Maine has other problems, like lack of jobs. Plenty of little damn kids though, unless you live where there aren't any jobs or Internet.
Artificial sweeteners reduce sugars in the gut.
We are encouraged to reduce sugar intake.
Artificial sweeteners reduce sugar intake.
What's the problem?
And the unemployed are the property of the welfare state.
And shift those pesky costs like healthcare, etc to the welfare state.
Not because business is evil and seeks to reduce costs at the expense of the taxpayer, but because the welfare state was created to buy votes, and has been expanded for over 40 years to further enhance that goal.
If you think the war on terrorism is a failure, consider the war on poverty.
The article misstated First Law. Get that right first.
No argument. I work in Phoenix.
I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter what number, if any, the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights had in mind. Change the rules in some fair, neutral eau of that dem the right way to do it, but arbitrary limits are stupid.
Clothing suitable for Gurgaon may not be suitable for Minneapolis. Especially in winter.
I, however, would love to be able to buy Allen Solly in the US.
Um, bad post. I meant that neither Local Motors nor anything associated with it are Luddite.
Now let me reboot this frikin N7. Stupid touch problems.
Local Motors and nothing associated with it are Luddite.
Your solution violates the Fourth Amendment at least.
I was responding to a proposal that cars be rejected outright, arbitrarily, and let the courts act as a filter to vet those, which would, to me, turn the court into a preliminary examiner. Such a waste, as the court should decide that that PTO ess negligent in merely refusing to accept applications dur to workload.
And that would be negligent, and is. The PTO should perhaps work on streamlining the work, maybe automating the intake and initial comparison of applications to both competing and existing patents, and even developing specialists to more quickly identifying problems and making decisions.
So the answer your propose is to arbitrarily limit demand. I would expect many rejected applicants to be on court with valid complaints that their application was never considered on its merits, as should be expected by law. You shift the work from the PTO to the courts. Stupid.
Though it is complicated by the government service issue, there are ways to measure performance...
- Salt the case load with fictitious, bogus applications intended to be declined. In fact, this can both detect work that is disingenuous, and start applying some quality checks. Applications that are so flawed as to be obvious can be expected to fall through as approved if examiners are just phoning it in.
- Break up the review process, no insight into the next step for any examiner. At some point, some examiners will be doing too little work to keep up, or the backlog will inspire some investigation. Perhaps.
- This is an oldie. Full tracking of the examiner's work, down to the keystroke.
- Even older, time to put up the performance chart. Peer pressure will probably not work in Civil Service, but it's a valiant try nonetheless.
Now, the real trick is how to measure performance. That scares me.
Same problem with 3d-printed firearms. It was fine and good to let you make your own into it even seems like or might be possible for just the technically adept minority of citizens. Now, not so much does the government think making your own gun is a good idea.
Restricting access to files describing functional designs is much like restricting access to books describing more traditional methods of gunsmithing.