Outrider

It was just a little joke based on that seems to be your answer for most things I actually like you as a poster and it was meant to be a friendly jab. Sorry if you didn't take it that way and also gor getting us off topic. Tell you what from now on when somebody posts something stupid I'll say stop being a Lord Antares and I doubt anybody will have to explain how thats insulting to you. Of course I won't do that. When you make a comparison it unavoidably goes both ways. When someone is being stubborn or deliberately obtuse and you call them mentally disabled you imply that those with disabilities choose to be that way. Thats one heres another. There are people who discriminate harshly towards the mentally disabled rising to the level of persecution in some cases. When you call a bad person retarded you reinforce notions that mentally disabled persons are bad. Or you could just stop because they asked you too. I have no idea why thats so hard maybe you could explain that to me.

I agree with just about everything you have said in this thread. I'm not ignoring you and if you had "inner peace" like me it wouldn't bother you if I was. What part of please do not use the word do you not understand?

It would go alot better if you all would read the links. This one gives a list of over 200 organizations that are calling for an all out ban on the word. http://www.r-word.org/r-word-supporting-organizations.aspx Any and all uses of the word are deemed offensive by me and many millions more.

What if I said locally for me the climate hasn't changed all that much in the last 50 years ergo climate change isn't a real thing. Would you point me to the experts? Here is a list of the organizations who work with and for the intellectually disabled and support discontinuing use of the word. http://www.r-word.org/r-word-supporting-organizations.aspx Supporting Organizations Thats just part of the list but please don't take my word for it just click the link. Why isn't it enough that the experts say it is unacceptable? L.A. the answer to your last question is here. http://www.r-word.org/ I can only show you the water I can't make you drink it. For me I don't really use that word either. What is so wrong with saying what we really mean? If somebody is being stubborn or deliberately obtuse why not call them that? Or instead you can hold up a picture of a drooling child on short school bus and say thats you. How long will it be before we just change our behaviour because a large segment says it's offensive instead of digging our heels in?

And parody is usually an insult. If you are saying there was no other way to make your point I will say ok. I won't believe you but I will say ok. By your own admission the word and all related words should be abandoned. I believe there are words for which there is no context that makes it ok. I believe this is one of those words. iNow it was just a mistake and you make very few and I have tremendous respect for you but if you can't admit it. I will lose some of that respect.

Oh dear I have neen confused about the very nature of the problem for a numberof years. Thank you both for the education. About the useless part. If 1 and 0.999... are the same thing what would you need 0.999... for?

For the crowd that believes 0.999 = 1. Does this mean 0.999 is useless? And. Does .0991 also equal 1? This is not an argument I'm just curious. I have no idea who is right and I'm ok with that.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/why-haven-t-we-had-alien-contact-blame-icy-ocean-worlds Just an interesting (to me) thought.

Is an obsolete medical term. https://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/intellectual-disability-mental-retardation As such it troubles me to see several members use it in insulting ways. Please do not do this! http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/110774-harvey-weinstein/?page=6 DrP said You had plenty of synonyms. Why did you go with the most offensive term. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/110774-harvey-weinstein/?page=7 iNow said I know you were mocking others and you would never intentionally hurt defenseless innocents. But cause pain you almost certainly did. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/110513-breaking-the-rules-heavy-chemical-elements-alter-theory-of-quantum-mechanics/?page=3 Dubbelosix said Not to speak to much for Phi for All here but I think the use of the word was as much of a problem as the insult was. IMO it was. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4896444

I got a 502 error and everything is real slow again. 20 to 30 second load times.

But I really don't think its that easy while gun control certainly will save some lives we also need to change our culture. http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-that-have-produced-the-most-serial-killers.html Britan is #2 with 145. Why do we here in the U.S. lead the world in so many violent ways? I think its because we worship violence. Why do I need a video game were I can be an assassin for hire? I just see the stockpiling of weapons as a symptom of a larger problem.

Well yeah I don't "know" I live on a rocky ball flying through outer space but I have the same amount of confidence as I do that O.J. killed Nichole out of jealousy. We may err in our assignment of motive fairly often but we do know why people kill. It's hard for me and you to fathom someone taking a life to make theirs better but we know people do it all the time. As for the second part Financial Crimes Enforcement Network was looking at him but not for the reasons you stated. He was smart enough to buy his guns at different places. A national registry could help with that.

I was having the same problems as the rest but everything seems to be ok now. Thank you!

I own 2 rifles and a handgun. The rifles are bolt action which means their not semi automatic and used for hunting not that I ever go these days. The handgun is for defense of me and my family. Because I live in a rural area the last time I called the police it took them over 30 minutes to arrive. I am not a member of the NRA because I do support a waiting period which I think would help curb crimes of passion. I also am in favor of background checks and smaller magazines and even more important required training which would reduce accidents. The only one of those measures that would have helped in this case is smaller magazines. Gin control is important but understanding and changing our culture are even more important. Which killers? This fairly long article delves in to the motives of some of the school shooters. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence It also deals with Mark Granovetter's model of thresholds. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Granovetter If instead you were referring to all the killers I would like to see a citation.

I remember the Shoemaker-Levy event well. It was very exciting. The predictions started coming in months before the event and as the date approached it was discovered that the impact zone would be turning away from us as the comet collided. Many worried we would miss it but instead we all got a fine show. I never will forget seeing it live on tv. But to answer your question we already know of a asteroid or comet that did explode. The impact happened in 1908 and Russia sent an expedition to the very remote area in 1921.

