I agree with the points that she makes.

However 2 things

1st.
Under current conditions If you call IRS for a question and they provide an incorrect solution - you are still on the hook.


2nd.
This is looking like the fox watching the hen house.


Best solution is to make the tax code streamline simplified, cut out all the special interest group set asides.

I mean what I said. Trump (and his subordinates at his direction) made up new regulations, New laws, New restrictions, New limits, new procedures, and new rules that combined made it not just harder but often impossible for people who, before Trump under any administration would have been quickly granted asylum in accordance with the law. He also slowed the process for legally applying, limited the number allowed to apply in a way never done before, and created new systems where instead of waiting in the country they had to wait in another country with no services in crime ridden refugee camps if they're lucky, sometimes sent south of Mexico, many instructed to go home and wait, homes they fled under direct and credible threats of death or worse....many after having their children taken.

Trump did not simply "enforce current laws". He changed them, misinterpreted them, ignored them repeatedly and flagrantly, then enforced those he liked. Consistently the intent was to minimize any immigration as much as possible from countries that aren't predominantly white. Not once was the intent to streamline the system so it would improve, every step was designed to slow the process and deny entry to as many people as possible, even those with legitimate life or death reasons for asylum. He even changed those rules to exclude narco terrorism death threats to be a reason for asylum, not because they aren't valid but because there are too many.

When you personally create the "law" you're enforcing by (often illegally) changing the rules and established interpretation of long standing law and policy to make following the law near impossible and often deadly, you don't get credit as if that's being a humanitarian just enforcing the law. Duh.

Edit: BTW Mr law and order, Trump never followed the law in his business dealings nor with his taxes or his loans (hyperexagerated his property values on loan documents, while minimizing their value on tax forms). His best excuse? His claim that he's not a real businessman and didn't even bother to read the loan and tax documents he swore were correct because he had no idea if they were.....His claim that everyone does that, everyone is a tax cheater and bank fraud perpetrator, is asinine.....but exposes him as the criminal fraud we all know he is, not a man who respects the law.

I thought I saw a Phalanx! Lethal R2-D2 for the win!
lol

So, I did a little reading; the Mark 38 has been through several upgrades---from the original 25 mm Bushmaster mount with no weather protection (on a naval ship? really?)---to the streamlined "big brother" mount we see now and 30 mm shells (sudden thought; is there ammunition interchangeability with the A-10's gun and if not; why not? lol)

There is, in fact, a deliberate "off-set" mode now introduced for firing warning shots---I guess you designate the target and set "off-set" so that you put shots across the bow/spray them with water? To avoid macerating a mere obvious idiot as opposed to someone who actually means you harm? Although there's no way to tell if that's what's going on here for sure...

Cover the entire border with more of these cameras combined with drones then hire more border patrol agents or use the national guard. Streamline processing of detainees and improve handling facilities. Would work far better than a wall at a fraction of the cost.

I understand what you are saying I would say though that in the past, a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away- media in this country was a bit more "journalistic". Able to take multiple views and be the devil's advocate, if need be. Now everything is streamlined and slimmed down with an agenda set by their corporate sponsors and shareholders. It wasn't ALWAYS like this in the very specific way that it is now.

I think I abstracted my point, sure - Trump would be great for capitalism and business and I do understand why many asshats think "in the box" for that sort of utopian status quo bullshit. Unfortunately, we're no longer in the 50's & 60's... we have MANY issues that demand progressive answers.

Welp, my friends - soon we might just have to join a Snorkel Colony. Thanks Trump, alt-right-wingers & capitalism! I always wanted to go back to my roots in the ocean!

I get it, hating on the game is super popular right now. I'm no fanboi, I certainly didn't pre-order the game (I only pre-order from a select few developers, those I know will put out great products, like CD Project Red). I'm quite enjoying the game. It's not the type of game you play on rails or with a strong linear narrative or that holds your hand through the experience. I'm on PC and have had not a single issue or crash. I have to put graphics at medium when they should be maxed out, but that shows the age of the engine and that it isn't as streamlined or polished as it could be.

Also the game 'does' have a story, it's just rather basic and while I'm not sure the game is worth $60 (I got it for $45 and think it's worth that) I look forward to future content and the fact that they've said 'no paid DLC' makes me happy as well.

When people ask me if I recommend the game, I tell them first that it's worth waiting for a price drop or the issues with AMD and top-end nVidia to be worked out. I use the analogy that it's like Early Access Starbound. Fun, with an open universe to explore, some interesting races and things to find and crafting but not a whole lot going on in it or directed content to experience. That's No Man's Sky, at $20-30 it's a great Early Access title. I'm glad that it sold very well as that will fund future development and hopefully we'll see new content and fan requested stuff soon.

