Hans Ludwig

I believe that it was Carl von Clausewitz in his treatise On War who would argue that it wouldn't make you safer per se, but that it would act as a deterrent and definitely make your enemy think twice about their next course of action. Unfortunately this wouldn't work against someone that has already set his eyes on not only committing suicide but taking out others in his evil plan. However, the latter is so statistically insignificant (see my posting titled "Exhibit "A"") that it's hardly something to worry about, as you are more likely to get cancer or be severely hurt in a vehicle accident.

Which was a law passed by "progressives" in response to a growing criminal activity that sprang up during Prohibition. They also controlled both the House and the Senate.

No, you clearly said the following: You are half correct if you were only referring to the U.S. House of Representatives. The Senate, however, wasn't designed to be "malleable" or pass legislation because of "the will of the people."

Actually they aren't. That's why the original founders created the "Senate." Often times referred to as a place were bills go to die, the founders created it as compromise, a body that wouldn't pressured to pass legislation, a cooling off system if you will. Both the big government founders (Hamilton) and the small government founders (Jefferson) agreed that this was a necessary to prevent a majority from infringing on the minority, which was often the case in the old world.

What about Switzerland? SOURCE: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/publications/by-type/yearbook/small-arms-survey-2007.html

Except that guy I posted writes about games. http://www.joystiq.com/editor/justin-mcelroy https://twitter.com/JustinMcElroy

Lets blame killings on games again. =/

Hmmm, there are now 1.5 million people without power, and you are asking a stupid question like is there anyone from the New England area online? Yeah, because if a huge freaking hurricane is bearing down on me, the last thing I'm going to be is on the BIS forums.

^^ Clearly this guy has never been in a hurricane before.

Now when some European say something about the US, I can direct them to this link. Karma can be a ______ sometimes, huh?

No, you wont. You will be paying more for goods and services via inflation - the silent tax. Your children will be $26+ in college debt, while working in jobs that don't require a college education. Both Republicans and Democrats love creating public policy that end freedoms. And according to the ACLU, every American (300 million) breaks something like 20 laws a day (I forgot the actual number). With spending cuts at the federal and state level, your school district thinks raising property taxes is the answer to everything, which then means the value of your house is artificially increased. While that might seem like a good thing, it's not to you and to potential buyers, who move further away or just rent. Do you want me to keep going? I wouldn't be the first to cast the first stone, Tonic. I mean, your country isn't exactly the bastion of all that is just and righteous. The last I checked, your government tells you what symbols you can or can't display or what political ideology you can or can't associate with.

I'm thinking that all those that protesting and killing people didn't see it either.

Judging by those wearing white dress shirts and Bates Chloroform shoes, they have to be either from the Citadel or VMI military academy in the US.

Furthermore, why should "millionaires" be the only ones the pay taxes when 50 percent of the US population doesn't (see link 1). Why should anyone have the fruits of their labor taken away and given to someone else through government force? If we are gaining jobs as you say, then why is the Federal Reserve and Department of Labor statistics show us around 8.2 and 8.7 percent unemployment? Matter of fact, the unemployment rose in July by .4 percentage points.

Which means that sooner or later the rest of us will have to pay high premiums. That means that our employer will pay more, but that they will eventually shift the burden on to us or have us pay more for out of pocket expenses. In short, higher prices for healthcare, which the law was supposed to fix. The US is $15 Trillion dollar in debt. For the month of August alone, we only were able to create 96K jobs for a population of 300+ million with a 8.3 percent unemployment, not including those that have given up looking for work. Most economist say that you have to generate at least 300K jobs a month in order to deal with just high school and college graduates entering the workforce. I hardly call that economic progress brought on by our Savior El Presidente Obama.

It depends on how you're calculating inflation, and you are also forgetting to factor in budget/cost overruns, which the Office of Budget and Management never includes in their reports. Unfortunately we will have to wait for either next fiscal year or next quarter for the Congressional Budget Office to release their cost and benefit analysis. Of course you like this adventure NASA took because you didn't pay for it. It's what economist call the Moral Hazard. It's also a subjective, value based judgement you placed on this NASA mission. Who is arguing against that? If you want to send something to Mars to look for life, then do it through capital investment or actually pay for it yourself, which I hardly doubt you did the later of.

The East India Company wasn't funded through taxes, but rather selling of stock. In other words, they were able to do what they did because of capital. If you need any lessons on US history, feel free to PM. By the way, I'm half Sioux. That side of my family would lay claim to discovering North American thousands of years before the Europeans on a fraction of the cost. There is always someone like you that loves spending other peoples' money on discovering something that is not that important. It really doesn't make any logical sense to borrow money from China to fund such a trip that then devalues personal savings and creates inflation, the increase in prices for goods and services. Wouldn't it have been better served taking care of those that most directly needed it because of the bad economy?

Eight billion dollars wasted on sending a very expensive remote control car to find out what we already know or don't really care: Life doesn't exist anymore on Mars. I probably wouldn't care at all if these scientist went to Kickstarter to fund their own adventures instead of using my money, or I should say the Chinese' money that was lent to us by buying our bonds.

If this were 2005, I might have been interested.

Now subtract taxes and the regulatory compliance fee.

Don't be that guy. Seriously.

I don't see why you just didn't take the money you did raise. I mean, I have mixed emotions about you guys not taking it. Either (1) you guys really weren't serious or (2) you think 200k is chump change or (3) it was some kind of etrantrum for not being able to collect the $400k.

To me, that is the major reason I never play RO2 anymore is because I just don't want to be bothered learning what the bloody different game modes are. After reading their forums, I'm left scratching which one is more realistic. One group says that the one mode is more realistic and the other says the other mode is realistic. Then someone chimes in says "yeah, but you forgot the third mode." I honestly think the game has more game modes than actual players.