|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 27 2014 01:39 Simberto wrote: I don't get it. Company owes taxes, government grabs stuff, stuff gets auctioned to pay taxes. How is that news?
I think the auction part is just a political riposte for the strip club mocking. I think the story is that he cut taxes and revenue went down (Shocker?! [coincidentally, even more than the budget shortfall is]).
|
On September 27 2014 01:47 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Doubt it will get much attention given the nature of the US media to start focusing on entertainment scandals etc. when such news ins revealed.
because the media is run by the same people obviously
edit: oh, by the way I should mention that I take back my promise in that other thread to read paul krugman, I've been reading his op eds and he's either totally corrupt or an incredibly stupid person. probably both.
|
On September 27 2014 02:21 bookwyrm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2014 01:47 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Doubt it will get much attention given the nature of the US media to start focusing on entertainment scandals etc. when such news ins revealed. edit: oh, by the way I should mention that I take back my promise in that other thread to read paul krugman, I've been reading his op eds and he's either totally corrupt or an incredibly stupid person. probably both. Keep telling yourself that.
|
This paragraph, for instance, is one of the most terrifying things I have ever read:
"Why does all of this matter? One answer is that central bankers need to stop talking about “exit strategies.” Easy money should, and probably will, be with us for a very long time. This, in turn, means we can forget all those scare stories about government debt, which run along the lines of “It may not be a problem now, but just wait until interest rates rise.”
don't worry guys, we can just solve all our problems by debasing the currency. Yeah ok keep telling yourself that, Caesar
|
On September 27 2014 01:35 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Kansas' budget woes are so dire that the state government has resorted to selling off furry handcuffs and vibrators seized by its revenue department.
The Topeka Capital-Journal first reported on the sale Wednesday, explaining that the new bounty, numbering in the thousands of items, resulted from a five-shop, four-city raid on a company that owed more than $163,000 in state taxes.
Kansas negotiated with the owner, returning the merchandise under the condition that he auction off the toys and use the money towards paying back the state.
Democrats noted the irony of the sale, given that Republicans allied with Gov. Sam Brownback (R) had criticized Brownback's Democratic challenger Paul Davis for being at a strip club during a drug raid in 1998.
“Brownback is so desperate to fill the massive hole in the state budget caused by his reckless income tax cuts that the state of Kansas is now in the porn business,” state Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley (D) said in a statement. “This is the same governor whose supporters spent this past week attacking his opponent for a strip club incident.”
Kansas is expected to face a $238 million budget shortfall by the summer of 2016. Brownback remains supportive of the income tax cuts passed into law in 2012, despite the fact that the state brought in $282 million less in personal income tax revenue than it expected in fiscal 2014. Source
Where are they selling them? I definitely want a pair of fuzzy cuffs purchased from the Great State of Kansas.
|
FRESNO, Calif. (AP) — California farmers who spray a widely used insecticide on some of the state's most abundant crops may soon have to overcome the nation's steepest restrictions or find another pest killer, officials said Thursday.
Regulators are proposing heavy restrictions — but not an all-out ban — on chlorpyrifos, used to treat crops like grapes and almonds. The pesticide, in use since 1965, has sickened dozens of farmworkers in recent years. Traces have been found in waterways, threatening fish, and regulators say overuse could make targeted insects immune to the pesticide.
"We've come up with a clear idea of when it's really needed and what are the alternatives," said Brian Leahy, director of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. "We want to preserve this tool for when you really need it."
But he expects pushback from across California's agricultural industry, which leads the nation in production.
Joel Nelson, president of the California Citrus Mutual, said that because somebody misused the pesticide, everybody shouldn't be punished with restrictions. Nelson said regulators in Sacramento want to apply a "broad-brush approach," which isn't right. Alternatives pesticides exist, but he said they're not as effective and are more expensive.
"What's a producer to do, let his cotton production be destroyed by a pest, or should they spray it?" Nelson said.
The pesticide is sprayed on 60 different crops, which also include alfalfa, walnuts, oranges and cotton. Up to 2 million pounds each year are sprayed in California.
