Anything that you do amortization wise for corporate taxation does not bring in more revenue for the government, it just discourages investment by having companies pay artificial tax bills up front. That might make sense for something that is financed over decades like a major construction project, but it is a disaster for research and development.

You realize that the legislative power is the power to make *new* laws and amend existing ones don't you? The Senate does not have and cannot grant the power to make new laws or amend existing ones to an international body. It can ratify duly negotiated treaties not grant dictatorial powers to international bodies. No new laws, no new treaties or modifications to existing treaties of any kind without the consent of the Senate.

That doesn't mean for example that treaties can suspend the constitution. Don't be ridiculous.

There is nothing more ridiculously unconstitutional - i.e. not within the power of the Senate to grant - than an agreement to surrender the legislative power to an international body.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. - Article I, Section 1, Clause 1.

As a general rule, conventions are called conventions for a reason, and require legislation to implement any actual mandates. The UN is not a super-legislature that can just tell the United States or any other country what to do, occasional pretense notwithstanding.

There is a reason why treaties - real ones - have to be ratified by the Senate, and with a 2/3 vote at that. Less serious changes may only require Congress to pass a law, which under the Constitution the President lacks the power to unilaterally enact.

How many commercially significant programming languages with a concurrency model do you think were invented between 1980 and 1991? Erlang is the only major one that I am aware of, although there were certainly a few minor ones. Modula-3 didn't exactly hit the big time.

C - the most influential system programming language of all time - preceded Ada by nearly a decade and does not have explicit support for a lot of things as a matter of simplicity. Of course it has other downsides that motivated the creation of languages like Ada.

I don't think you are going to be able to make the case that the inventors of languages like Java and C# were so hopelessly uneducated that they were unfamiliar with work done in languages like Ada though. Java had a concurrency model from the beginning and it was one of the first languages to have an explicit one.

All or nearly all user interface developers have to deal with some form of concurrency. Javascript has a particularly unfortunate one that almost all web developers have to deal with for example, and they can't exactly fix that problem anytime soon. Cooperative multithreading with blocking requests is so much easier to develop for and reason about than asynchronous callbacks for everything.

Support for unsigned integers might be coming someday, but doing that properly would require a major extension to the JVM - roughly doubling the number of supported instructions - if not an entirely new, word oriented bytecode format.

For memory efficiency reasons if Java were being designed from scratch they might make strings into a sequence of bytes without direct access by character index but that is incredibly unlikely change to make now for compatibility reasons. A change to a direct indexed 32 bit char implementation would be more likely, and that has the opposite problem - it consumes too much memory for too little gain unless you invent a multiplicity of string types.

But if there is a mere deficiency in the standard library, that ought to be easy to fix.

The USPS is under federal mandate cover its own expenses. If we were to follow the normal pattern and just print money to pay for it the USPS could deliver everything for free, including billions of pieces of junk mail every month. Free advertising courtesy of the federal taxpayer, that is the ticket.

They are printed at the bottom of business checks as well. No one wants either to be stored electronically anywhere other than a bank or a payment processor though. IBANs do not have that problem - at least the way they are usually used apparently.

Losing money on every letter and making it up in volume is not a viable business plan. The postal service must charge enough to cover the economic cost of delivering letters at a minimum or it will either crater or become a basket case.

EFT is just fine for direct deposits from your employer. In the US, however bank account numbers are sensitive information that businesses do not just hand them out to anyone that needs to pay them money, because in our system people can use bank account numbers to initiate ACH debits with approximately no authorization checks. That is a problem that can be fixed so that checks are no longer the default way to pay any invoice, but there does not seem to be much effort being made to do so. Not sure why the US does not adopt a system similar to IBAN as used in Europe for that kind of thing.

With IBAN a vendor can just put their international bank account number on their invoices, and their business customers can remit payment without having to make further arrangements with the vendor. Where by contrast a U.S. bank account number is such sensitive information most businesses do not want it stored electronically anywhere, much like a credit card number except with less security.

Companies should be liable for data losses, and that should give them ample incentive to have reasonable policies appropriate for what is being protected.