But it was you who used groceries as an example of why you think sales tax is regressive. Yes I am well aware of Alabama's social and economic problems. Many of these policies (see "right to work state") were put in place when the democrats had a stranglehold here but now that the republicans are mostly in control things are really um pretty much the same.

You are right and I was wrong thanks for clearing up my misconception. There is a long running debate that capital gains tax does or does not stimulate investment but if it works at all it dosent work in the manner I described.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_evasion_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Papers

Capital gains is more of a corporate tax IMO when set to high it tempts "cooking the books" and when set to low (along with decreasing revenue) dosent encourage growth. When set at a fair amount companies can go out and buy new equipment and invest in new ideas thus lowering their profit and paying less taxes. Who first thought it was a good idea to tax milk and bread anyway? Taxes on those sorts of items should be done away with I hope we can at least agree on that. How bout this. I can afford a 1,000 dollar tv and I pay 10% tax on it. You can afford a 2,000 tv so you pay 12% and so on. I think some kind of system like that would be much more fair than what we have now. https://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/11/tax-refund-fraud-to-hit-21-billion-and-theres-little-the-irs-can-do.html 2015 article We already talked a little about legal tax shelters. And I'm not saying nobody will find a way to cheat a sales tax system but I do think it will be easier to control. Just to be clear I am not asking that we gut the income tax system today but I would like to a fair national luxury tax implemented and start moving more towards that sort of system. I agree with all of that. The people who cry that we are going to be a socialist country don't understand we already are more than we are not. How so? The more I can save the less I might be a burden on you in the long run. Tax cuts never stimulate in the short run but give them a chance, especially for the middle class, over time they will have more money to invest and more set back for catastrophic illness or accident. Well it dosent have to be but I think most of the time it turns out that way. It turns out that most people who can afford an army of accountants to constantly come up with new and creative ways to avoid taxes have just such an army.

iNow I am not proposing a flat tax. I could get pn board with no income tax on 50,000 and below and a flat rate from there up to 100,000 and then brackets the rest of the way. Just to throw out some numbers I am not married to them. I agree that tax shelters and the like are a big problem. The republican plan promises to address this but probably won't. I would like to see capital gains top earner rates locked in for a period of time maybe 10 years and reviewed at that time. Capital gains tax can encourage expansion in a business but to high can encourage corruption. Another thing I would like to see is higher sales tax and lower income tax.

Federal minimum wage. It's a fair point. California 1.3% of total workforce New York 4.3% Florida 4.5% Wyoming 5.1% Texas 6.3% California looks great and Texas looks bad but New York is right there with 2 states that have no income tax. Which is back to my point that simply raising taxes is not an answer. Heres another point for you. I'm in a 15% federal tax bracket and someone who makes far less than twice as much as me pays an additional 10%. Someone who makes 6 times as much I make pays 24.6% more than I do. But someone who makes 6 times more than that or 60 times more pays no extra percentage. Does this seem fair? Why do our tax brackets top out at less than 500,000? This is part of the reason so much of the middle class are anti-tax. I really don't mind paying my share but I feel like I pay alot more than that. So what would make you happy? For one thing I would like to see the tax brackets more fairly drawn and do away completely with income tax for people who make less than 50,000 a year. They can pay their share in sales tax.

Thats a hard question to answer because you don't define "much less" and apparently I have to show it was the low tax in and of itself that made the economy good. Sorry I can't do that. I think a low tax rate indicates good money management. What I can show is countries with a healthy economy and a good standard of living the latter being more important to me. In fact if you can show me somewhere with a bad economy and 0 homeless I will take that over a booming economy and 437 per 100,00 homeless. The U.S. taxes corporation's at 28% and top income earners at 39.6%. The highest sales tax is around 9.5%. Russia is 20, 13 and 18 Litchtenstein 13, 18 and 8 Switzerland 18, 13 and 8 Andorra 10, 10 and 10 (keeps it simple) Dubai and Kuwait 0, 0 and 0 Ok I will. I am not arguing that taxes are bad but I do think its more fair to tax spending rather than earning. Not sure I understand are you asking of they are only counted when services are offered? I got the numbers here https://www.usich.gov/tools-for-action/map/#fn[]=1400&fn[]=3100&fn[]=6300&fn[]=10400&fn[]=13200 I agree thats what I meant by decent jobs. I'll look into it further soon.

Plenty of jobs in Texas. If they had decent jobs they wouldn't be homeless. And budgeting is one of the problems also corruption. No matter how high the taxes if they are not managed well failure will result. QFT. Look I'm an old conservative who ditched the republicans years ago because they can't manage a party much less a country. The democrats are only marginally better. We all need too stop settling for less. Instead of telling our political parties what we want we need to demand accountability from whoever is in power. High or low taxes is not a conservative/liberal issue. Regan had both higher capital gains and top income rates than did Obama. And both managed the country very well.

Thanks MigL that is exactly the point of my post. I'm going to hammer some more on that. It has been very hard financially on me. I would love to see something better. I will look into the Candian system.

But why do we have to look to Kansas? There are 7 states with no income tax at all. I'm list them along with the number of homeless (per 100,000) in each state and then I will list 7 states with the highest income tax. Why homeless? I think it's a good measure of how a government takes care of the least fortunate among us and it's an easy number to find. Wyoming 146 Alaska 261 Florida 163 Nevada 252 S. Dakota 124 Texas 83 Washington 286 Average income tax 0% Average homeless 187 The number in parentheses is the tax rate. California 301 (13.3) Oregon 323 (9.9) Minnesota 133 (9.8) New Jersey 99 (8.9) Iowa 98 (8.9) Vermont 179 (8.9) New York 437 (8.8) Average income tax 9.7% Average homeless 224