DrewEckhardt

In Illinois, the data show that white teenagers are slightly more likely to be involved with drugs than black, yet the black ones are some 19 times more likely to be locked up in the juvenile justice system when caught, while the white ones get probation or community service. Blacks are more likely to have prior arrests for non drug violations than whites and less likely to be in a two-parent home that can supervise their probation.

Sometimes. Two years ago x86_64 Ubuntu Linux did not include 32 bit libraries so 32 bit programs didn't run. Getting into an application environment, 64 bit applications are not always compatible with plugins for the 32 bit version (Firefox).

Correlation does not imply causality. The referenced article says that people who are racist using the studies metrics are more likely to favor a punitive approach to punishment. Funding a middle class lifestyle requires skills that generally come from an education (college, trade school, apprenticeships). Children's educational attainment is predicted by parents educational attainment. Historically blacks have had a lower educational attainment level than whites so their children continue the trend. Living above the poverty level requires a job period. The disparity of labor prices between the first world and emerging countries has moved many of those jobs over-seas, producing radically higher unemployment rates for un-skilled and semi-skilled labor (as of Q2 2009, 15.3% of adults without high school diplomas were unemployed versus 4.6% of those with 4 year degrees or better). Educational attainment strikes again. Without access to a legal job market providing a decent lifestyle and often lacking any job at all they do the smart thing and get their money outside the legal job market, get caught, and go to prison. To fix the problems we need to address that. Social manipulation through the media could help; it's done wonders for smoking. Free education could help and wouldn't be that expensive with decent state schools + room and board in small apartments running half what expensive states spend to house their prisoners for one year. Blaming it on current racism might help getting research grants but isn't addressing the real problems.

I married a sexy engineering chick. Who I met working at a startup. Special advantages of marrying another engineer are that she can solve technical problems for you and she'll understand completely when you talk about the insanity going on at your office because she's seen it before. And contrary to stereotypes, just being an engineer does not preclude doing 'normal' fun things like hiking and biking. Just be yourself. Real women that you'd want to be with are smart enough to see through the crap, and if they don't want to be romantic with you it's better to find out before you have kids, are married, or have moved in together.

While bowling is fun enough to do, even a whole six pack doesn't make it watchable on TV.

And isn't it hilarious that in all these other countries, with Unions, National Health Care, Socialism and higher taxes, they make money, but in the US, they can't seem to make a dime. Nope. The US federal and average state corporate rates together are higher than all other OECD countries except Japan. They're 50% higher than the average OECD country. That's a good incentive to make your profits elsewhere.

What tax did he cut??????????? Income tax via: - The home buyer credit ($8000 for first time home buyers, $6500 for repeats) - The American Opportunity Credit (100% of qualified secondary education expenses (in the first four years) for yourself or a dependent up to $2000, 25% of the next $2000, 40% refundable for low income individuals, and cut-off at $90,000 modified adjusted gross income for singles and $180,000 for couples) - The Making Work Pay Tax Credit (6.2% of earned income up to $400 for singles and $800 for couples phased out by 2% of income over $75,000 for singles and $150,000 for couples) I dont know what liberal fantasy land your in. Add up property, state, federal, SS, MC, fuel tax, city or country tax, sales and every other thing they throw in there and how can you say we pay some of the lowest in 50 years? The bigger issue is that government policies have inflated housing and education costs substantially over the previous decades. Being able to own a house, attend school, and retire sometime isn't practical for as many people as it used to be.

It doesn't matter. Police are generally required to use an escalation of force - strong language, martial arts pain compliance moves with their hands, pepper spray, etc. For instance, the San Jose Police Department Duty Manual, L1501.5 states The general escalation of force to effect an arrest, prevent an escape, or overcome resistance is as follows: Voice; Hands; Chemical agent; Taser, electronic restrainin device (ERD) electronic restraint transportation belt (ERTB), if available; Baton, canines, Yawara stick, if available; Carotid restraint; Less lethal projectiles, if available; Deadly force. That's not evident in the video. He could have insulted their mothers, although as a trial juror I learned that words (no matter how inflammatory) don't legally justify physical violence.

