beowulf

So what do you propose? Should there be a 'salary cap'? Should there be a law that anyone that makes more then a million dollars a year should then have all that money over a million distributed to everyone else? How about univeral care and better social programs. Also, college tuition paid, as California used to do. Education and health care should be encouraged and provided. And the quality of the education and health care goes to shit. Bottom line you get what you pay for. Right, and the neo-Repugs have writtenthe rules to benefit them, so the poor have gone to shit..... and then the Repugs wonder why all teh crime????? You really do get wht you pay for and the Repugs have said fuck off to the lower classes and they ahev gone to shit, so I agree with you. By your statement you have demonstrated that you want fewer people to get better care, fuck the masses. Don't you think it's kind of ridiculus to blame everything on Republicans? Just look at the entire history of man. There has always been a lopsided distribution of wealth. That is just a fact of life. The lower have always got the shit end of the stick. That has nothing to with Republicans or Democrats. Pull your head out of the sand and take a look around.

Then quit whining about those who are rich.

Ask Marie Antoinette what happens when the rich and privileged have a cavalier attitude about the suffering of the poor. Not much you or anyone can do about attitudes. That can only be changed by the person. certainly not true - if you've been listening, the proposal is to take, by force if necessary, all the money away from these people and make them poor too. and that, QED, will give them better attitudes isn't it obvious? Oh ok sorry I must have been sleeping. I guess everyone should be poor then

Ask Marie Antoinette what happens when the rich and privileged have a cavalier attitude about the suffering of the poor. Not much you or anyone can do about attitudes. That can only be changed by the person.

So what do you propose? Should there be a 'salary cap'? Should there be a law that anyone that makes more then a million dollars a year should then have all that money over a million distributed to everyone else? How about univeral care and better social programs. Also, college tuition paid, as California used to do. Education and health care should be encouraged and provided. And the quality of the education and health care goes to shit. Bottom line you get what you pay for.

So what do you propose? Should there be a 'salary cap'? Should there be a law that anyone that makes more then a million dollars a year should then have all that money over a million distributed to everyone else? How about over 10 million? If you can't live on 9.9 million, tough shit. Reality is that there will always be fewer people with lots of money then there are people with little to no money. Trying to redistribute the money would only devalue it.

So what do you propose? Should there be a 'salary cap'? Should there be a law that anyone that makes more then a million dollars a year should then have all that money over a million distributed to everyone else?

Rabbits are passive creatures and spend their entire lives in a state of fear whenever they leave their burrow and most times in it. I, for one, refuse to be a rabbit. I eat meat and am willing and able to defend myself. Are you? Are you suggesting that not carrying a gun makes one a rabbit? What am I supposed to be afraid of? WHat are you so afraid of that you feel the need to carry a gun? This is only newsworthy for the same reason that "man bites dog" is newsworthy. On a typical day in the USA some 40 people are killed by guns and no-one starts threads for each of those. When should learn or prepare to defend yourself? When something happens? or before something happens? The moment you need a gun to defend yourself may never come, but when or if it does I sure as hell want to be prepared and have one.

Sounds like "911" and the meaning behind it is not working that well, right.... ? If some one broke into your house while you are in it and you had no weapon with you and you just called the police. Do you think the police would get there quick enough to keep the guy from shooting you?

I am sure there will be some wingsuit guys around. I am generally there every weekend if you want to do some freeflying.

I think you meant claymore.

Where do you people get this information??? The National Geographic channel has had some very informative documentarys on prisons lately.

Oh, sure. I wasn't arguing in that direction. But if the knive was what, a little plastic butter knife from the dispenser at the hot dog stand, then it's a little more reasonable to rush the attacker even without a weapon. At what point do you think it would be reasonable to examine the knife in order to make a decision to confront the attacker? How about calling for a 'time out' and asking the attacker to show you the knife? Do you think that would work? Have you ever been in a fight? Things don't exactly go as planned. Adrenaline high and you get tunnel vision and ya get very focused and also scared shitless all at the same time. All the IF, BUTS, COULD HAVE's and WOULD HAVE's don't mean shit when you are in the situation.

The pathetic knife is irrelevent. The guy sure had intent to kill as illustrated by the gasoline. you can't stab gasoline You lost me here. I don't know what you mean by this. The way I see the attacker decided the knife wasn't doing the job so he switched to gasoline and tried to burn her alive. I would say that shows clear intent to kill or at the very least do serious bodily harm.

The pathetic knife is irrelevent. The guy sure had intent to kill as illustrated by the gasoline.

Yes, that's my thought of why the guy left. He figures they'll find something to charge him with. He was protecting that woman, which is a police officer's job. It's unreasonable to expect the police to be able to protect the public. All they can really do is try to find the perpetrator of a crime and hold him for judgement and punishment.

I wonder if the gunman had a permit for the gun. Probably not since he didn't stick around. I hope they never find him. If they do they will probably arrest him.

[sarcasm]Makes a fine argument for religous based governments doesn't it. [/sarcasm]

Just to clarify, I came up with my conclusions mostly by testing DVD's written at different speeds and trying each different one. Also by researching info on the difference between -R and +R. The basic skinny on it is -R is older technology and the +R is newer tech. That is pretty much why the older DVD players won't play the +R's.

They are the winners of the US Nationals this last year. I would love to see outside video of that.

I am glad that my Odyssey still has the RSL on it so I don't have to mess with any of this. ********************NOTICE to SUNPATH*************************** I will never purchase any of your products again. My next container will not be one of your products.

It's better to stumble to your tent then to stumble to your car and drive. That's assuming you drink. Umm doesn't everyone at the dropzone drink?

That depends on what you are wanting to do. If you want to distribute video DVD's out to lots of people you will want to use the DVD-R at the slowest speed (ex. 2x). Older DVD players cannot read the DVD+R disks and have trouble with DVD-R's that are written at high speeds. For just data you don't have to worry so much about compatability as a lot of the computers out there will be able to read pretty much any data DVD's. The DVD-RW or DVD+RW are more expensive and would not be suitable for distribution and I would only use for temporary backup.

Amax will point you in the right direction.

You gotta watch out for that tall Russian guy I hear he is nothing but trouble.