The building was already demolished in a "controlled" burn last Wednesday. Residents in the other apartments in the building weren't allowed to return to retrieve their belongings, also believed to be contaminated, though someone supposedly went through and retrieved a few irreplaceable items for them.

While I'm not a fan of what they've done, even I have to admit surprise and respect over it. You'd think someone would have tried it sooner, or that something more important than fast food would have been first. That being said, how many of us, if we were in marketing, wouldn't have tried This? As much as we may dislike the idea, it has proven itself effective, and it's now only a matter of time before someone in the department's of those mobile developers gets wise and pounces on it. Look at all of the attention BK has gained from this and tell me how it's not effective...

There's a few things I noticed: First, a (false) rumor, dating back to 2007, in which Fox News opened the door to generating false news, an argument that both bashes Fox News and gave legitimate argument to the idea that false news is protected under the First Amendment. (Source: Snopes.com: http://www.snopes.com/politics... ) Ever since then, the argument between which cable news channels, and which media outlets overall, were accurate, based on political bias, with Fox receiving a bunch of flack on both sides for being able to generate fake news. Meanwhile, it also gave some legitimacy to fake news sites which catered to their crowd.

Second, the Tea Party movement, documented in The Billionaire's Tea Party (Info: http://documentaryheaven.com/the-billionaires-tea-party/), which, while started as a grass-roots project, quickly was usurped by those with money. (NOT going to mention names...) Many of the "Fake News Sites" I've seen so far, when they list their origins, tie back to some smaller party - but many (coincidentally) share the same sources, and nearly the same articles, as their similar-leaning counterparts - many without providing an accurate original source or tying back to each other.

Third, and particularly damning, is the lack of acknowledgement and respect for human error that used to exist. Between the major sites reporting false news from either tabloid or fake news sites, and the typical errors humans can make in either fact-checking, editing or reporting, major media has discredited itself and shot itself in its own foot. The fact that social media has tied into this - both by allowing linked information from all sites and by giving an outlet to all people to complain as well as report - has fueled these notions and made it harder, when errors are made, to fix those errors. (It also discredit's Snopes' argument, when you think about it - it's faster to spread misinformation on Facebook, and harder to prove false afterward, with people clinging onto the false record.)

There's also stuff I see in the comments area, much of which is probably also true: the educated levels of people now compared to points in the past, the lack of proper editorial and fact-checking people working with journalists, the fact that "people only hear what they want to hear" and are stuck in "echo chambers," etc. It's a combination of all of these factors - and probably some we haven't discussed or thought of yet - that's causing the problem.

Professors, that's who...

You're right, the top moneymakers of a country can't "own" the majority of that country's citizens. They can, however, own every business they work at, everything they purchase, everything they watch, and because they hold the majority of the jobs, everything they do. They can even buy legislative support for their means (lobbying), and if someone did have the gusto to vote against their wishes, replace them with some other fool who'll honor their wishes. We're really close to a slave nation, and we're too happily stupid to care about it.

Your second point is almost exactly my point: just as there are other countries where they can pay lower wages than others, unless all countries developed a maximum cap, there will be plenty of other "capless" countries to continue to make their ungodly amounts of money. At minimum, you have to get all of the countries where the move would be worth it; after all, some places may be capless, but will tax and tariff those profits to a "capped" society.

12:1 may be okay for Switzerland, but in the U.S., you'd have a tough time swaying enough execs who'd want the risk of operating a large-scale company like Wal-mart, McDonald's or Comcast. In companies as large as those, the levels of management tends to be as high as the employees in ONE Wal-mart store, each with varying responsibilities based on region and infrastructure. 20:1 might be able to serve for some of those companies, but that'd be closer to the minimum. (I will note, however, that 12:1 would work on small-medium size companies, such as regional firms, companies with only a few factories/stores that specialize in one type of product/service, and most non-for-profits.)

You asked why you want to get other countries on board, forgetting the ugly truth that some people are just plain greedy and stingy, and have no qualms about uprooting someplace where the rules are less restrictive, as I explained before. As for "extreme capitalism," any system that allows loopholes for greed and ugliness to mix will fail, regardless of how a system works on paper. Capitalism's not the problem - the people abusing it on both sides are.

While I like the idea of a maximum cap, I see three huge problems. First, since the top moneymakers practically own everything from media to politicians (I'm just waiting for the "This candidate sponsored by Johnson & Johnson" signs), convincing them to do this will be next to impossible. Second, if they did somehow slip this through, most CEOs will leave, possibly taking their companies with them, to a cap-less place. (They've been doing it to factories where workers wanted rights and wages, why wouldn't they move out of country to protect themselves from caps?) Finally, 12:1 is way too low to set that ratio should it happen in some countries like the U.S., who may lose incentive to work towards becoming responsible for leading larger companies. (I could see 20:1, legitimately - a little too high in wage differential, but about the right spot where loss of incentive might be very minimal.)

In addition to maximum caps, continuous minimum wage increases - where the wage increases as the cost of living goes up so that people can continue to improve their lives without demanding that the government steps in to help them - and a fixed flat tax rate across all states and wages, we need to consider options in case of such a fallout on the major CEOs and brands leaving here. I'm against any idea of banning companies from outside the US from selling goods and services, even if they do move - some of the stuff may prove to be inaccessible to us any other way. However, I'm for encouragement and assistance in entrepreneurial growth, and think that building companies from the rubble of those companies that do leave is a great way to get back at those that do leave, and providing adequate competition is one of those necessary steps towards getting all companies to play equally.

One last thing that would need to be done is the encouragement of such caps in all countries with organized governments. As I stated before, any cap is going to spook some CEO's into taking their countries and running, and they're going to do what they can to scare other countries, particularly developing countries where they can get away with slave wages, into not doing this. The more countries that fall in line with some of these actions (if not all of them), the fewer places there will be for such cowards to run to. Making sure almost everyone can live without government dependence and afford to grow and achieve greater opportunities not only benefits the U.S., it benefits the world markets and economies.

First things first: I don't endorse the idea of gay marriage, NOT because I hate gays but because I believe the idea and sanctity of marriage in general is all but lost on everyone. I'm not against it, or against anyone being with the person they are most happy and in love with, I just think marriage, in general is a wasted joke that needs to be re-evaluated for people today. Second: I believe people can believe express whatever they feel like, and should be able to do so freely AS LONG AS they can take the consequences for their actions. Card has never struck me as otherwise in this. It does disappoint me that DC has taken this view and decided not to publish this story - I'm sure there has to be an illustrator who doesn't care about the controversy. Third: there are very few things that creators do that dissuade me from their work - most of the time I stop watching or listening to someone, it's not because of their opinion on something I disagree with, it's because whatever they're working on sucks on a major level. One thing I find funny, however, is that most people who voice these sorts of opinions I disagree with also don't focus enough on their work, which is part of the reason why said thing sucks. I've seen a few people buck this trend, and Card is one of them (in my opinion.) Finally: This is to the idiots on both sides: SHUT THE FUCK UP! Those of you preaching from a bible have no clue how the human body or mind work, and don't understand how you can't punish gays for being what they are, any more than you can punish a Jew or black person for being what they are. Likewise, those of the most vocal Gay supporters don't realize how many people you put on the opposite side of the fence, by shoving your ideas and beliefs into the faces of those who could otherwise care less. I'm not a person who picks sides, as I find weaknesses and idiocies on both sides of an argument. The only time I do pick a side is when someone shoves their belief down my throat- and usually it pushes me away from that view they want me to support, not for it. You idiots don't need gay marriage - marriage itself needs to die. Go ahead and disagree - I can't help it if all of you want to be wrong.