And for the record I've seen equal numbers awesome wildlife as I've seen crazy shit like in this video lol. The craziest was on this cold, radiated world that was none-the-less flush with exotic life. There were these 1m tall blobs of jelly with elephant ears and like mice faces that bounced around like a bouncy ball all over the place. Hilarious!

Lambast it all you want but it's clearly still popular. Mid-day on a wednesday and it's #3 on steam with 70k users atm. And it's not like it wasn't super easy to find out what the gameplay was like in those 3 days it was on PS4 before PC. So anyone who still bought and is bitching about it is being hypocritical.

Idk man. I'm out looking in too, but my list of problems guns are a good solution for stops pretty short after "killing something you want dead". I mean, cars and knives can do that pretty good too, but I've not seen many getting to work or chopping vegetables with their automatic. Well, unless its an automatic transmission car, which I gather are quite popular state side. Gun, automatic gun I meant. Also I guess technically the vegetable chopping thing is _possible_ with a firearm. I digress.

When used as self defence I think they might sometimes have uses if you are prepared and have it ready. My problem is that the only person who knows for sure that they are going to be in a gun point robbery/rape/[insert crime] situation on any given day is the guy doing the robbing/raping/[insert crime]ing. I mean, is the aim to get the point where every man woman and child is so strapped to the nines that mutually assured destruction is guaranteed? Excuse me from taking it the logical extreme, but I don't think it's entirely fallacious.

They are fun? I've shot some guns. It was fun. I didn't need to own them mind. Hunting aint for me, but evidently some people enjoy it...but I guess I'm not sure how strident I would be in defence of my hobby if it involved the use of a machine that has been streamlined by war to be the most efficient man-portable tool for taking life that we can conceive.

So yeah, I certainly think your right that is more to gun violence than gun ownership. Clearly there are countries with relatively high levels of gun ownership with comparatively little gun violence. (altho the US still has almost twice as many guns per person than the next nearest...so yah). I just struggle to understand exactly what reason there is for having quite so many of them given that everybody else seems to be doing mostly ok without them. What exactly are these problems the Americans should be using their guns as a solution for? Can knives and cars, which according to gun advocates are at least as lethal, perhaps be leveraged in creative ways to be the solution to the problems for which apparently only guns can currently solve?

So...criticize the agency for improving success rates, streamlining and reducing budgets, introducing private industry to reduce costs and meeting agressive timelines. Good thinking budget minded politician!

Earth sciences budget increased 41%? What percentage of the total budget is it now? Is it now larger than the money allocated for space exploration or is it still a small percentage of the total NASA pie? Not a misleading chart at all. Of course, charts is book learnin' and learnin' is what them elitist socialist do!

Go home to Canada senator, you're a tool.

FYI I was thinking $1500/month to 3000$/month. Which would make 75 to 150$/day.

Its nice to have a civil discourse with you.


Other than the clarification above I AGREE WITH ALL THE BENEFITS YOU MENTION.


All I am saying is it the responsibility of the employer to pay for this benefit?


Should the young couple or single woman wait till they can afford such time off? With all the family planning available should the couple or single woman take some responsibility.


According to report California and few other states have placed a tax of sorts to spread this cost over all its citizens. I do not see an issue with this as long all are taxed equal.

-----------------------------------------------------
My reform plan

We do need welfare and social security reform ( which will have to happen) it should be 1 in the same. Everyone over 25 should be able to take 10 years of government paid time off (PTO).

All get 10 years, All pay a tax, call it what you want. But when it is used up then that's it. no more government cheese.

If I am 25 and going to school I should be able to collect a year or two OF government PTO ( paid time off). Your choice.

If I have a baby and want to take 3 months off then I will have 9 years 9 months left for retirement.

If I turn 40 and find myself lost in life and just want to check out of society and go back to school or travel the world for 2 years then I would have 8 years left.

I don't care what you spend you government check on. Schooling, traveling, hookers, drugs. Its you life.

When I turn 65 and think I will still live another 20 I better not retire with my remaining PTO time.

Its your life use it when you need it.


This would stop all the complaining towards welfare people. Also it will keep people from retiring early and sucking tax dollars for years to come. It would naturally provide an incentive to work and to stay working.

There would be no unemployment benefits. Other programs eliminated and rolled into this program. It would streamline the government. Reduce government costs create a a level playing field for citizens. Your PTO pay should be based on you current skill level with minimums and caps.


Granted this is a pie in the sky ideal world thought. But it does have some merit.

Have a good day.

Prefabricated construction has a long history both in China and the west, and to some degree almost every modern building uses the technique. There is a video on here about the construction of the Empire State building for instance, and the WTC twin towers were quite prefabricated too. (*related: Steel erecting on the Empire State Building -1930s, Building the World Trade Center Towers 720p HD)

It was particularly popular in ancient Rome, and combined with the use of cranes and concrete their construction times weren't that different to the modern era (actually sometimes faster, I think the planning process must have been more streamlined).

