What a massively ineffective conspiracy you've proposed. Can the deep state at the same time be all powerful but still let Trump get elected? The Nunes memo is nothing but hot air. There is no evidence of most of it's claims and it contradicts itself. It's little more than a political campaign ad.
To me what would make the most sense would to have a consortium of companies do this. Imagine Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. all chipping in in a coordinated effort to prevent trolls from lapping up bullshit patents.
If they change it to only require simple majority then I guarantee it will never change back. Partisanship is dead. The thugs won't appoint a supreme court justice, the thugs won't appoint any other judicial appointments. This will never be forgotten and there will never be compromise again. It's obstructionism on both sides from here on out.
Sourceforge used to be a reputable source for software, mainly open source. I hope they actually do try to regain the community's trust by getting rid of the crap they were bundling.
This correlation of equality breaks down in regards to the justice system however, where the poor are systematically curb-stomped and viewed as revenue generators for local governments while the rich can literally destroy the world economy through fraudulent mechanisms and walk away scot free.
I don't believe that it's impossible... while the complexity of the crime itself might be beyond most people's understanding, there is a virtually limitless toolbox at the hands of federal prosecutors, from RICO to conspiracy charges, which have exceptionally lower bars to proving guilt. The fact of the matter is that it has generally been the policy of the DOJ not to prosecute financial crimes under the purview of Eric Holder. This policy has recently changed but it's mostly too late to prosecute for the obvious amount of outright fraud that triggered the financial crisis of 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/business/dealbook/justice-...
"If nonviolent criminal laws were enforced on college campuses or investment banks for just a single day in the same rates as in poor communities, there would be twenty-four-hour news vans outside of every local jail and immediate public hearings about the harshness and efficacy of our legal system."
http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/04/policing-mass-imprisonme...
This is my interpretation of Alan Watt's concept of abstraction of wealth. You can't eat money, it's just paper or coins with no inherent value in and of itself. More than that it's also a unit of measurement, which is an itself an abstraction.
^This. It's easy to see this when you look at the numbers that show productivity rising while lower income wages stagnate. Higher income earnings have gone up an extreme amount. We've built a society where gains in productivity are not shared and that's not an accident.
Income inequality is a disease as it eventually will cripple an economy. It's foolish to assume that it "isn't the fault of the 1% that median incomes haven't matched productivity gains..." How is it not the fault of the 1%? Who pushes for tax measures favoring the wealthy? Who pushes for outsourcing? Who squashes labor movements? Who created a $1200 TRILLION derivatives market? Who got bailed out when the economy crashed? Who gets the all of the federal reserve loans and the benefits of their policy decisions? As for class warfare, Warren Buffet said it best: "There's class warfare alright, but it's my class, the rich class, that is making war, and we're winning".
Outsourcing has done much more harm to the american middle class than technology. For every job lost to automation in the US there are many that are lost to outsourcing.
This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. The amount of energy and engineering involved would be ridiculous. If you want mountains then move to a place where there are mountains. I moved to colorado from florida for just that reason. You need to learn to adapt to the world instead of expecting the world to adapt to your expectations.
It's only pure logic if you think that more trees = healthy forests. The real equation is much more complicated and includes biodiversity and other factors.
What this article is describing (trees as a renewable resource for paper/etc) isn’t a natural forest, it’s silviculture. Sure Georgia Pacific etc. will plant a bunch of trees to replace what they mowed through but those trees are all one species and age. The “forests” they create are not good for the environment. They drain the water table, they limit biological diversity and do little ecological good. Ecology is more than just “how many trees are planted, period”, it’s the overall health of a forest/system. The forests that paper companies maintain are not ecologically sound; they’re just a crop, little different from corn or any other agriculture the article mentions. The best thing we could do to make paper more sustainable would be to switch to hemp.