Shouldn't the study explain to /. readers what sex is rather than confusing them?

This is how Crony Capitalism works. As long as you pay either to candidate campaigns or in fines, there are favors to be had at the Washington D.C. Bazaar. Government only goes after the little people and companies because they don't pay up.

Nicely done on multiple counts. Welcome to /., home of the anecdote extrapolated globally.

Would the savings you anticipate by remaining paper based remain when: 1. The document has to be retrieved from the "warehouse" and a file cataloging system must be maintained to ensure its whereabouts remain known? 2. What are compliance costs/fines or other undesirable consequences if the document can't be retrieved? 3. The "warehouse" is destroyed by fire and the sole original goes up in smoke? 4. You have to maintain duplicates of paper originals in digital or analog form in geographically disparate locations to avoid scenarios 2 & 3? 5. What happens to the paper documents when their business usefulness or legal retention requirements are met? Are there costs for destruction/removal?

When do you plan to stop beating your wife/significant other/anime collection?

Heh, nice on topic nick. So you were the idiot weaving on the highway last night? Reductio ad absurdum

I didn't propose your straw man, you did.

Shooting police is a bad career move if you reside in a nation of laws. No doubt they'd stick to easier prey and send the crime rates back up to the days when the criminal justice system didn't understand recidivism and that career criminals commit most crime. In Mexico, they send the Army to quell violence.

I concur that having that rate of incarceration is not optimal. Any sane person desires less criminal activity. What's your suggestion for lowering it without having them commit new crimes?

No doubt Mexico achieves this admirable statistic by ensuring they house their criminals *outside* of prisons. These upstanding citizens use the freedom you've described to shoot police execution style, sometimes going north of the border for variety. What a country!

Indeed. Why can't we be more like Mexico in every way?

> I argue, however, against your, in my eyes, simplistic view of political economics. Straw man. I am painting in broad strokes geared to the majority audience, not those schooled in the minutiae of the "dismal science". :-) Slashdot is not the proper forum for an in depth treatise on the topic. It is, however, the optimal forum for sharpshooting. Per your example of Newtonian physics, there are exceptions and I'm not ignoring them. The crux of your argument is that tariffs are beneficial if correctly applied. It's a nice theory but the entities that apply them, governments, are historically poor predictors of economic behaviors, which makes "correct" application improbable. I note that you do not believe that the EU, with a combined economic output that exceeds the USA, is in need of protective tariffs. A snap cost/benefit analysis precludes further investment of resources in this thread. Thanks for your responses.