The same one was among them - some of us just have our eyes open wider than others.

BTW - I'm not against all forms of taxes.

Usage taxes are fine, though I have dreamed up a few ways around those they seem like a good thing. Tax the gas, tires, cars, bus tickets, etc.. To pay for roads. Every dime of that tax (and) toll money should go to maintaining, building, and upgrading our vehicle infrastructure. Since the historical pre-car users of roads were pedestrians, equestrians, and cyclist and those historical roads didn't require 100th the maintenance they can pay for bike lanes and sidewalks for the people and animals they displaced, though a tax on bicycles and parts for them, maybe shoes- not allowed to exceed the percentage placed on gas or cars - I would find acceptable if the same reasoning was used. Don't bike drive or walk? No road tax!

The people of your city want a stadium? Tax the event tickets. I'm not on-board with taxing hotel rooms to pay for stadiums. Your team sucks and so does Justin Bieber so you don't watch sporting/music events at your stadium? Don't pay for it.

I should not however have to pay taxes on my gasoline where the funds get diverted to studying the mating habits of feral Chihuahua's, nor should should taxes on my phone bill go to pay for a war with Mexico that was over more than 100 years ago.

It's both an aural warning and an indicator light. But they ignored about 70 aural stall warnings; they probably ignored the dual input warnings too. Remember, the pilots didn't know they were suffering an instrumentation failure due to iced up pitot tubes. All they knew was that they were getting inconsistent, contradictory, and in some cases impossible readings from their instruments. While trying to figure out what the hell was going on, they got the plane into a high angle of attack, low speed configuration which caused the stall warnings to stop (even though the plane was still in a stall) due to the computer being programed to discount aerodynamic data as unreliable in that state.

When the pilot then gave the plane the correct input (nose down), the plane picked up speed and the stall warnings began again. Completely the opposite of what's actually going on, and probably confused the hell out of the pilots. At that point they probably guessed they were experiencing an electronic/computer problem, and probably began disregarding all the alarms they were hearing.

It's tempting to blame the accident on how easy it is to miss the "dual input" warning during a confusing and dangerous situation where all sorts of warnings are going off, and say that a force-feedback system like Boeing uses is superior. But with Boeing's system, one pilot slumped over or deliberately pushing his control column to crash the plane would hinder the other pilot from controlling the aircraft, possibly causing an accident. With Airbus' system, the conscious pilot just pushes a button and he has complete control. It's not that one method is better than the others, they're just different, and vulnerable to different failure modes. AF447 just happened to hit upon a failure mode of the Airbus system.

It's also worth pointing out that the other two major crashes caused by disorientation following instrument failure were 757s. So while the dual inputs probably added to the confusion, it's still highly likely AF447 would have crashed anyway even without the dual input problem. The overwhelming cause of the accident was spatial disorientation coupled with reluctance to believe the instruments after a systemic failure (the airspeed inputs feed into multiple other systems that update the pilots on the state of the plane).

Needless to say, the actual article left me disappointed.

As I comment this is at a -1.

I would say not wanting to pay someone to violate your rights while monitoring and punishing your activities is a perfectly reasonable answer.

and it will only have been there once.....

I live close enough to the Charleston in TN that I have gotten used to checking whenever the word comes up without more info.
You, yourself admitted that at least one item on Kr1ll1n (579971)'s list was reasonable.
Other people are even now pointing out that what you claim was obvious is not obvious.
I supect you'll be surprised how many people who don't live in the US also don't find ANYTHING about which Charlston is largest obvious, and in fact you'll probably hear from people who only know of a handfull of the very largest cities in the US and have never heard of ANY Charleston.
Your claim that the mention of the general US Drug Enforcement Administration appearing in the summary invalidates all non-us locations is itself wrong (The US siezes assets in cases of INTERNATIONAL drug trafficing, so the summary is just assuming something is 'obvious' too - you've got a whole lot of "my side gets to declare EVERYTHING is obvious to win our Internet argument" going there.

Yet despite those issues, you're still busting someone's chops. You've jumped on somebody who 'obviously' took at least two minutes doing some research, to get the list you are declaring irrelevant. You see with your own eyes a piece of research that I feel confident took at least two minutes and your first nit-picking, obsessive compulsive act is to criticise the poster for not taking two minutes to research something. That's like me reading your post and then claiming you are 'obviously' a secret lifetime South Carolinian.
          I have never met you before, but my first impression is you are the sort of pedantic fool who trys to bully people at near random to bolster his flagging self esteem, falls back on a claim of Aspergers when called on it, and you have the sort of underlying, monumental anger-management issues that make you an impossibly annoying jerk for everyone who has to deal with you day to day. In fact, that's "Obvious!".

Lots of big state mods today.

How can I troll them? I know! Marxism sucks because eventually you run out of other peoples money and/or labor!

you can't piss on somebody's leg by making your own money system

Why not? This isn't the first time, it's happened many times before, arguably trading gold for the first time was doing exactly that. Then making notes backed by gold was doing it again, then making currency backed by nothing was doing it one more time. I would argue Nintendo Points are their own form of currency - granted a highly regulated one - that Nintendo created. I would totally do a small amount of work for some Nintendo points to buy new games with - that would be trading my labor for their currency. The fact that currency can only then be used for purchasing games is the only reason I would limit my amount of work for the points. Were I able to pay rent, buy a car, and buy groceries with Nintendo points I might just work full, but not likely as I can only surrender those points to Nintendo. If however I could trade those points with someone else - what do you know - a new form of currency meant to piss on the leg of the government and Sony.

Buyer beware - the only difference between US money and Bitcoin is who's in charge of it's quantity. I don't trust either.

People do bargain directly with each other now. The government isn't involved in that.
See above.

Yes, we get that Bitcoin is potentially useful for tax evasion. Can you spell out why that is socially desirable?

Can you spell out why every transaction a person is involved in should be taxed? Instead of answering your question about why it is socially desirable I'm going to ask my own question. Is it socially desirable for me stand around in Kentucky Fried chicken, seizing a single piece of chicken from every order to feed some random individual outside on the street? What if I told you that random individual picked up trash on the highway - it doesn't matter if you litter or not.

If you can tell me why that is socially desirable, then you will have answered your own question.

As with everything else there's a form for that! We should charge the feds for doing paperwork for them all the damned time.

Also, they're serious about it even ignoring the face value of legal US tender to prosecute.

Does it really matter how much income those companies have if you get the same salary you would have in an open source development company?

Why is this statement modded down? It's a perfectly legitimate assessment of the flow of money and labor. If people were allowed to trade their own labor or goods without having to invoke the mandatory use of Federal Reserve notes/bits it would be much more difficult for the USA's Federal Government to put a toll on that transaction. Indeed Bitcoin is a competing currency that allows people to bargain directly with one another which the Federal Government would interpret as competition - in much the same way Taxi unions in Houston declared bicycle rickshaws as "stealing" from them and had the rickshaws regulated out of existence. The US Government - unlike the Taxi Union - sees ALL business transactions done without them as competition and since they have direct law making power will address such things directly.

I had a look at how YouGov works (based on Wikipedia at least) they work with panels with as much diversity as possible, they are active in the US since 2007, so I guess a 1000 might be OK. I thought it was some online site where people vote on their own initiative, it isn't.

Outside the little bubble of Silicon Valley, it's a lot worse if you're young than if you're old.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2013/07/jobless-rate-for-poor-black-te.html