Perhaps three hundred jumps (at 5000 feet MSL density altitude on a cool day and 8000+ on a hot one, a 170 has the forward speed of something between a 135 and a 150) to build muscle memory and are comfortable with all of the survival skills on a 190, such as landing down-wind and cross-wind, landing up and down-hill, making low turns below 50', making post-plane-out turns, landing following a speed inducing maneuver with front risers, and having reasonable accuracy skills. It's really easy to land parachutes straight ahead into a wide open field, even small ones but that's not the right way to judge things. You need to be choosing your canopy for what happens when cute girls flash the pilot on sunset load so you have extra altitude, your climbout is delayed because your buddy got hypoxic and got his foot stuck on a seat belt, you have a bad spot, land out, don't see an obstacle in the low light until the last instant, and turn 90 degrees at 50 feet for a down-wind landing on an asphalt road. Some people point out that canopy piloting skills vary; although unless you've made a habit out of out landings in bad conditions (in which case you should not be down-sizing due to poor judgement) no one can know whether you have mad skillz. Lots of people got away with being overly aggressive and give you advice based on that, but they're not the ones who'll be visiting the orthopedic surgeon for hardware and bone grafts if things go wrong. Read Brian Germain's document and follow it http://www.bigairsportz.com/pdf/bas-sizingchart.pdf With turbine aircraft, 300 jumps can be just one or two years out of the decades you'll be skydiving. Don't be in a rush.

The inheritance tax is simply a capital gains tax on VERY large estates. The assets and investments are changing ownership, so capital gains kicks in. It does NOT apply to 99.5 % of the population. For that 0.5%, a decent tax attorney that specializes in estate planning can minimize or eliminate the tax anyway. No. 1. Where capital gains apply to appreciation above the cost basis, the inheritance tax applies to _everything_ and not just capital gains and it's 55% not 20% (assuming the Bush reduction sunsets). 2. The inheritance tax starts applying to MODERATE estates of the sort middle class couples must save to maintain their life style. With Social Security replacement rates of just 30% (assuming the government does not cut benefits) of higher earning individuals up to the wage cap people need 18X their annual income saved to avoid running out of money before they die. That's $1.8M for some one earning $100K a year like garbage men in expensive places. With an exemption (technically a credit) of just $1M the garbage man's estate would be taxed $550,000 (assuming the Bush reduction sunsets). Given a history of limited indexing for inflation, we can expect this to go down market. Poor people don't pay taxes. It's the middle class people who want their children to retire that need to worry.

Shutting down the ENTIRE Department of Defense wouldn't even reduce the deficit by half. How do you think reducing military spending will balance the budget? On top of closing the entire DoD, what would you suggest shutting off in order to get the deficit under control? Trillion dollar deficits are abnormal. Once we get the current financial crisis under control and return to normal, scaling back to what other first-world countries spend would completely eliminate the deficit 2001 $144.5 billion 2002 $409.5 billion 2003 $589.0 billion 2004 $605.0 billion 2005 $523.0 billion 2006 $536.5 billion 2007 $459.5 billion

The whole United States does. 10 USC 311 TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311 § 311. Militia: composition and classes (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. 32 USC 313 adds national guard members up to age 63 who were formerly in active service § 313. Appointments and enlistments: age limitations (a) To be eligible for original enlistment in the National Guard, a person must be at least 17 years of age and under 45, or under 64 years of age and a former member of the Regular Army, Regular Navy, Regular Air Force, or Regular Marine Corps. To be eligible for reenlistment, a person must be under 64 years of age. (b) To be eligible for appointment as an officer of the National Guard, a person must— (1) be a citizen of the United States; and (2) be at least 18 years of age and under 64.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income. . Ability to pay depends on how much you HAVE, not on how much you earn in any given year. Ability to pay depends on how much you EARN in excess of what it takes to cover your expenses, not how much you have. Owning a modest 1500 square foot 3-bedroom ranch some place expensive adds $1.5M to your balance sheet but doesn't help to pay the bills (although hopefully a hot job market goes with the inflated property values, and that helps). A retiree with a $1-$2M investment portfolio earns enough to support a middle class lifestyle and pay taxes, but might be eating cat food without the assets.

The issue here is that without a significant pension you need a lot of money to retire with out lifestyle changes. In America, Social Security will only replace 1/3 of a high-earning single retiree's wages. You need to save millions by the time you retire in order to sustain a middle class lifestyle someplace that's pleasant (and therefore expensive) to live.

One of the reasons why salaries are not the best way to gauge polls like this. A six figure salary in Silicon Valley or Manhattan does not go as far as a six figure salary in most other parts of the country. $150,000 in San Mateo County (Silicon Valley) qualifies a family for the county moderate income housing assistance program. Family size makes a big difference too. I had more disposable income making 1/2 what I do now but living in a place which was only moderately expensive with no one else sharing my earnings.

