Yeah, it's all the fault of the private sector...the ones who actually create jobs. Got it.Spare me your third grade understanding of economics and strawman arguments. Try actually reading and learning to reason.
Let me get this straight: Obama politicizes the tragedy by talking about gun control the day after the shooting, and I'm the one who's blamed for making it political? I'm the one...some guy you don't know on the Internet. Not the President of the United States, who has a long history of such things...ME! This guy!Oh, and I'm a racist. You really are sickening. Typical "tolerant" leftist.
You don't seem to get his point (which was made in response to me, by the way). He's saying not just that AT&T will pass on the cost, but ALL companies of every kind pass on costs. That's the nature of business.
http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-statement-on-charleston-shooting-2015-6 First, he's wrong (totally) on gun rights and what would actually reduce gun violence. Beyond better background checks and better mental health services, passing additional laws restricting law abiding citizens' rights is both unconstitutional and will be ineffective. Secondly, no...we're not the only advanced country where this kind of thing happens. We are, however, one of the only nations...
Lifeline is absurd to begin with. We're dealing with a cultural and political mentality that is so ass backwards: The more people dependent on government programs, the better. In fact, just the opposite is true.
I suppose that's true, though I think the larger point is that the threat of extreme data throttling essentially makes "unlimited" meaningless. If I can't reasonably use my "unlimited" plan beyond 5Gb a month, it's not unlimited in reality. Well, courts haven't for a long time, actually.
He's not really using a strawman, just more of an exaggeration. I think you're missing the overall point, though I agree he's off topic. As for your rant, are you honestly suggesting that without government regulations, your description of work conditions would occur? In today's market? I'm not arguing against all regulation, mind you. I'm just asking.
Well, I finally had a chance to read the entire publication. Incidentally, I believe I've come across it before, though I can't recall if I read the entire thing. Let me start by acknowledging the question of "is temperature ever adjusted downward" was off base. I'm not even sure why I asked it, because obviously there are a multitude of adjustments made for many reasons (urban/rural station balance, elevation changes, even time of day of measurements). All I can...