Source
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On September 27 2014 01:07 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 21:29 oneofthem wrote: this 'distinction' is just a part of a clusterfuck of random interactions between an ancient prejudice and some newfangled humanism, you are better off just ditching the prejudice. why not We can also all gouge our eyes out, then no one will see race any more, hurray! As with all ideologies religious or not, they often come with good things and bad things. Religion plays an important positive part in many people's lives, just because some people make a caricature of it and twist it doesn't mean you should ditch the whole thing. what? was talking about ditching the prejudice. i dont rly care about the religiosity part.
|
On September 27 2014 04:26 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2014 01:07 Nyxisto wrote:On September 26 2014 21:29 oneofthem wrote: this 'distinction' is just a part of a clusterfuck of random interactions between an ancient prejudice and some newfangled humanism, you are better off just ditching the prejudice. why not We can also all gouge our eyes out, then no one will see race any more, hurray! As with all ideologies religious or not, they often come with good things and bad things. Religion plays an important positive part in many people's lives, just because some people make a caricature of it and twist it doesn't mean you should ditch the whole thing. what? what part don't you understand?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i said the distinction is something invented to accommodate a clearly ancient and broader than any particular religion prejudice, alongside the humanism found in new testament jesus teachings etc. but why have this deal at all, just ditch the prejudice against gays. it's not like your argument gets any better traction if you are defending 'hate the faggy actions' instead of hating fags.
as far as religion is concerned my position is that it is not justifiable unless in very narrow situations. sincere religious belief is simply wrong, in the error theory style. but this is neither here nor there.
|
Oh I thought you were talking about ditching religion as a whole. Regarding the gay hate, it has already been ditched by a majority of Christians. I don't know why all the crazy people have moved to the Southern parts of the United States.
|
|
On September 27 2014 04:34 Nyxisto wrote: Oh I thought you were talking about ditching religion as a whole. Regarding the gay hate, it has already been ditched by a majority of Christians. I don't know why all the crazy people have moved to the Southern parts of the United States.
We keep them quarantined there. Have for a really long time, really. There was a while where we didn't let them vote, in the late 1860s, and when we gave them back the vote, suddenly Jim Crow laws. Oh well.
|
On September 27 2014 01:39 Simberto wrote: I don't get it. Company owes taxes, government grabs stuff, stuff gets auctioned to pay taxes. How is that news? It's not. It's politics disguised as news. You're supposed to get a good laugh out of it and vote for the other guy.
|
On September 27 2014 04:57 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2014 01:39 Simberto wrote: I don't get it. Company owes taxes, government grabs stuff, stuff gets auctioned to pay taxes. How is that news? It's not. It's politics disguised as news. You're supposed to get a good laugh out of it and vote for the other guy. its news because brownback's cut all taxes policy didnt magically lead to either faster growth or higher employment. Which no one has ever predicted would happen because as everyone knows tax cuts are always expansionary.
|
I was just curious : Do the US medias speak at all of Canada or only rarely?
It seems to me, in Canada, our newspapers always talk about the US ^^ Just wondering if it was mutual
|
Canada is submerged in American Culture.
|
On September 27 2014 06:56 XenOmega wrote: I was just curious : Do the US medias speak at all of Canada or only rarely?
It seems to me, in Canada, our newspapers always talk about the US ^^ Just wondering if it was mutual
They had fun with Rob Ford and there's Hockey, but that's about it for reportage on Canada.
|
The US media has also started pointing at Canada whenever Justin Bieber messes up. Which is starting to become a fairly regular thing.
|
Also the decline of the natural habitat of the wolverine. It's all in the papers.
|
If a pair of new government forecasts prove true, Washington and Colorado would see more than $800 million in extra revenue over the next few years thanks to marijuana sales. At the least.
The estimates, both released in recent days, differ greatly in what they predict and over what time period. But together they show that the plant, now legal to purchase in both states, could generate at least $811.2 million for the trailblazing states before 2020. Washington can expect $637 million by 2019, while Colorado can expect $174.5 million through the fiscal year that ends in 2017, according to state estimates.
Such estimates are, of course, difficult to make as there is no precedence for what is being forecast: Marijuana for recreational use has never before been sold legally. The Washington’s forecast, released last Thursday by the state’s Economic and Revenue Forecast Council, was the state’s first prediction to be based on actual sales, which began in July. In Colorado, sales began in January, so the state’s Legislative Council had slightly more data to work with for its latest estimate, released Tuesday.
The new Washington forecast through 2019 is a slight upward revision from the February and June forecasts, thanks in part to sales beginning sooner than forecasters predicted, raising near-term estimates. Just under 30 percent of the total expected revenues will go to the state’s general fund, while the remaining portion has been been flagged for specific uses by law. As a result, lawmakers will have an extra $186 million to manage as they please.
Source
|
|
|
|