I don't see much difference between the Republicans and Democrats. They both want a big governments and don't believe in the tenth amendment. Although the Republicans are supposedly pro-rich the tax system became more progressive under Bush 43. Although the Democrats are supposedly tax-and-spend liberals, Bill Clinton was responsible for well-fare reform and a balanced budget under accepted voting rules. I often vote for libertarians. Although they're unlikely to be elected for more than local offices, one of the big two might throw some concessions my way when they loose like the Republicans have with evangelical Christians. REALLLLLLY. I could try to vote for my own-interests but things don't work out that way. I could vote Republican because I like guns, but would be disappointed when my politicians do anti-gun things like Schwarzenegger signing a bill prohibiting mail-order ammunition sales. I could vote Democrat because I think adults should be able to party with substances other than alcohol, although Democrats have a long history of endorsing decriminalization (like Jimmy Carter) and backing off once elected for political reasons.

You only have entries for democrats, republicans, people who live outside the US, and those with seven figure incomes. Many of us are none of the above.

Most people would rather have 90% of something than 100% of nothing.

1) As of 2006, the bottom 40% had 11% of the income. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h02ar.html 2) Taxation is about both collecting revenue and changing behavior, like getting people to drive more fuel efficient cars. Positive income tax rates for the lowest earning quintiles would be about limiting votes for politicians with wastefully spending habits since everyone should feel the effects in their tax rates to support it. Otherwise we're going to have an ever increasing group of people not paying income taxes extracting larger returns from those of us who do.

I usually work from home after leaving my office some time between 9 and 11pm. Home office amenities include my Hjellegjerde recliner and fridge full of tasty micro-brews.

We can't afford to maintain the most expensive socialist organization in the country, especially where the main benefit is national pride. I recognize that doing away with socialism may be impractical in this modern world, although when downsizing to what we need for defense we could put former military members to work doing something productive using less expensive capital ($4.5B for an aircraft carrier, $2.1B per new bomber built, $112M per new fighter), like infrastructure repair or Obama care. You attributed that quote to Mike, it's Bill's quote. How does the military play into military pride? Just because you think it does doesn't mean it does. A well-run military does, but an oppressive one that practices torture and violates Geneva at every turn does not.....but that's just me. Other countries our size (Canada, Eh?) spend $20B a year to defend their countries while we spend $700B which is as much as the rest of the world put together. As long as we're not in the empire building business the excess is only about providing employment and having a bigger dick than the rest of the world. That's pride. And it's not worth $600B.

We can't afford to maintain the most expensive socialist organization in the country, especially where the main benefit is national pride. I recognize that doing away with socialism may be impractical in this modern world, although when downsizing to what we need for defense we could put former military members to work doing something productive using less expensive capital ($4.5B for an aircraft carrier, $2.1B per new bomber built, $112M per new fighter), like infrastructure repair or Obama care.

I'd insist you pay for the FFL's services or NOT use the FFL.

Right, that's why you had to pay. The tax code is BS and the last dumbshit just gave a tax benefit to married people as well as Clinton gave more for having kids. The trend in this moral toilet is to punish being single w/o kids. Working married couples are penalized. For married couples the starting point of tax brackets higher than 15% isn't double single people's. Lower earning spouses become ineligible for earned income, education, and other credits. Partners of a high earning spouse with a employer provided retirement plan cannot deduct their IRA contributions. The capital loss application to normal income is the same for a single person and a married couple. Historically, the itemized deduction and personal exemption phase-out was not doubled for married couples. It cost my wife and I $1500 annually in increased taxes when we stopped living in sin and her children became ineligible for thousands of dollars in education credits. The CBO studied this in 1997 and found an average marriage penalty of $1380. You need to be more like Ward & June Cleaver than a modern working couple for marriage to provide a tax benefit.

The wealthy having more money is orthogonal to what's happening to the rest of us. In America being poor does not preclude having luxuries like cars, color televisions (which 98.9% of us own), or even cable/satellite TV (64% of households earning less than $15,000 a year). Most families earning under $15,000 a year (57%) even have a washing machine so they don't need to go to the laundromat. Wealth distribution is only a problem when it comes to people's feelings and we'd be better served dealing with real problems facing the non-wealthy, like the government artificially propping up house and education prices.