The first rule of economics is "Businesses do not pay taxes. Businesses collect taxes."

No, the first rule of economics is "don't talk about economics".

Seriously, as long as you have companies in competition in regard to pricing, then yes, businesses do in fact pay taxes. They can not in fact just raise prices to cover taxes, because if they could raise prices, they already would have done so.

There is no law in economics that says "Businesses do not pay taxes. Businesses collect taxes." That's an old conservative trope that gained currency when Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were busy rodgering the working people of their respective countries.

If you had gone to high school, you might have noticed that women make up 84% of the teaching staff

And if you could read your own citation, you'd have noticed that men make up 43% of the high school teachers.

The 84% number includes elementary, pre-school and early child care. As someone who's actually had progeny, I can assure you, there's a good reason men don't go into pre-school and early child care.

But elementary school and high school? Forget about it, that's approaching 100% women.

43% of high school teachers are male. And the number of men in teaching at the pre-school through high school level is growing. And growing is the opposite of "approaching zero", for future reference.

http://www.menteach.org/resour...

Abandon all that, and telling your wife that you hate the boss at work, can be used against you when they find that the boss was run over at work.

If this is indeed true, then you have bigger problems than marriage. Freedom of speech - or chilling effects on it - is not a minor matter.

Because it is one of the very few institutions found in all human cultures. Any legal system that doesn't deal with marriage in some fashion is profoundly deficient.

That's just not true. Until fairly recently in human history, marriage was largely a religious and private issue.

Until fairly recently in human history, religion was the law, and no issue could be both religious and private.

Should women be given free choice or not? One wonders exactly what the social-justice crowd had in mind.

The vast majority of women choose to study social sciences. Men don't.

Should their freedom of choice be curtailed? Should we 'force' women to study something they're not interested in? Because if such inhibition of personal freedoms is not acceptable then perhaps we should stop treating these obvious gender-aligned differences in preference as "flaws", and start treating them as "features" of our species.

The social justice crowd would of course insist that it's all "nurture" and not "nature". But how many times must this absurd belief system be obliterated with logic for it to finally disappear? ---> https://vimeo.com/19707588

You are crazy. Here is an example of the democratic process working, yet you desperately have to search for some conspiracy theory to continue your irrational hatred of the USA.

No. It's an example of a republic not working. What history books tend to call "decline and fall" when it's happened in the past. It is what happens when governments completely lose sight of, and concern with, and respect for, the principles that brought them into being.

This is real life, not a Tom Clancy novel.

Oh, we know. In Clancy's works the US TLAs are the good guys. That's not been the case for decades now.

It's deep, but it's dry. And it has a sharp rock floor at about the 100 foot level.

and will head up into Rocky Mountain National Park around 7am tomorrow to hike around bear lake with my girlfriend.

Sorry, man, I was just messing. That sounds like a beautiful way to spend a Sunday morning. One of my life goals is to live on the edge of a National Park.

1) How will replacing the voting system result in faster or more informed decisions by the voters? That's like suggesting making high tech toilets will get people to make better choices about what they eat.

2) What on earth do we need -faster- decisions for? Because having to wait a few hours a few times a decade is the major problem with our system of government?

Better how? Fewer people would know how it works. Therefore Few people should trust it. Doesn't sound "better" to me. Election systems need to be simple enough that everyone can understand them, everyone can see that hasn't been tampered with.

A show of hands is simple but not anoymous.

Physical ballots placed into a physical box. Then removed and counted in full view of everyone is also simple, and you gain anonymity. And a child can understand it and validate it. There is zero reason for an election to ever be more complicated than this.

Since these articles get pretty much the same reaction on weekdays

I think you'll find that these stories are most likely to appear on Slashdot Friday and Saturday nights.

I was playing guitar but stopped to check the various feeds before shutting down and heading to bed. Snowshoeing early tomorrow.

Right on, brother. Tomorrow morning I'll be busting some broncos and then base-jumping off the Sears Tower with a parachute of my own design. After that, I'll be having sex with the entire wait staff of Hooters, one of whom is my wife, Morgan Fairchild.

Are you calling God a scumbag?

In the original, yeah, kind of a scumbag.

He was much nicer in the sequel when they had the dude with the long hair and beard play Him. I think it was Jared Leto.

the article says he's being sued for fraud and breach of contract

And they waited until the Oculus Rift is ready for release to file suit.

This is patent trolling by another name. They're trying to make money off someone else's work.