Vertigo

So detention with no proof is ok with you. 40,000 people die in the U. S. every year. Should we now detain everyone who gets sick? She tested negative for Ebola and had no symptoms.

I'm wondering what everyone's thoughts are on Christie's detainment of a nurse who had no symptoms and tested negative for Ebola, in which she was only released after she sued. Is it ok for the state to willy nilly quarantine asymptomatic people against their will in the interest of "public safety" (i.e. manufactured fear)? https://www.wsbtv.com/news/lifestyles/health/nurses-ebola-quarantine-leads-lawsuit-chris-christ/nhsz6/?icmp=cmgcontent_internallink_relatedcontent_2014_partners1

Oh don't get me wrong. I totally agree. I think her word choice was wrong, but I think her subject was about the trickle down theory and not really about who or what creates jobs.

Demand for your product. I think her point was tax cuts don't create jobs, demand for a product or service does.

Wow- I can't believe I'm going to say this, but imo the moderation here has gotten BETTER than in years past. At least from my perspective. I think the mods know they weren't correct when they changed people's posts, etc. If someone feels they were chased off then that's on them for not sticking up. Hell I've had multiple attempts of someone(s) try to chase me out of here, but guess what... I'm still here making people roll their eyes. Because I believe when a mod crosses a line, the other mods hold that person accountable. That said I do have warnings that are over 5 years old now, but whatever. Has the content been a bit stale lately? Sure. But maybe that's because that's what these "new Air Force" users are bringing to the table. Don't like the content? Then post the shit you do like, or don't and keep bitching about it. I can agree that you should need to be a registered user here to view the info, but requiring a .mil address:? GTFO.

Not in my opinion....

Or just carry your dog around with you everywhere you go, since that seems to be an accepted practice.

You mean the free left hand that was buttoning his suit jacket, that free hand? Funny how biases can make a person defend one action while simultaneously slamming a similar action.

Save your money for this instead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfFMAtmWb5s

Congrats to Scotland on their Declaration of Dependence.

FIFY. You're right, it is well established states do not have a Constitutional right to secede. But do they have a natural and inalienable right to secede? A free state isn't really free if it can't leave of its own will, is it?

I just seen the 117th ARS is holding a board on the 4th and 5th of October for FY16. Applications may be submitted in person, by mail, or email to: 117ARS: SUPT APPLICATION 5920 SE COYOTE DRIVE FORBES FIELD (ANG) TOPEKA, KS 66619-5370 117ars.og@ang.af.mil Contact information: 190 ARW Recruiting: (785) 861-4292/4293 117 ARS: (785)861-4670/4641

That's an issue of social welfare programs, not immigration. I prefer this by the CATO Institute: Based on the few studies that have tried to systematically examine the impact on government budgets, taking into account immigration’s impact on the size of the economy and pace of economic growth, as well as the impact of immigration on government budgets, the longitudinal and static studies reveal a very small net fiscal impact clustered around zero (OECD 2013: 125). The economic benefits of immigration are unambiguous and large, but the fiscal effects are dependent upon the specifics of government policy over a long time period, which means that the net fiscal impact of immigration could be negative while the economic benefit is simultaneously positive. Looking at the results of all of these studies, the fiscal impacts of immigration are mostly positive, but they are all relatively small. They are rarely more than 1 percent of GDP in dynamic models (Rowthorn 2008: 568). Even dramatic changes in the level of immigration have small effects on government budgets and deficits (Auerbach and Oreopoulos 2000: 151). Besides the net present value of the individual immigrant or group fiscal contribution, immigrant-caused deficits or surpluses could also be represented as a percentage of future economic growth or projected budget deficits. Regardless of those details and nuances, there is no strong fiscal case for or against sustained large-scale immigration. The enormous economic gains from immigration described in Chapter 1 indicate that an open borders policy of the type proposed in Chapter 7 is not likely to lead to large government deficits or surpluses. https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/working-paper-21.pdf I particularly like this point: This chapter leaves aside the wisdom of judging the benefits of immigration based on the immigrant’s fiscal impact largely because the fiscal impact is so small. A worldview that seeks to judge whether immigrants are beneficial based on their fiscal impact, where the chief value of an additional American is determined by the size of their net-tax contribution, is fundamentally flawed and a testament to how dehumanizing a large welfare state can be. The fiscal impact of immigration is neither a proper evaluating metric nor is it a particularly meaningful one upon which to base support for or opposition to immigration.

Lets say for simplicity it costs us $100 per illegal alien and in any given year we have 100 illegal aliens coming in. Now let's say the law is changed that now 90 of those illegals can now easily and cheaply enter the country legally. And they do. We just decreased our costs by 90%. That's substantially. Also - do you think a low skilled worker will stay in that same job for life or are they like most all other humans in the workforce and tend to work their way up the ladder?

Oh a fence is all we need for a secure border? Shit that is cheap then. I thought maybe you'd want surveillance on that fence, and a more robust border patrol force with all the associated tools, etc. But if it's only a one time cost of $4B for a totally secure border for now and forever then count me on board! FYI that $113 B for illegal immigration goes down substantially when those illegals are now coming in legally.

I'm saying they could help in paying the tab to get their children to that desired level if there was a system in place that allowed them to easily and cheaply enter the nation legally. But instead we would rather throw money at obstacles that aren't effective, and then when they enter illegally their children get that same level of education without their contribution to the associated costs. Our current policy for legal immigration is costing us more money in the long run. Doubling down on that policy won't decrease our tax burden, it'll only increase it.

Wow, imagine if our immigration system was set up to encourage LEGAL immigration rather than what we have. Then those immigrants WOULD be ponying up that burden through their tax dollars.

Self immolation

Last I heard, chopping off heads was illegal in this country. And if/until this country has a large enough of a population that shared the view that it shouldn't be then we shouldn't be race/religion/sexual orientation screening and deciding whether or not these individuals will or will not live exactly as how you see fit. Your lifestyle may not be the same as mine... but I'm not clamoring to have you expelled because you don't fit into what I think our society is our should be.

I highly doubt road lane striping is a unworkable flaw.

Who gets to define what "our society" is, exactly? Is "our society" the same as it was in 1865? The same as it was in 1920? 1945? 1965? 1980? No? Hmm... so society changes over time as technology and population changes occur. Correct? Who are you to decide what that future society will be?

If the government was picking up the tab for the re-work I would agree. However I would think it is safe to assume the private company will have to pay out of pocket to fix their mistake- so they weren't more careful with their money or the taxpayers money.

Not helping the argument since these lines were put down by a private contractor...

Welcome to last month. Glad you could join the rest of us.

Looks like you're in for a good weekend. Not judging. Do you squeeze it in straight or sideways?