Sure. Let me know when there is a Photoshop app. Let me know when apps are optimized for desktop display sizes and not a 5" phone.
Now before I get marked as a troll let me say I am not suggesting that all complaints of harrassment or assault are ficticious or embelishements. But lets be honest here - a guy looking at a woman in the office is viewed by women a lot differently than when one of their female coworkers checks out a male worker. And then there is the flipside - the woman who holds a grudge seemingly against all males because she is not pretty and does not get that kind of attention - regardless of whether she advances in her career or not. Men are damned if they do and damned if they don't while women get the free pass.
So I guess I come at this from the "fat? no of course that dress doesn't make you look fat because you aren't!" school of things because we all know what happens if you don't answer precisely that way. Isn't it time that women (as a group) just get over it?
When they approach the owner, he can flip the proverbial middle finger by citing the fifth amendment.
And it's all legal despite any Patriot Act, secret FISA court, or intimidating threats from the NSA.
An oversimplification. The US, UK, and allies variously broke many cipher systems throughout WWII. Still the US benefitted from this.
What if the Germans were using, say, Windows, Android phones, SSL, Gmail, Yahoo, and Skype, instead of Enigma machines?
I presume you wouldn't say it was "wrong" of the United States to crack the German and Japanese codes in WWII...
This isn't so much a law enforcement question as a question of how to do SIGINT in the modern digital world, but given the above, and given that intelligence requires secrecy in order to be effective, how would you suggest the United States go after legitimate targets? Or should we not be able to, because that power "might" be able to be abused -- as can any/all government powers, by definition?
This simplistic view that the only purpose of the government in a free and democratic society must be to somehow subjugate, spy on, and violate the rights of its citizens is insane, while actual totalitarian and non-free states, to say nothing of myriad terrorist and other groups, press their advantage. And why wouldn't they? The US and its ever-imperfect system of law is not the great villain in the world.
Take a step back and get some perspective. And this is not a rhetorical question: if someone can tell me their solution for how we should be able to target technologies that are fundamentally shared with innocent Americans and foreigners everywhere while still keeping such sources, methods, capabilities, and techniques secret, I'm all ears. And if you believe the second a technology is shared it should become magically off-limits because power might be abused, you are insane -- or, more to the point, you believe you have some moral high ground which, ironically, would actually result in severe disadvantages for the system of free society you would claim to support.
you either have to cut services or raise other taxes
Maybe taking the punch bowl away makes governments more responsible about what they spend our money on?
And if the choice is between getting 0 (because a company leaves entirely) or a lower rate, isn't a lower rate better?
And with a lower tax rate, who benefits? Must be those naughty shareholders right? Hmm
The largest component among U.S. retirement assets remains IRAs, with $5.68 trillion for the first quarter, according to the ICI report. The second largest is the $5.37 trillion in DC plans, and the third-largest component is government defined benefit plans with $5.2 trillion in assets.
Private-sector DB plan assets remained essentially flat at $2.66 trillion for the first quarter of 2013. Since the beginning of last year, DB assets have hovered between $2.6 trillion and $2.7 trillion, the report said.
It is estimated that roughly 55% of pension assets are in equities - either directly or indirectly thru hedge funds.
Historically low total tax as a percentage of GDP in a very long time
I think that sentence disqualifies the rest of what you have said. In any event, let me try to put this in a simple way so that you can understand.
When your income is 30K units you probably own a mediocre TV.
When your income rises to 60K units you probably own a nice TV.
If your income continues to rise, are you going to a) continue buying a new, more expensive TV because you can and/or b) just keep buying more TVs in total? You would need to in order to maintain the same TV consumption as % of total personal GDP.
So the take of the government off the top as a % of GDP is an incredibly stupid way to look at this.
fuck them. Almost 2/3 prediction from existing crime stats. Gee I know a lot of cops aren't the brightest but really? Thats not enough of a leg up?
Good for them for figuring out how to get that deal. Corporate income taxes hurt the poor and low income more than anything else.
4. Cap federal student loan interest rates at inflation based on the CPI. What we borrow is what we pay back.
Below market rates is already the biggest problem with student loans; don't make it worse. Easy-to-get student loans make the schools see easy-to-get money which causes a positive feedback loop: tuitions rise because so much loan money is handed out because tuitions rise becase so much money is handed out because tuitions rise.
There was a great article in last month's Economist about the direct correlation of student loan availability and tuition increases since the student loan program was instituted. The rates of increase have been WAY over any other price increases in the economy.
hokey philosophies and ancient pipelines are no match for a modern java GUI IDE
-- Han Slowmo, Unix Wars, episode IV