aquajet
Dec 6, 05:37 PM
Okay, so let's see...are you trying to use the G5 or the PowerBook in Firewire target disk mode?
obey908
Mar 14, 01:21 PM
There is already a post your setup thread
tjb1
Feb 13, 09:07 PM
I have a PS3 I could get doing this if it would even be worth it?
likemyorbs
Mar 16, 06:05 PM
Remind us all why murder is a crime in the first place?
Because an innocent person is being killed (usually). Yes i know it has happened in the past with the death penalty, which is why i only support the death penalty in cases where there is no possible chance of innocence.
Because an innocent person is being killed (usually). Yes i know it has happened in the past with the death penalty, which is why i only support the death penalty in cases where there is no possible chance of innocence.
more...
xi mezmerize ix
Oct 13, 09:06 AM
Meow. (http://wallpapers.pixxp.com/20__Leopard_big_cats.htm)
255571
That's creepy.
255571
That's creepy.
neut
Feb 23, 10:06 PM
Hopefully <snip> we can but our money where our typing is. :D
:) im waiting for the hiatus to be over ... and my paycheck. :p
peace | neut
*oh yeah, and the new mods are doing a good job too.
:) im waiting for the hiatus to be over ... and my paycheck. :p
peace | neut
*oh yeah, and the new mods are doing a good job too.
more...
Kieranic
Apr 8, 09:59 PM
Very simple :)
http://k.min.us/ikGuGS.png (http://k.min.us/ikLntk.png)
http://k.min.us/ikGuGS.png (http://k.min.us/ikLntk.png)
liamkp
Jun 22, 12:47 PM
Here you go. (http://cgi.ebay.com/AV-TV-Video-Cable-iPhone-iPod-Nano-3G-Nano3-Classic-/280515003028?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Other_MP3_Player_Accessories&hash=item414fff4294)
more...
ma5ter5
Apr 13, 10:34 AM
does apple really want to become that predictable with annual product updates at given events?
decafjava
Apr 7, 05:06 PM
I wonder how many of these posts are trolls? I haven't had any issues whatsoever with 4.3.1. I also didn't have any problems with 4.3; battery life has been absolutely stellar and call performance actually improved in 4.3.1.
The timing of all these "bitching" posts just seems suspicious.
Maybe, but there have been some issues. The battery thing was real. 4.3.1 improved it for me.
The timing of all these "bitching" posts just seems suspicious.
Maybe, but there have been some issues. The battery thing was real. 4.3.1 improved it for me.
more...
mattyuk
Jan 1, 03:26 PM
Awesome Xmas.
Jalexster
Feb 14, 05:42 AM
:D I'm still me, maybe a bit better behaved (honest Mr. Anderson! ;)), but still me...
I hope so...
I hope so...
more...
Blue Velvet
Nov 23, 01:14 PM
I strongly suggest you copy off your work folder or files onto the desktop or wherever and work from them there, copying the new files back onto your Flash drive when you're done.
Eduardo1971
Apr 13, 11:21 AM
Is your iPhone set up as a brand new phone or restored from an old backup?
Because it definitely seems like iPhones (all models) slow down once they have a pretty long "history".
My iPhone 4 is restored from the ashes of my iPhone 3G s (may it rest in peace).
Because it definitely seems like iPhones (all models) slow down once they have a pretty long "history".
My iPhone 4 is restored from the ashes of my iPhone 3G s (may it rest in peace).
more...
daneoni
Oct 2, 09:38 AM
You have mail
Hilmi Hamidi
Sep 1, 02:26 AM
Great job mods.... you deleted my September 2010 Desktops thread and allow other people create it...
more...
bousozoku
Feb 14, 07:36 PM
In hindsight, I think I may have been high on Vegemite when I posted this. On that note, I'm gonna go eat some Vegemite.
Could we use that on some of the bad users? I've heard that it can also be used as road and roof patch. :p
Could we use that on some of the bad users? I've heard that it can also be used as road and roof patch. :p
rtdunham
Nov 20, 09:43 PM
This second version would incoporate Apple's iChat software and may be dubbed "iChat mobile". According to Wu, Instant Messaging (rather than email) would be the focus of the device.
i think i'm missing something. my cheapo sprint phone text messages. my daughters' phones do. the person sitting next to me at the football game yesterday was IM'g. is the ability to IM something that belongs in the second version of an apple phone? how many new phones lack that ability, as the first version iPhone presumably would? i need a perspective. thanks.
i think i'm missing something. my cheapo sprint phone text messages. my daughters' phones do. the person sitting next to me at the football game yesterday was IM'g. is the ability to IM something that belongs in the second version of an apple phone? how many new phones lack that ability, as the first version iPhone presumably would? i need a perspective. thanks.
