1. 17 km to drive and purchase DVD? 50% of the trip is apportioned to the DVD transport to account for multiple purchases and errands per trip in the base-case? I doubt people are driving 10 miles just to purchase a DVD, or as only 50% of the reason to take the trip in the first place.

2. Average disc lifetime 5 years? I still have 'The Matrix' that I got for free with my first DVD player back in 1999. None of my DVDs seem to really have a 'lifetime' that I can tell.

I actually looked up 'agnostic' because I have no idea what it means:

1. a person who does not have a definite belief about whether God exists or not

2. a person who does not believe or is unsure of something

Soooooo, what the hell does this have to do with 'clouds'?

If they were against getting the shots in the first place, how would you now force them to get the shots?

The problem becomes: Pay how much? A set standard rate regardless of what the loser actually paid their attorney? If I bring a lawsuit against a large corporation with an internal team of lawyers, how do I know much it really cost them to litigate? And even if I 'win' against a guy with no money, so what? And when is someone considered a 'loser', since there are so many levels of appeal?

I think the bigger problem with our legal system is that it even requires a lawyer to handle the most basic of procedures. That shows that the legal system has just become too complex to be useful. But since the legal system is ruled by lawyers (on all sides of the equation), there is little incentive for them to make the system more simplified and easy to access for the average person.

Yeah, because I'd NEVER think to plug in my mobile device while in my car. How much do these idiots get paid?

Well, yes they can make that claim with a straight face. I think you and I have different ideas about how a marriage works. Everything you have is equally both of yours.

By your reasoning, a house purchased is actually only owned by the earning spouse, and all decisions about when to sell/remodel/etc. are exclusively in the domain of the earning spouse.

Are all decisions about kids entirely up to the mother since she is the one that gave birth to them?

Sucks that you have such a shitty marriage that your wife would consider any money that she makes as belonging to her and not to the both of you.

Yeah, because courts never give alimony to non-working spouses in a divorce settlement.

Um, my wife is a very successful financial analyst who makes more money than I do.

And if BOTH spouses want to work, they should either stay in their home country where they can both legally work, or both have to apply separately for H1-B visas (or some other work visa).

Nuclear disarmament vs. greenhouse gas reduction is a poor comparison.

How much did nuclear disarmament affect the day-to-day lives of the average person? Zilch. Zero. Nada. 50 nuclear missiles sitting in some empty part of the country vs. 200 nuclear missiles sitting in some silos in some empty part of the country affects people not at all (unless there is a nuclear war, but were all screwed anyways).

Greenhouse gas reduction involves changing things in peoples day-to-day lives. How much is, of course, up for debate, but the perception is that we will have to sacrifice some of our standard of living to accomplish this.

Nuclear Disarmament spokesperson: "We are going to have fewer nuclear missiles in our subs. What do you think about that?"

Joe Blow: "Uhhhhh, OK...."

Greenhouse Gas Reduction spokesperson: "We are going to slap a tax on the fuels you use, so now you will get to pay more at the pump. What do you think about that?"

Joe Blow: [punches Greenhouse Gas Reduction spokesperson in the face]

OP:

I think you have serious reading comprehension issues...

Also, your 'debunking' link looks like it is just one of your /. comments. I think I will go with SA over random-guy-on-slashdot.

Who the hell is moding you up as insightful?

Wait, first you say that the deductions are to make taxes 'fair'. But then you turn around and claim that the deductions are for 'improving society as a whole'? Well, which is it? I suspect you just like paying less taxes, and don't really care one whit about the justification for it.

I also loved this zinger:

When you deduct your education bill from your taxes, how do you think that loss of taxes is made up?

That is THEIR decision. If they want to be assholes about not giving out money, so be it. If the only reason you are making charitable contributions is to reduce your tax bill, then how charitable are you REALLY being? Again, I think you just like paying less taxes than the guy next to you.

Now, lest you think I'm just picking on education expenses, I don't agree with ANY of the deductions given to people for their expenses (child care, health care, mortgage interest, etc.), which include some that I benefit from. I want them all gone so that the tax code is simplified, and we stop using it for giveaways and trying to push people to do a certain thing (buying solar, electric cars, etc).

I'm not sure why anti-gun crowd always focus on the 'militia' part of the 2nd amendment, while totally ignoring the 'people' part of the 2nd amendment.

There is no reason to pick one or the other (militia vs. people).

Ha, ha. No. The whole point of deductions is to buy sway with voters. In fact the whole point of the US tax code is NOT to help collect taxes. It is to give a way goodies to the proper special interest groups.

If the government wanted more 'fair' taxes, they could simply adjust tax rates higher or lower based solely on income. Why should I subsidize your decision to go to grad school?