The standardised look of ancient Chinese buildings is for the same reason, the parts were standardised to make prefabrication easier, certainly by the Ming dynasty if not earlier - see http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/705 for instance.

This particular building just does a particularly good job of it.

Net neutrality is not bureaucracy, any more than "not allowing organised crime to extort people" is.

Obamacare obviously has some significant overhead to it, but as the system beds in, people will streamline it and make it more efficient.

The majority of the world has found that some bureaucracy is a reasonable price to pay for the benefits of socialised medicine. It's never perfect. The question is whether you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

No-one is arguing for "large, unwieldy debt-ridden monstrosities", if that is happening, then measures should be put in place to deal with that. But in a country of 320 million people, some bureaucracy is inevitable.

The way it's designed seems like it's intended for use on cell phones and tablets, and not really a computer.

The entire page is streamlined in a single column where you have the video information / comments / permalinks all in the same area with no differentiation.

The way you have it now where everything is noticeably different based on colours has completely fallen by the wayside, and everything is just kinda lumped in together on the same crummy grey(dark mode) background.

The permalinks section needs to be off to the side more, and maybe put in with a different colour? Otherwise it just seems like you've slapped everything on a page. May not hurt to put them as smaller and off to the side aswell.

It's wind resistance, it makes a massive difference. When they're really far apart the rear driver is just driving better and shaving time off the lead, so he catches up, but once there it's down to drafting to get the little burst of speed to get alongside. The carts are probably approximately equal in power, so he reaches level from the draft position easily enough, but can't keep the momentum to get a lead with the new air resistance on him, just draw level. So they're level, but obviously there's only one sweet racing line to take to keep your speed up and lap time down. You can either pass on the outside (in which case you have to go faster into the turn to stay ahead) or the inside (in which case you have to turn sharper at speed to stay ahead) both of which are risky, or you can return safely to the racing line - i.e. not by swerving into him, but by conceding the lead to him and dropping in behind him. If you do that, you take less risk and give yourself the chance to try again because you're in draft position again. He needs to stay as close as he can and find the right place to overtake so that his superior driving can give him the lead into the racing line of the next corner, at which point he gets right of way and the position advantage the lead gives. Sometimes that's not even possible and lead to what some would call boring races (Monaco Grand Prix) where the leader is decided on the first corner and doesn't change unless they crash out.

I'll draw two parallels:
1. DRS in F1 racing, where a tiny part of the tail opens up for a small part of the track, which drastically increases speed and allows for more interesting races because it almost ensures overtaking. You can also see the same application of the racing line and people conceding position or trying to take different lines and spinning out or locking up.
2. In cycling, the commonly quoted figure is that you can save 40% of your energy by drafting behind a leading cyclist. The Tour de France and every other cycling road race is defined by drafting, cos no lone cyclist would ever be able to keep pace with the peloton which 'cycles' riders in and out of the wind-protected bunch throughout a day. This should convince you more as cyclists are not streamlined objects but still offer significant gains. Go and watch a cycling sprint finish - it's a case of whoever gets behind the fastest guy wins by conserving energy in his wake until it's time to burst out alongside and pass.

It could be, although it's exceedingly difficult to find any meaningful numbers for distances that aren't terribly vague, and what you do find is almost always for something other than karts (semis, F1 racecars and bikes).

I still think that the open, small, only semi-streamlined form of the karts would tend to make the effective distance less than what we saw in most of this video. The lower speeds than F1 cars would tend to improve the slingshot tactic, since the effect of wind resistance increases with the cube of velocity. Which again, doesn't seem to explain the drastic slowdowns when they're not at top speed anyway.

You misunderstand. Family court can't vacate state fees levied because of ILLEGALLY IGNORING family matters (child support). That's criminal. (and please don't be silly and say 'he didn't illegally ignore anything', because as far as the state is concerned he did until he proves he did not IN COURT, where the claim can be scrutinized and verified)
Courts have the authority and processes they do because intelligent, thoughtful people designed an imperfect system to do the best we could at serving justice. Because it is now so overworked, (and in this case abused by numerous people perpetrating frauds) it no longer works as designed...not because those in it are creating their own busy work, but because there is far too much actual work. (agreed, that's a good reason to streamline any process that could be streamlined)
Um...I don't want to sit in front of a robotic judge, thank you very much.
Um...courts ARE higher and more enlightened, due to their authority granted by society and their experience dealing with it.
Often courts do work properly. This one did, it vacated his child support order as soon as he proved he was never notified. Because you don't understand the full process does not mean it's poorly designed.
Like I said, I'm glad I'm not as cynical as you....you can deny it, but you are incredibly cynical about those working in the courts. I have known some, and they do not resemble your remarks in the least. They joined the law to help people, not to become a 9-5 drone lapping up the legal honey.