Applejuiced
May 1, 10:02 AM
Only if you JB.
RawBert
Dec 25, 03:19 AM
Damn, I'm loving these muthaz...
http://cdn.nicekicks.wpengine.com/wp/files/2010/10/jordan-take-flight-414825-101.jpg
http://cdn.nicekicks.wpengine.com/wp/files/2010/10/jordan-take-flight-414825-101.jpg
Michaelgtrusa
Oct 10, 04:09 AM
Here's mine
Where can I find this?
Where can I find this?
toolbox
Jul 31, 09:06 PM
Display on my iMac, just sitting back listing to the bee gees live in australia
Mexbearpig
Oct 1, 06:09 AM
^Thanks! Looks really cool. Where did you find it? I'm curious if there are more like it.
samiwas
Mar 3, 04:37 PM
I know you WANT to give your solution... you're so close... c'mon... say it: "I think we should drastically increase taxation on wealthy Americans to fix this problem."
What I want to know is how exactly you expect businesses to grow jobs, expand operations, etc. in this type of situation. It seems fairly clear based on the facts that A) this wouldn't be near enough money to solve the problem B)that the end result in the long run will almost certainly be less growth, fewer jobs, and less government 'revenue' than before. C) that you'd kill what chance we have left at regaining a strong economy as large businesses would do whatever they could to get their assets in locations of lower tax burden.
Can you point me to a time in history where lower taxes led to more growth? Can you point me to the time when high taxes meant things were not progressing? As I seem to recall from the history classes I mostly failed, the mid-20th century was quite a boom for this country, right? Since I'm not so good at history, I looked up tax rates.
The last time tax rates were as low as they are now started in about 1925. What followed 5 years later? The Great Depression and massive unemployment. Shortly after 1930, tax rates skyrocketed. You know what else happened around that time? Massive growth and employment. Then, since 1981 when taxes started getting much lower, the economy slowly started to go downhill. Many people were still making gobs of money, but the middle class started to see things going away. There must be some huge factor I'm missing. Maybe you can fill me, and everyone else here, in.
And as for me wanting to "drastically increase taxes on wealthy Americans", you can stop right there. I want to get rid of the TAX BREAKS, the TAX CUTS...for everyone, and especially for excessively wealthy people.
'turned into' a a profit machine? As opposed to... when?
Providing health services and goods has always been a for-profit enterprise. This is exactly what has lead to the amazing growth in medical technology in the past 100 years.
While the advances in medical technology are great, let's not for one second think that the massive profit machine known as the health care industry is not as corrupt as can be. You take a service that by it's very definition is essential for life, and turn it into a profit operation...nothing good can come from that. That's why a Tylenol in a hospital costs $14 and you go in for a bad cough and walk out with a $21,000 bill. Ludicrous.
I tend to agree. Cut programs until our expenses match our current 'revenues.' When the two are equal or are in the black, let's immediately pass an balanged-budget amendment so this problem never happens again.
I think we definitely need to include in the cuts the health care and pensions for all senators, congressmen, house members, and any other "lawmaker" types.
For the record, they are paying their fair share. The top 50% of wage earners pay over 95% of the income tax.
And as pointed out above, they also make and have the vast majority of the money in this country.
If 90 people make $1,000 each, and 10 people make $50,000 each and they were evenly taxed on income, you'd still have 10% of the people paying 84.7% of the taxes. Is that unfair? No, it's not. Not in the slightest. And once you take out even a basic cost-of-living exemption, which should be the start of any tax system, that number would increase dramatically. Like, just over 95% maybe?
In this free market, you have the choice to make more money. And if you want to make metric ass-tons of money, you can pay the taxes that go along with that. Free market capitalism.
I agree. I would start with a MASSIVE simplification of the tax code, and virtual elimination of all government subsidies over the next 5-10 years.
