Who decides what is right and wrong? In your world it certainly isn't you :)

If you think gun ownership is expensive, try actually knowing how to use one... On a good day you can buy a box of 50 9mm rounds for $13. That's 26 cents each time you pull the trigger. The cost of the gun becomes moot if you want to practice regularly, as a good practice session is going to consume several boxes of ammo. Just like anything else you must practice to become proficient, and practice regularly to maintain your proficiency.

Yeah really, just add some kevlar body armor, a camera, blinders, and a remote controlled stick with a carrot on the end of it!

I noticed you used the word "work" Would you consider owning copywrite on a 40 year old book that your father wrote as work???

While I wont deny that your argument has merit, I take issue with advertising in general. It has evolved into something more than just letting people know your product exists. It is manipulative in many ways that I dislike. (I'm sure you dont understand this though) In our society we regularly deny people the ability to profit from their work. What their work is and how they intend to profit is usually scrutinized. If you truly think that ads are toxic bullshit, then it follows that you will truly think there is nothing wrong with avoiding them. The creator is always free to find some other mechanism. Perhaps a more ethical one...

Just a guess, but perhaps someone trying to dodge taxes, or exploit some sort of loophole. The article claims that the son has some money in an offshore account and is refusing to give it back. From this I make the inference that the son knows how to handle, transfer and manage money in ways that the ordinary person isn't familiar with.

Perhaps if there was more freedom of speech, instability would not exist to the degree that censorship is required to prevent riots. Arguing the merits of censorship is essentially circular logic. The people are oppressed. Why are they oppressed? Because it's for their own good, if we didn't oppress them they would riot and hurt themselves... Why would they riot? Because they are oppressed. Ahh.. Makes perfect sense.

It's not actually free unless EVERYONE has access to it. If my personal information is being SOLD that seems to indicate it's not very free. And furthermore, I suspect that the Govt and The Corporations involved are working very hard to keep much of their personal information from escaping and becoming free.

Here in the USA most of us have been duped into thinking that the Government and Large corporations are at odds with each other. Instead of realizing that each represent a consolidation of power, and pose similar threats (and more often than not work together). We spend so much time divided and arguing about who represents "evil" ( the Govt or the Corporations) that they both pretty much get to do whatever the hell they want.

A 454 is most definitely a rebuildable engine. Standard procedure is to bore the cylinders over and use larger pistons. You can bore a 454 (big block) up to .060" over. Therefore you should be able to get atleast two rebuilds before you need to find a new block. Don't take my word for it, Google 454 rebuild kit, or big block rebuild kit, or how to rebuild a 454... I find it hard to imagine a situation with a passenger vehicle where it would need more than 2 or 3 rebuilds during it's useful lifespan (taxi cab perhaps?), and I suspect that's why engines like this do not have easily removable sleeves. My understanding as to one reason large diesels have sleeves is that it becomes possible to service only one cylinder. As in you can replace one piston, rings and sleeve, while keeping all the cylinders the same size. It also makes it possible to do said repair without removing the engine from the truck (no machining necessary)

The biggest problem with this scheme is that given the choice most people wouldn't invest it. The entire reason for social security is to assure that everyone has some form of a safety net. We have no faith in the ability of the masses to plan for retirement, therefore we take the money from them and do it for them. As far as not giving them the option of spending the money, but letting them manage it however they seem fit... Hrmm... First off we have this program in effect because they are not smart enough to save. This sort of disqualifies them from managing their own 401k IMO. And it seems suspicious to me also. Safety nets are not something you gamble on, they are the sort of thing that should have a *guaranteed* return. A lot of people experienced extreme losses with 401k's during the whole Worldcom and Enron escapades. I don't call that a great safety net. On the other hand if I had a vested interest in the stock market, or heck even owned a company that sold stock I'm sure I'd be all for it.

While the big block wont EVER make it to a million, I've seen an awful AWFUL lot of diesels fail to make 500k. When it comes time to rebuild the engine the big block can be rebuilt several times over for what the Diesel will Cost. (atleast in parts and machining costs) Diesels commonly give twice the service life of their gas equivalents, anything more than that while not unheard of, is not to be expected either. (some gas engines go 400k too) Don't get me wrong, I would trade my Vortec 454 for a diesel in a heartbeat. But my motivation would be for the improved gas mileage. ESPECIALLY when Towing. The only reason I own Big block is for pulling a 10,000# trailer, and it does this VERY VERY well. But it get's about 10mpg when towing (15.5 when not) A Diesel would probably get 18mpg when towing and i could run homemade bio diesel. My tow vehicle with a big block is inexpensive, dependable, easy to work on, and gets pretty poor gas mileage....

An easy prediction. If they are wrong we are not having the wool pulled over our eyes by a conspiring govt. If they are right then said govt wouldn't dare release the incriminating evidence!

Because it shows them using this intelligence in the wild, in a natural setting, presumably without human prompting. It's probably not surprising at all to those who study them, but science tends to demand evidence....

So let me get this straight. While thousands of artists got ripped off, the vast majority only sold a single album or two. Therefore they are only getting screwed for a couple bucks eack, perhaps $10 at the most... And besides they were shitty bands and sucked. Therefore it's perfectly Ok???? nobody got hurt, nobody suffered more than the loss of a combo meal, so it's no problem??