It's the crappy software. Free isn't cheap enough, especially when you're 5 years too late to the party and a million apps behind.
Or, better yet, raise enough money to fix a real problem.
Right wing affiliation? Are you kidding? That gets you audited these days - look at Dr. Ben Carson as an example.
(inane, clueless trashing of conservatives removed)
If it passes constitutional muster (which the ACA HAS), it is not "tyranny of the majority," it is simply a law YOU don't agree with.
Actually, some parts of it have been upheld by the Supreme Court. Barely. But it's not a tyranny of the majority because the majority of the people in this country are against it. One party pushed it through and now they're delaying parts of it to help stave off losing a lot of elections later this year.
Talking points? I'm not part of the looney left - I have a substitute for "talking points" known as "reality". I would take anything from the whitehouse with a grain of salt.
The federal government has been spending ever more money in order to prop up the GDP (remember that gov't spending is part of the GDP). In reality, the economy has been shrinking for some time except in Washington DC. And, no, we can't continue this forever or even much longer.
Forbes and WSJ pointed this out a couple of years ago:
If you actually look at how much work is done and actual years worked (not just age) etc. the gap disappears. Actually, according to the summary here there *is* a gap as women get paid more. I'm sure the feminists and looney lefters will want to fix this new problem. Not.
So, why do many of us perceive Whole Foods and the Creation Museum so differently?"
It's easy -- because in many ways "science" has become a religion to many. However, many people lack a firm understanding of scientific principles and methods. So, if something looks "science-y" with Latin words, molecular drawings and other intelligent-sounding but hard-to-understand descriptions.
These days people have "faith" in "science"..and if that so-called science goes along with their worldview (which Whole Foods is self-selecting in that a certain worldview makes someone more likely to become a shopper there), then they may blindly accept it. Very few people have the skills and motivation to actually analyze the claims of these manufacturers and just go with their biases when making a decision.
Even the summary brushes on this. We find that the two things that get some people riled up are creationism and climate change denial. Actually, those are things that tend to get left-wingers riled up. A lot of folks also get riled up about, oh, anti-vaccination nuttery, anti-economic-reality nuttery (denying basic market principles), climate change extremism (we have to all give up our cars now to save the planet), green quackery (we have to destroy our nuclear power plants and replace them with wind farms!), etc.
There are plenty of religions in the world and many of them have nothing to do with God or gods.
You've got questions?
Hey, so do we!
Come to think of it I'm probably on the "fuck this guy over" list because of this and similar comments on other forums.
Don't sweat it - if there were such a list I'd be the first name on it. They don't seem to pay any attention to me at the airport.
Whether you agree or disagree with the need for the TSA, the above is a lousy childish argument.
The spinkler system at my office has not put out a single fire. My smoke detector has not once detected smoke.
And that's where your analogy just crashed and burned. Has there been a fire at your office?
There's been a shoe bomber. There's been Smokey the Terrorist who set his underwear on fire (yeah, not from here, but we're spreading our stupidity around the globe).
See, we've had the fires, it's just that our "smoke detector" - the one that costs us billions of dollars while violating our rights, that smoke detector - has demonstrably failed. While they were patting down old ladies and little kids in wheel chairs Richard Reid walked right through.
So, no, not only does it violate our rights, clog up airports, create a far larger security problem (ever see video of the Russian airport security line being bombed?) it has failed to catch at least one terrorist of which we are aware. And other airports using these same stupid policies around the world have likewise failed to catch actual terrorists.
This isn't the least bit surprising to anybody paying attention. Old white ladies don't bomb airplanes, and it's highly unlikely (to the point that it can be safely ignored) that an old Muslim lady would do the same. And, yeah, I know, "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. There are a total of about 5 old white Muslim ladies on the planet. And they wouldn't bomb a plane, either.
So the simple fact is that the TSA has yet to catch a single terrorist, and they've actually failed to detect an actual terrorist. It's not because their policies work - quite the contrary it's because bombing a plane is difficult on a number of levels and very very few people care to do it. Combine that with people in the air who will "take care of business" (which started on 9/11/2001) and the chance of someone pulling off a successful terrorist attack on a plane is essentially nil. That's what happened to the shoe bomber. And the last hijacking that I'm aware of ended when the plane landed and the police stormed it and saved the "hijacker" from the rest of the passengers who were beating him to death.
Hell, look at what happened over Shanksville, PA, on 9/11. The poor fool who had the job of "guarding the passengers" was tortured with scalding water and beaten - likely to death. He's lucky I wasn't on the plane.
You're correct. You can even buy real estate with IRAs in some circumstances.
Do they really expect $20million in annual revenue from WhatsApp to grow to cover that $16billion?
The question is, how does Facebook ever hope to recover the cost?
Obviously in 1000 or so years....
The real issue is the disconnect between company performance and executive pay. We're seeing a lot now of people who run a company into the ground and end up with a golden parachute, anyway. It's doubly insulting when people who make literally 1/1000th the CEO's pay end up with nothing.
My belief is that the real problem is that we're disconnected from the companies that we own. I own stock in a bunch of companies. Through mutual funds. In my Roth IRA. I can't show up at their annual meeting and vote because I don't directly own them.
In the old days, the board really represented the shareholders and shareholders often had bought the shares. As such, they had a closer stake in the company and the outcomes. The idea of a CEO ruining the company and then being compensated for it would have caused the board to be changed at the next annual meeting.
I'm not sure what the solution is but I believe this disconnect is a big part of the problem.