With a Pringles can.

That makes no sense. Minimum wage labor is only a portion of the actual cost of anything. That is the only part that went up due to minimum wage increases. Any other rise in price would have happened anyway. So unless businesses illegally collude to raise prices in a big FU to the state, it won't absorb all of the increase in income.

And those corporations are also welfare recipients. As for sources, take your pick. Forbes is probably good.

I never admitted such a thing. I dared them to sue [insert name they called for].

That's just it. Slippery slope is often NOT a fallacy. Anywhere where precedent is followed, such as law, permits a logical argument behind the slippery slope. Anything involving human psychology (boiling the frog) likewise.

So now it just needs to describe particular things to be to be seized. Everything is too broad.

You also need to describe what you are searching for. It needn't be an EXACT description, but should be as narrowly constrained as possible. For example, you might search for 'the object that bludgeoned john doe", a bloody baseball bat, a handgun, etc.

Aye. I use the product. What I'm saying is that on some sites, I've started getting messages... "You are using adblock. Please disable it to see the content".

That would be fine, but what they actually asked for was the email account. Item to search for: Every email ever sent or received.

I think our best target would be very smart machines which do not have consciousness. You can't "enslave" a vacuum cleaner.

Once they have conciousness then you are enslaving them.

I get the philosophical point- especially after reading a lot about brain injuries.

But pragmatically- we are conscious and creative. I think we'll get machines that are as capable as (more capable than) humans.

Actually, blacks did not fare well.

A couple quotes:
THE GREAT Depression of the 1930s was catastrophic for all workers. But as usual, Blacks suffered worse, pushed out of unskilled jobs previously scorned by whites before the depression. Blacks faced unemployment of 50 percent or more, compared with about 30 percent for whites. Black wages were at least 30 percent below those of white workers, who themselves were barely at subsistence level.

There was no relief from the liberal Roosevelt administration, whose National Recovery Act (NRA) of 1933 was soon referred to by Blacks as the Negro Removal Act. Although its stated goal was nondiscriminatory hiring and an equal minimum wage for whites and Blacks, NRA public works projects rarely employed Blacks and maintained racist wage differentials when they did.

---
  In 1950 a black person's income was around $3,828 but a white
person's income was $7,057. By 1956 a black person's income was around
$4,768 and a white's income was $9,060. As you can see from these
figures, because of segregation and the various laws around black and
white people, white people led a much higher standard of living
compared to black people.
---

Blacks have also consistently run about double the unemployment of whites as long as we've had data.

http://people.ucsc.edu/~rfairl...

And this was also true for the 1960's and 1970s. Double unemployment and much lower income.

Regarding 1930...

During most of the 1930's Blacks faced unemployment of 50 percent or more, compared with about 30 percent for whites. Black wages were at least 30 percent below those of white workers, who themselves were barely at subsistence level.

However, if you look at 1880 and 1910, during a period of general 3% unemployment- blacks had slightly lower unemployment.

----

I guess what I'm reacting to in your original post is the assumption that a lower or no minimum wage will automatically result in higher employment and that blacks benefited from lower minimum wages in the past. The data shows that from 1920 onwards, they had lower employment despite lower wages.

I don't want to bust your chops too much- I think the trend in robotics is going to replace humans generally with machines which can do the job 3 shifts a day for 1/6th the cost of a human per shift- never take vacations- never get sick (with a proper SLA). That's a good 15-30 years away before it becomes a dominant factor that can't be ignored tho.

It's a good question.

Prior to the current incarnation of the republican party, both parties screamed at each other but they worked together as a functioning government and negotiated with each other.

Having started voting in 1978, I've seen the change occur right in front of my eyes. I voted for reagan and bush sr. I voted for clinton (who worked very well with the republicans on actually getting things done).

Then suddenly the republicans started saying no to everything. They even asked for "X" and when offered "X", they STILL said "no".

If you recall, they openly declared that was their plan. They would vote no to everything and drive Obama from office by 2012.

To quote:
TIME just published âoeThe Party of No,â an article adapted from my new book, The New New Deal: The Hidden Story of Change in the Obama Era. It reveals some of my reporting on the Republican plot to obstruct President Obama before he even took office, including secret meetings led by House GOP whip Eric Cantor (in December 2008) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (in early January 2009) in which they laid out their daring (though cynical and political) no-honeymoon strategy of all-out resistance to a popular President-elect during an economic emergency. âoeIf he was for it,â former Ohio Senator George Voinovich explained, âoewe had to be against it.â

---

"If he was for it, we were against it" is something truly new to united states politics. I think it's bad for the country. I am currently no longer voting republican as a result of the policy. I think the policy is bad for the long term health of the republican party.

to my current Samsung S2 and Sprint.

Since I retired, I've examined various expenses with an eye on optimizing them. If they make sense, I can afford them but since I have the time why not check them out?

I'm currently paying $100 a month for "unlimited" data, 1500 daytime minutes and 1500 text msg with an aging S2.

My new plan is $53 a month for 1gb, unlimited talk, unlimited text, unlimited music data.

The S2 is an android phone while the Nokia is a windows phone.

After 20 days, it looks like I'm going to transfer my number to the Nokia and retire the android phone.

The actual service has been better on T-Mobile than on sprint which was a surprise. Sprint has so many dead areas off the high way that text to speech, pandora , etc. are painful to use. The GPS after only 2 years has become very flaky. GPS Status only works a quarter of the time- the rest the time I have to reboot the phone. Sometimes, it seems to have trouble with metal car roofs. I'm assuming the antennae is aging fast.

The "feel" of having a limited data plan is constraining but in actuality, I've only used about 200mb of data on the new phone and most of that was from doing some app installations at home when the wifi was turned off.

Voice quality on the Nokia is stunning with other Tmobile subscribers but slightly below sprint for other people. One of my friends said of a landline call, "it's not as good but it's not bad. I'll get used to it." Other Tmobile customers sound like they are in the same room.

I personally hate windows 8 on my laptop (which is not a touch screen) but I've gotten used to it really quickly on the phone.

I've replaced most of my apps with native apps-- some of them better and oddly not available on android devices. Oddly, some "official" apps have different features and behaviors on the two phones. Notably lacking was Scotttrade. There is a third party app which claims to interface with Scott trade but I'm leery of that for my money.

My biggest struggle to date was having to use the Office App to open pdfs which were then sent to the PDF app. This was seriously confusing-- the apps themselves had no way to open PDF's. But that's more of a windows issue than a phone issue.

The lack of a flash has been less of an issue than I thought and the picture quality is good.

---

Bottom line is- going to this phone is going to save me about $570 per year, I have improved gps, music. I technically have less data but it's more than I need and the reality of better coverage means I can use data driven features of the phone in a wider area. WIndows vs Android has turned out to be a surprisingly tiny learning curve.

If you think I'm conservative and pro-gun, then you've clearly never read any of my other posts. In fact, if your entire reply is not just an ad hominem, but one attacking views that are diametrically opposed to the ones that I've publicly stated on numerous occasions, I can only assume that you are completely lacking any meaningful responses.