Crime is mostly based on opportunity. Imagine someone with a fat wallet willingly getting into your car and you get to drive them somewhere they may not have been before.
This is just another redistribution system without the push and pull of a free market to keep prices in check.
Yep... Haiti is a perfect example of how throwing money at a problem really helps... oh wait...
Confusing much? Welcome to the hell that is sales tax.
I know the Slashdot crowd leans liberal... so this may come off as a long shot. But this is basic economics...if you make apples more accessible by lowering the price and making them more accessible, more people want them. What happens when more people want them, yet supply is limited... * wait for it * the price goes up! Just replace 'apples' with 'college' and bob's your uncle.
The uncertainty is pretty clear. First it was X date, now it's Y date... who knows when the party moves to Z date. I operate a business and can tell you that a lot of this crap changes on a weekly basis.
If I can do all this, why would I want to remain a tester? Why wouldn't I get into development?
Maybe you like breaking things, not building them.
I hate to bring this up... but city councils / local municipalities, etc have no authority over airspace. That would belong to the FAA. As evidenced in a recent case: http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2013/130117lessons-learned-from-glider-arrest.html
I read the tags: eff yro copyright as: Fuck your copyright.
In other words... it could be used for good. Educating a specific population to be more careful about their turtle encounters. OTOH... it will probably just be used for evil.
...news at 11!
"... they actually record images in stereoscopic format, using two 2D images to create the illusion of depth" My eyes work the same way.... dammit... if I want to see around something I have to actually move my damn head!
That is a meaningless distinction. Employees get benefit from insurance that they themselves do not purchase... therefore they have no stake in how it is used or abused. There is a big distinction. It is based on how much you earn, it simply happens to be capped. That's a very low cap that includes about anyone called an employee, from part time to full time to seasonal to CEO. You pay for it depending on your salary... Again... YOU do not pay for it. And... it is based on the first $7000 you make. If you make $10k, $50k, or $250k... it's the same amount. Why should a person not pay more into it (themselves) to guarantee a greater payout should the so-called "disaster" of unemployment happen. Why not purchase it individually like home insurance? Because then the employee would REALLY have to find a job instead of milking the payout while watching Oprah. Sorry... Ive seen this scenario many times. Get over it... it's a handout as it stands. There are union companies that abuse it and get more out of it for their employees by "laying them off" for a week for training. The contribution percent for companies is capped too. These companies operate at the cap and abuse the system for the benefit of their employees. This is to the detriment of companies that have a good layoff history and end up paying more into the system to benefit others. Sorry... I write the checks on this... it's a horrible system.
Couple misconceptions here... at least for US unemployment insurance. 1) EmployEEs don't pay for unemployment insurance... the employER (does though there is talk of changing that). 2) Unemployment insurance is a fixed rate (that changes yearly) charged against the first $7000 (usually) that an employer pays an employee... so it is not based on how much you earn... just on what you earn... up to $7000. Employer's have an experience account where unemployment insurance contributions accumulate. When an employee gets laid off and starts to collect benefits, the employer's experience account is charged for that. If the experience account gets low (or is emptied) the employer is charged a higher rate the next year to compensate.