the law is much more concrete and harder to get around unless you want to actually redefine the meaning of words. The letter of the law is the guiding principle; if it was intent then you have kangaroo courts and decisions made based upon the current direction the wind is blowing.
So, to take that to the next level, does it mean that ANY differences in taxation levels must necessarily be the result of subsidies? In other words - if Germany taxes less than France, then Germany MUST be giving subsidies and therefore must force additional taxation? I mean, if lower tax rates are considered subsidies, then whoever has the highest tax is "right" and everyone else must be giving subsidies and should be penalized.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, let's be honest. If it diden't bend easily then how can they have chips delaminate from the PCB and fritz the screen and force an upgrade? It's "Business Case Engineering 101" there...
She already started three... Iraq War (which she helped push and voted for), Libya, and Syria. Why not go for a grand slam and make it an even four?
Didn't read the article I listed, did you? "In Hawthorne, firefighters were called after a lightpole on Chadron Avenue, near Crenshaw Boulevard, was damaged during the earthquake." There's a reason you post as AC - you've got a box of rocks for a brain...
So you're saying you had indoor plumbing...
Then how does Wall Street's financial sector continue to earn returns on their buying of candidates? After all, they spend the money supporting a selected candidate, they expect a return!
Federal spending on social services (pensions (driven by social security), health care, and welfare) and interest on the national debt already consume 69% of all Federal spending. Federal spending is about $4 trillion this year, so that spending is about $2.8 trillion. All the spending is also adding $1.4 trillion of that to the national debt, meaning we didn't have revenues to cover it - only the first $2.6 trillion.
So we're spending $2.8 trillion on pensions, healthcare, welfare and interest on the national debt, and that is more revenue than the Federal Government takes in. Completely eliminate - 100% - all military spending and you're still running a deficit. It's not military spending that is the problem - it's out-of-control social spending (which has far outstripped revenues and population on an inflation adjusted scale). And that's just the kind of spending that's easiest to buy votes and retain power...
In reality, we haven't had tax cuts, either. In 2016, Federal, State, and Local Governments will combine to raise $23,523 per US citizen. In 1990, that revenue was $7751. In 1957, that revenue was $716 (and that was also the last year we ran an actual surplus, we did not add to the debt). When you adjust for inflation you'll find the various Governments are pulling about 3 times the tax revenue now, as they did in 1957, and close to double what they did in 1990, on a per-capita basis.
What happened was that tax rates were monkeyed with, but exemptions that used to be allowed were dropped or heavily modified, and the result was a massive increase in the effective tax rate - witnessed by the massive rise in inflation-adjusted revenues per capita. The Governments today are fed 3 times what they had in 1957, and even so they combine to add over $1.5 trillion in debt just this year (don't let the reports fool you; the Federal Government is running a $1.3 trillion deficit this year, based upon the increase in the national debt). So even with 3 times the amount of funds - spending has skyrocketed even faster, building up massive debts.
There have been no effective tax cuts - there have been effective tax increases. That's the sad reality - that so many buy into the claims of tax cuts, while at the same time believing our Federal Government is only running a deficit 1/4 of what it actually is.
Really? Even for jobs at McDonalds or Walgreens? A plain, voice line isn't sufficient for an entry level job?
Oh, and there is a fault line that IS active in Hawthorne, and is capable of a 7.0 quake. It's just a matter of time. But that's OK, you PERSONALLY have never experienced it so you're all safe, right?
Hi there, I live in Ventura, and whilst our fault lines are FARTHER away than yours, you can still feel earthquakes, you still get cracks in plaster, and there are still concerns. I guess, though, you think that having lots of faults around you but not IN your little tiny ZIP code means you're immune. Nope. Not true. And that's not including the bigger fault along Palos Verdes, just to your SW. And I go through Hawthorne weekly as I commute down to Costa Mesa once a week...
Given that HST is going to cost at LEAST $70 billion in California, and the path under the mountains isn't even decided (not just where it could go, but if it could EVEN be made), and that a Hyperloop would face the same challenges, of not more so, because of the elevated nature of the track - no way in Hell that a Hyperloop from SF to LA comes in under $500 billion. Best case.
Yeah, that's right! I mean, there are only five fault lines within 3 miles of Hawthorne, and as EVERYONE in the Los Angeles region KNOWS, when an earthquake is more than a mile away, you can't feel it, it does nothing at all.
The same software and OS I use now? I have a few older PCs around that still have Win95 on them... And you know, I could be proactive - such as saving them out in a different format if it looked like it may be an issue in the future. Heck, given that LibreOffice can read most of the formats - and that software is open source - I have access to the file format itself, right? So I can always directly access them if I wanted.
I've seen this argument before and it never made sense to me. I have a physical copy of my data. I have a physical copy of the software. If Microsoft disappeared tomorrow, I'd still have my Excel, Word, Powerpoint, and Outlook files. Why would I suddenly lose access to my data because Microsoft went away?
Hey, Steve (praise be unto His name) Jobs said you don't need more than 3.5 inches... And no, you can't use a "tool" (stylus) as a replacement either!
They both JUST WORK for me, probably because I use my cell phone in mostly a novel and unusual way... to place and receive phone calls.
Cool! Is there an app for that?
Don't confuse humble with benevolent.
Hey, it's a startup, aren't you supposed to run fast, break things, fail fast? Fix it in the next release!
Caltrain - BART - close enough. You can get to Milbrae, right?
You want to get away from your monoculture? 30 minutes on BART will get you into downtown SF, you can have PLENTY of culture there...
Maybe that far West section of Palo Alto out towards Russian Ridge. The East part, along the bay, with all the businesses and where the downtown, is completely indistinguishable from Mountain View or Menlo Park - or basically anything south of SFO and north of San Jose. It literally runs right into its neighbors and one side of the street representing the border is indistiguishable from the other side in another city.
It's as far from a "small town" as Lynwood or Monterey Park are; nominally they are "cities", in reality they are incorporated neighborhoods in a much bigger, continuous metropolis. You wouldn't know it's a new place/city/town exept for a map or maybe a label on the street sign.
So there are minimum tax laws that Ireland is responsible for. And thus it's Apple's fault that Ireland broke its own agreements and laws. Doesn't make sense to me. Government has the ultimate power, the final call, and when it screws up somehow the private sector is responsible.
Exactly! People frothed at the mouth when President Clinton said something like that in the 90s. But it is a real problem. It seems to Average Joe that a word like "is" is very easy to understand, but then, they're also not used to communicating in forms that are capable of containing details.
But at the end of the day, the simple, plain Average Joe understanding of "is" won. The President was impeached, and he lost his law license. He tried to play the cute word game and lost. I think 99 times out of 100 it ends up that way - the usually, the other time, it's different because the judge just feels it's right. The 9th cicuit court is famous for that - and they get overturned with quite regular frequency.
Well, it depends upon what the meaning of "is", is.
Intent is purely subjective and subject to the whims of whomever is currently interpreting the law. The letter of the law is much more concrete and harder to get around unless you want to actually redefine the meaning of words. The letter of the law is the guiding principle; if it was intent then you have kangaroo courts and decisions made based upon the current direction the wind is blowing.
So, to take that to the next level, does it mean that ANY differences in taxation levels must necessarily be the result of subsidies? In other words - if Germany taxes less than France, then Germany MUST be giving subsidies and therefore must force additional taxation? I mean, if lower tax rates are considered subsidies, then whoever has the highest tax is "right" and everyone else must be giving subsidies and should be penalized.