Actually, the *entire* rail thing is a fucking joke. It's ridiculously expensive and isn't all that fast. It does have to, you know, make plenty of stops. It's essentially more corporate welfare for specific companies. Americans like to talk about "high speed bullet trains", because it makes them feel all sophisticated and European, but they have no fucking clue what's really supposedly so great about it.
Our *current* rail system does suck, which is the entire point of building a new high-speed rail system. We like to talk about it because if it actually ever happens, it will be better than flying for a lot of domestic travel: more legroom, power outlets, not having to show up 2 hours before departure, the ability to use mobile data plans for the majority of the trip, etc.
Google Wave isn't dead
It's pining for the fjords.
I logged back on to Facebook and Zuckerberg had killed my farmer and was raping my livestock
probably in the year
and notified my extended family of several cute things the kids said.
I'm pretty sure that falls into the "what I had for breakfast" category...
spoiling the ship for tuppence of tar short sightedness
Are you some sort of bot that just randomly puts words together?
I hate to resort to calling the EPA malicious, because I want to believe that they think that what they are doing is right, but, seriously, that's the only alternative. They certainly aren't trying to _actually_ clean up the air, since worse offenders than the USA already exist and won't be affected by this law at all.
Come the fuck on. You cannot honestly believe that the US government, which depends on tax revenue from American businesses and their employees, would intentionally handicap said businesses? To what end? Stop trying to turn a legitimate difference of opinion into some sort of battle between good and evil.
As far as the "worse offenders" go, the EPA doesn't exactly have jurisdiction over other countries, so it's a moot point. You're presenting an imaginary alternative -- that the EPA could somehow regulate greenhouse gases in China, India, etc. -- as some sort of evidence that this is only intended to bankrupt the EPA's revenue stream? Get a grip.
I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it.