Pretty certain the extinguishers are a sculpture.
A cost to reduce another *potential* cost is still a cost, not a profit.
There's plenty of reason to spend as little time as possible at Harris Ranch.
Wow - making judgmental calls on my beliefs based on what I say about logic.
You realize this all stemmed from you claiming the Bible recommends a gold standard and I merely refuted your claim.
That has absolutely nothing to do with my individual belief system (which you're absolutely wrong about) and is intentionally going off-topic so that you can feel you won some kind of argument.
How do you think the poster got their hands on a bunch?
As soon as you start hand-waving away and justifying portions you don't agree with (like the slavery example you just mentioned), you have opened the door for *any* portions to be justified away in the same manner. There is nothing in the Bible that instructs "follow this part, but ignore the previous page."
The Bible cannot be used as a basis of logic and directive on human behavior for this very reason. It can be a fantastic tool for study, for allegorical lessons, for cautionary warnings, for a supplementary tool, and especially as the guiding principals of religious belief, but not as a logical basis for extrapolation into how people or cultures should act.
The Bible clearly lays out mandatory tithing . Wether a particular denomination or church follows that practice is something altogether different.
But it's completely wrong to claim that the Bible discourages taxation while ignoring what the Bible says about tithing. Not to mention the whole "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's" goes against your servitude argument as well.
Hint: The Bible is inconsistent with itself in many ways. As a result, trying to use the Bible as foundation or any set of rules or behaviors requires making effectively arbitrary decisions as to which conflicting passages should be used or how they should be interpreted.
The Bible also pushed for mandatory taxation, sorry, I meant tithing, to the prevaling religious power.
Your browser supplies HTML5 Geolocation. But it sounds like the submitter is having problems with GeoIP detection. That's a server-side issue and relies on subscription databases for identifying where physically on the globe an IP might map to. It's also horribly inaccurate as the submitter has found.
Signup for a VPN or Proxy service with an exit point in the region you want.
IP-based geography detection (GeoIP for short) depends on the databases and services that various providers are leveraging. It's inherently inaccurate. Good luck getting these fixed as there are a bunch of different services (including the W3C) that you would need to get updated. Are you sure your routing exit point isn't actually in Ireland? My company's IP address maps to an exit point in San Francisco, even though I'm located in Los Angeles.
HTML5 location detection is pretty accurate, insofar as it relies on your browser to tell the site/service where you are. You should be able to force that setting in your browser.
You spend money on food regardless if you have any income. Ergo, food expenses are not direct costs associated with your income.
If you have to wear a uniform to your job, and pay for it yourself, then it is certainly tax deductible. Just like travel, meals, etc.
Rule of thumb - if you could do without it when unemployed, but it's required for your *particular* employment, then it's a direct expense that you can probably deduct.
The problem is that most voters simply don't know what to care about. Voters worry about irrelevant issues like abortion, gay marriage, inequality, and racism, while not worrying enough about the stuff that matters, like banking regulation, tax policy, nepotism, and crony capitalism.
That's not true, and it's a tired trope I keep hearing over and over. Voters do care, but they care about different things. Some people care more about sociological issues, whereas others care more about socioeconomic issues.
Their month-to-moth offer is still Unlimited, and says so in the language. And I have the opportunity to sign a new contract, and lock in the same service (for example, to subsidize a phone).
They are trying to use contract language to redefine Unlimited to mean something other than Unlimited, but still call it Unlimited to avoid.
With current LTE speeds, it is possible to hit the "soft" threshold for a monthly data use in less than 90 seconds.
If they want everyone off the plan, they could change the terms and call it "Throttled" and not be lying. But they want to have their cake and eat it too. They know that if they truly ended the plans, customers would take the opportunity to walk to another carrier.
I have Grandfathered Unlimited with AT&T. They're screwing us.
Unlimited used to mean Unlimited. Now "Unlimited" means if you use more data than our basic tiered plan, we are going to arbitrarily throttle your speeds to those available when you first bought into the plan (Edge, vs LTE).
It is very clearly a reduction of service for "Unlimited" users to encourage them to drop the plan for the tiered pricing, which has no speed restrictions. Verizon just got slapped around by the FCC for doing this. AT&T is due.
Back in dial-up days, companies tried the same kind of crap and got punished for it. Eventually ISPs shifted to truly unlimited plans. Later, rinse, and repeat.