Yeah, god forbid you actually glance at the fucking linked article. I'm not even expecting you to read it, just look at the pictures. I know delaying your insightful reply by 10 seconds would be torture, otherwise how could you proclaim your ignorance?

Yeah, but for me it's their poor value:price ratio, not their abhorrent business practices.

You obviously don't know how Disney operates. They will allow the use of selfie sticks (now called "Mickey Sticks") that you buy from the park at a massively overinflated prices, maybe $200-$300, and of course you must use "Disney Dollars" to buy them because regular dollars aren't "fun".

In your example, person 1 is providing both work and risking capital where person 2 is only providing work. Why shouldn't person 1 receive a greater reward than person 2 when he is taking a risk and doing just as much work? If person 2 wants to get the same outcome as person 1 he needs to work harder than person 1, not do the exact same work. Yes, capitalism is rigged for people who already have capital, that is why we have things such as progressive tax structures and estate taxes - to try to even that out. The beauty of the system is that anyone can own capital - in contrast to most other systems you can work yourself up the ladder and be an owner rather than just a worker.

Never? What about Klocek v. Gateway? The court found in that case that since the sale occurred before the "agreement" that the terms of the agreement were not part of the original sale and struck down the EULA. You better go back to law school for the second semester, obviously the stuff learned in the first semester isn't everything.

The problem is that he thinks HE is the one who gets to decide what is constitutional, no matter that the constitution grants that power to the Supreme Court:

"Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be 'constitutional' does not make it so" [reference]
-Rand Paul

Are you talking about the Patriot Act that passed the Senate 98-1? Sure, the one dissenting Senator was a Democrat (Feingold) but that is hardly "lots of Democrat outrage". The Democrats weren't outraged then and they aren't outraged now, they want to snoop on you and control you JUST as much as "the party of small government" does. The US party duopoly is two sides of the same shitty coin.

That assumes that all truck traffic is carrying consumer goods, however this isn't the case. If a gold-mining company is hauling a 190,000 pound excavator to a job site, how does that benefit me? Currently, automobiles are subsidizing such road use with the gas tax, this law seems like it will make that subsidy even greater. Large trucks do not pay taxes in proportion to the damage they do to the roads, since damage increases exponentially with weight.

These are occupation statistics, so recreational flyers won't apply. However, the other occupations you mentioned are relevant, particularly small charter planes. For example, in Alaska there are tons of places that are only accessible from the air and there is a large charter plane and bush plane industry which often has to fly in challenging conditions.

A Sheriff is often elected, other than that most police aren't elected. However, the people who give them their marching orders (District Attorney, Mayor) often are elected so that is where voter pressure needs to be applied. Not that it will do much good, both dominant political parties in the US are quite authoritarian so it is unlikely any serious action will be taken against the police departments.

It's the former. Hint: the moon is beyond geosync distance but somehow it manages to stay in orbit. The "balanced" orbit you are thinking of may be the Lagrange Points, where the gravity of a body balances with the gravity of another body.

Actual scientific studies seem to indicate that poorer people are much more likely to be religious than well-off people. For examples, look at this Gallup page that says Religiosity Highest in World's Poorest Nations. Or check out the Wikipedia page on Wealth and Religion which says "The GDP of countries generally correlates negatively with their religiosity, i.e. the wealthier a population is the less religious it is". There are several studies cited on that page that seem to support that conclusion. You claim to have a source for your assertion that "lack of religion in the us is strongly correlated with poverty", can you please provide it?

Not to mention the fact that these cars probably drive more than an average car drives in a year. The only logical statistic is the accident rate per miles driven, not accident rate per some period of time.

The law says that they are at fault if they hit you from behind. It is the responsibility of the trailing driver (or computer) to allow enough following distance to safely stop if the car in front of them stops. If their car takes longer to stop than yours, they need to allow a greater following distance - just like semi drivers are expected to now since their trucks take longer to stop than a car. This should be one of the places where a computer excels, not only will they always leave enough room to stop safely they will also have a quicker reaction time than a human and so can apply the brakes more quickly.

It's actually one year