That's still 180k a year post-tax. That's still enough to fund an absolutely lavish lifestyle, even in the highest cost of living locations. It's not MTV Cribs rich, but it'll still put you in the 95%ile in Manhattan, to say nothing of more reasonable locales.
One of the strongest arguments for banning cock/dog fighting is that it inculcates moral depravity in its participants. To stand there and take pleasure in causing suffering in living things can only serve make you callous to human suffering as well. It seems justified to ban it, at least as an organized, large-scale enterprise.
I realize I've laid out a slippery slope. That's why I was hesitant. The strongest case is for banning organized, large-scale animal cruelty done for depraved enjoyment. But I don't think we should prosecute people because we don't like, for example, that they use electric shock collars to keep their dogs from running off.
I'd summarize my position as: 1) animal interests for their own sake are not a legitimate end of government coercion, and 2) the moral character of the people is a legitimate end, but we should be very hesitant to use coercion for social engineering.
You're not holding much water to be honest. Pick one:
a) animals are incapable of suffering
b) we shouldn't care if animals suffer
c) we should care and pass laws
Are you arguing that the solution to all controversy is to pass a law? You are proposing to solve all problems at gunpoint.
What space for different conceptions of the good, for diversity of values and preferences, could exist in such a society?
You must have limiting principles for when we should resort to the remedy of the law. Perhaps yours are different than mine, but I doubt that you have none at all.
Delta IV heavy looks pretty similar to the Falcon Heavy approach. I would imagine there was some knowdgle transfer there.
That being said, SpaceX is taking a much more pragmatic and efficient approach to building rockets with far less bureaucracy. This is the epitome of private sector efficieny over government projects.
I recall reading SpaceX had to reinvent quite a few wheels because the existing private sector was far too expensive — everything from cryogenic pumps to sea recovery of lower stages.
The problem is lack of meaningful competition, rather than government vs. industry; governments can be very good when competing with other governments.
Many of the homeless people in SF probably escaped the cold Chicago winters too.
Due to nice weather, California cities have to support many of the Midwest’s homeless population. To compensate, there should be a lot more federal funding for homelessness.
This is a myth. LAHSA does an annual homelessness census in Los Angeles. The overwhelming majority of the homeless are native Angelenos; 73% of them have been in LA for over 20 years.
Please stop spreading this pernicious myth. Nearly 3/4 of the SF homeless population became homeless while living in the city; 90% did so in California.
"The most recent homeless count, conducted in January 2015, found 6,686 homeless people in the city. Seventy-one percent of people reported living in San Francisco when they became homeless, up from 61 percent in 2013. Just 10 percent said they were living outside California when they became homeless, and the remaining 19 percent were living in the state but not in the city."
The loss in case of fraud against the customer or losses due to a hacked customer is entirely the customer loss. The bank does not care, they don't have any loss. Spectre is an attack against the client and the customer is responsible to keep his client secure. It's not the banks device, they have no power over it.
That's not how it works though, people get hacked all the time and banks make their customers whole. You can literally leave your debit card on the street corner and you won't be liable for any fraudulent charges as long as you notify the bank of them.
Not in Europe in general. Chip and PIN leads to the assumption that you made the purchase or initiated the charge. In any case, card charges (or charges in general) are something entirely different than payments initiated from your banking client. Anyone can charge your account and you can dispute the charge. However, money sent from your account cannot actively be disputed. You can tell your bank that you accidentally transferred money and they’ll try and stop the transaction, by if it goes through, you need to retrieve the money from the person that got it. Banks will try to help in case of fraud as long as the money is in their reach, but will not make you whole at their expense.
