Cab payment patterns pretty much match overall payment patterns. Americans use credit cards for a much larger portion of transactions than Europeans. I never pay with cash when I can pay with a card, it's simpler, faster, and cheaper to use a card.
In Germany I doubt you find a cab that accepts a credit card.
Well, unless you consider Munich, Frankfurt, and Berlin to not be part of Germany, your doubt is very misplaced. I've used a credit card in taxis in all three cities. Not every cab takes them (although I can't remember ever having to go past the second taxi in the rank to get one, so I'd say at least 50%), and there's usually a fee (a Euro or two), but it's not at all unusual.
How would you have suggested they "fix" the algorithm?
It's perfectly legal to make a $10k cash deposit into or withdrawal from your bank (assuming that the underlying use/source of the cash is legal, of course). It is, however, definitely ILLEGAL to make a $9999 deposit for the purpose of staying below that $10k limit. It's called structuring, and can get you into a lot of trouble.
As an example, you sell a car for $13,000, and get paid in cash. If you go and deposit that $13k in cash in the bank, you're entirely kosher. It'll generate a currency transaction report, but they're not at all uncommon.
If, however, you deposit $9k, and then $4k, to stay below that $10k ceiling, you've just committed a federal crime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Slashdot has notoriously always had a comically unfunny April 1st, and at this point I have to think the complete lameness of it all is the real meta-joke.
Or, you could just pay the sixty bucks.
PS It's steganography. Stenography is for taking dictation.
Yes, he did. He admitted that he did. It wasn't in the take they used, but he admits he used it.
Penny pinching? How is this at all a cost issue? It's not like US carriers have an extra person on board because of this rule. It just means that there a slightly fewer person-hours available to serve passengers drinks/food.
On mobile? Data caps are nearly ubiquitious.
as well as fighting USSR off twice during 1939-1944 period.
While Finland did much better than expected during the Winter War in 1939-40 (Finnish forces were hugely outnumbered), it clearly lost, surrendering more to the USSR than the USSR had demanded at the outset.
The second conflict, where Finland was allied with Germany (enemy of my enemy is my friend) was closer to a draw.
Making those Russian observers ride in a Saab 340 has got to be some sort of Geneva Convention violation.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218
They couldn't have bailed out the banks, even if they had wanted to. The losses per capita were something like TWO THOUSAND times the losses of the US banks.
You lent your money to an Icelandic bank because they were paying much higher interest rates than UK banks. You pays your money and you takes your chances.
They already had me when they let their banks go bankrupt for their own idiocy instead of having the population foot the bill.
They really had no choice. The banks losses were just so incredibly massive that they simply couldn't be bailed out, no matter how much they might have wanted to. $100 billion in losses, for a country of 325k people. Total net US bailouts have added up to about half that, for a country 1000x larger.
You might notice that Iceland is already on the rebound and out of the recession slump. We're not even in it yet.
Iceland's GDP is still 30% smaller than it was at the peak, while US GDP is 16% above pre-recession levels. Both are in current US$ for comparability.
"Who alone has reason to *lie himself out* of actuality? He who *suffers* from it." -- Friedrich Nietzsche
