I heard a good (but perhaps somewhat over-simplified) explanation on this. It defines crony capitalism where businesses pay lobbyists to have the government make rules that benefit them. Rinse, lather, repeat. OWS is attacking the businesses/lobbyists portion. The Tea Party is attacking the government making rules to favor certain businesses over others. Just like so many corporations donate to both parties so they are covered in both cases, its in their interest to make sure that if the government is handing out favors anyway, to make sure they get theirs.

In other words, do you hate the player or hate the game?

I think this entire article is a rickroll, but I'll bite.

It wasn't the feds that created timezones. It was the railroads who told the government what was going to happen - one of the best examples that corporate/government relationships weren't pure as the wind-driven snow until 50 years ago.

Re #2 - Do you want people to vote who can't bother to invest half an hour of their time in the process?

As long as Han shoots first.

The last line in "Marooned off Vesta" is "I give you the year's supply of water we used to have."

NT

I give you our million-dollar NASA probe we used to have!

"You'd all be speaking German and eating brains if it wasn't for the US" ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_gauge

It's 4 ft 8 1/2 in.

How about a piece of duct tape?

Until there's a contract to that effect - e.g. "buy 10 books get this sale item for half off" then that's not the buyer's problem legally or ethically. This is no different than the network execs saying not watching the commercials by using a DVR is stealing (pg 8 here - web.mit.edu/cms/Events/mit2/Abstracts/DerekKompare.pdf)

If this continues, the end result is that book prices in both the local marked of the bookstore and the end buyer both move closer to the average - though that means higher prices one place and lower prices elsewhere. So why is it fairer to insist the cheap books stay in one community, making someone elsewhere pay more?

Actually, his name is Edward.

They're after our Macs, the only threat to their advanced civilization.

(Background - BS in Computer Science). Most non-degree mill CS degrees are about theory. My university had 1 "Software Engineering" program where you had to work as a team (not a required course). Obviously, working as a team in SW Development is very important in practically all projects in the corporate world. Given those 2 statements, no surprise that I learned more what I needed to be successful at my job in my first year of full-time employment that at school (not including the lack of "how to deal with all the business stuff that has nothing to do with real work" course). So, a 4-year degree is no indication of practical success (and in my personal experience) neither is a master's or PHD).

Yet, given all that, my guess would be that if you went to a vocational school, HR may well assume it's because you couldn't get into a "real" college? And given what happened turn of the century - "I have a degree in HTML programming"-types - people probably are wary of applicants without any "proof" of real work. Given that the tools of the trade are so readily available (a computer), there's plenty of people out there who think they can program because of going through a few "program in VB in 30 days". A good technical interview should weed those out, but cheaper to first filter out people who don't even have a degree.

Now, there's plenty of cases where someone has the technical knowledge and no degree and has proved it, but sometimes job requirements are not bendable by the person doing the interviewing.

Their victims ARE dead, not were dead or have been dead.