Probably the only thing I agree with you on. Individual tax returns should require a post card and nothing else. Corporate taxes, well...I don't know enough about them to know how to simplify them, but I'm sure they are ridiculously complex.
I tend to agree. Reduce the budget by half, let them become more efficient and more reliant on technology. Take a more defensive posture around the globe and avoid entangling alliances, etc. abroad. That being said, I believe its important for us to maintain a strong national DEFENSE. We do have enemies... and defense is one of the primary constitutional roles of the federal government.
OK, two things.
If the top 50% are declaring earnings equivalent to 88% of the total, it seems entirely proportionate that they should be paying 95% of the total tax. Their true earnings are probably vastly more in percentage terms, anyway.
Yep.
What I want to know is how exactly you expect businesses to grow jobs, expand operations, etc. in this type of situation. It seems fairly clear based on the facts that A) this wouldn't be near enough money to solve the problem B)that the end result in the long run will almost certainly be less growth, fewer jobs, and less government 'revenue' than before. C) that you'd kill what chance we have left at regaining a strong economy as large businesses would do whatever they could to get their assets in locations of lower tax burden.
Can you point me to a time in history where lower taxes led to more growth? Can you point me to the time when high taxes meant things were not progressing? As I seem to recall from the history classes I mostly failed, the mid-20th century was quite a boom for this country, right? Since I'm not so good at history, I looked up tax rates.
The last time tax rates were as low as they are now started in about 1925. What followed 5 years later? The Great Depression and massive unemployment. Shortly after 1930, tax rates skyrocketed. You know what else happened around that time? Massive growth and employment. Then, since 1981 when taxes started getting much lower, the economy slowly started to go downhill. Many people were still making gobs of money, but the middle class started to see things going away. There must be some huge factor I'm missing. Maybe you can fill me, and everyone else here, in.
And as for me wanting to "drastically increase taxes on wealthy Americans", you can stop right there. I want to get rid of the TAX BREAKS, the TAX CUTS...for everyone, and especially for excessively wealthy people.
'turned into' a a profit machine? As opposed to... when?
Providing health services and goods has always been a for-profit enterprise. This is exactly what has lead to the amazing growth in medical technology in the past 100 years.
While the advances in medical technology are great, let's not for one second think that the massive profit machine known as the health care industry is not as corrupt as can be. You take a service that by it's very definition is essential for life, and turn it into a profit operation...nothing good can come from that. That's why a Tylenol in a hospital costs $14 and you go in for a bad cough and walk out with a $21,000 bill. Ludicrous.
I tend to agree. Cut programs until our expenses match our current 'revenues.' When the two are equal or are in the black, let's immediately pass an balanged-budget amendment so this problem never happens again.
I think we definitely need to include in the cuts the health care and pensions for all senators, congressmen, house members, and any other "lawmaker" types.
For the record, they are paying their fair share. The top 50% of wage earners pay over 95% of the income tax.
And as pointed out above, they also make and have the vast majority of the money in this country.
If 90 people make $1,000 each, and 10 people make $50,000 each and they were evenly taxed on income, you'd still have 10% of the people paying 84.7% of the taxes. Is that unfair? No, it's not. Not in the slightest. And once you take out even a basic cost-of-living exemption, which should be the start of any tax system, that number would increase dramatically. Like, just over 95% maybe?
In this free market, you have the choice to make more money. And if you want to make metric ass-tons of money, you can pay the taxes that go along with that. Free market capitalism.
I agree. I would start with a MASSIVE simplification of the tax code, and virtual elimination of all government subsidies over the next 5-10 years.
Probably the only thing I agree with you on. Individual tax returns should require a post card and nothing else. Corporate taxes, well...I don't know enough about them to know how to simplify them, but I'm sure they are ridiculously complex.
I tend to agree. Reduce the budget by half, let them become more efficient and more reliant on technology. Take a more defensive posture around the globe and avoid entangling alliances, etc. abroad. That being said, I believe its important for us to maintain a strong national DEFENSE. We do have enemies... and defense is one of the primary constitutional roles of the federal government.
OK, two things.
If the top 50% are declaring earnings equivalent to 88% of the total, it seems entirely proportionate that they should be paying 95% of the total tax. Their true earnings are probably vastly more in percentage terms, anyway.
Yep.
No comments:
Post a Comment