Posts by Mr. Ed 18 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Jun 2010
Leave the guy alone. Until a couple of years ago it was no crime at all in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave to refuse to give one's name to the police. Now, in the Land of the Fearful a guy gets put in jail for it? For how long??? Why don't these Official Busybodies go back to the donut shop and leave us the heck alone.
... against coal. :-)
"Not one person has died from radiation," Sir David King told the Guardian. "Let me put that in context – in the same week, 30 coal miners died. Generating electricity from coal is far more dangerous."
Coal is cheaper, safer and more abundant. Let's figure out how to get the C out of it and burn it for the next thousand or so years.
to be minding one's own business and suddenly be arrested, tried, convicted and executed for someone else's crime. Thankfully, the odds of that are so remote that nobody imagines that as being as likely as being killed by an asteroid while cashing in a winning lottery ticket.
It would be every bit as much a very bad day to be minding one's own business and suddenly be murdered by some low-life scum with no regard for human life. Far, far more likely. It is also a more likely scenario that the aforementioned scum was previously convicted of a murder.
So why is it that we are so afraid of executing "the wrong man?" The wrong man is being executed every day. The question is, will we as a society elevate human life by imposing a just and preventative punishment or will we let the bigger, meaner animals rule the jungle?
- Reads The Reg and loves it
- Thinks Rush is pretty darn entertaining
- Thinks he understands when to take seriously both El Reg and Rush and when not to
- Agrees with Sarah Palin on many issues
- Does not want her to be President
- Eats an occasional Big Mac
- Is as intelligent as anyone reading this
- Like most people, doesn't want to be pigeonholed
- Understands however, that many people need to do so because ???
that when the government comes to your door and demands information from you, no matter what it is, you should just give it to them -- no questions asked. Is that about right?
As has been pointed out, the US Constitution is very specific about the intent of the census and the limited data to be collected. I personally don't care who knows my race, my gender and my income level. But I don't think people who do object are "kooks." In America, it is every citizen's duty to keep the natural tendency of the power-hungry, to encroach on liberty and privacy, in check. The terminally compliant dependents of the State and the comfortable leeches who live off other peoples' diligence are the real menace.
...James is a bit confused about his country and lots of other things. It's election season here, a time when liberals come out of the woodwork and say the darndest things.
The law in the US is pretty much as you describe for the UK. It is not illegal in the US to own and operate a camera. It is not illegal to be in business and you can choose a sole proprietorship, a partnership or a (gasp!) corporation. If you choose to form a corporation, you can even operate inside and outside the US, making you a (gasp!gasp!) multinational corporation. All those businesses are free to make money -- as much money as they want.
We can see our credit records too -- once a year for no charge, by law.
James is correct that surface rights are treated separately from mineral rights (and in some states, water rights) but the government doesn't take those rights to itself. This way, a property owner can grant others the right to develop minerals on his property without selling his property. In the US, Google cannot enter your home or even stand on your lawn and start taking pictures.
Just thought someone should remove any misconceptions. Don't be too hard on James -- our public education system is in a heck of a mess. But we rock at Call of Duty.
Oh, and I hate Google too though.
If your lemonade stand makes $100 one day, and you spend $50 to go out to dinner, are you running a Ponzi scheme? The purpose of a business is to make money for its investors. Distributing dividends is one simple way to give them a return on their investment. What is the problem?
... especially if the automobile hadn't been invented yet.
If you want to pretend that Adobe doesn't exist (or have a right to), be consistent and stop using their invention. Some of us remember the days before portable documents and are mighty appreciative of them. You could be looking at typewriter text.
This is the same fallacy that drives socialism -- the failure to comprehend that before you can redistribute wealth, someone has to create it.
It seems this article and most of the replies assume that either the government pays for higher education or the populace is doomed to remain in permanent ignorance.
We used to recognize a third option -- namely, that motivated and capable people, recognizing (all by themselves) the benefits of investing in their future, would sacrifice and save for their own education. Parents, wanting the best for their children, would save so their children might have a brighter future than their own. This used to be how most people financed their education.
Yes, it is valuable to society to have an educated workforce. However, I would argue that is is even more important that people have a sense of empowerment and responsibility for their own lives and destinies. Expecting other people to feed, clothe and educate you is more fitting for infants.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
