cab21

http://happyplace.someecards.com/showtime/a-graphic-designer-wrote-a-fantastic-response-when-showtime-asked-him-to-work-for-free/ so i saw this article, the graphic article talks about being offended by the offer. is it legitimate to be offended if someone sees a offer as too low or high, or are offers that are two low or high simply business decisions that getting "offended" and emotional about is not in the spirit of negotiation and a free market? my initial assumption is that a buyer and the seller both want the greatest return on investment, so a buyer would start with a lower price than they are willing to pay and a seller with a higher price than they are willing to sell for. i don't see getting all emotional and offended by the other offer as providing much benefit. either the parties can agree on something or they can't, but the emotional stuff seems a little unnecessary.

i can see that if it was private costs, though this was a government program, from a government health department. i don't know if that it's government funded that i should expect something more about the health of children rather than the desires of the mother for a government run eugenics program.

what about adoptions? what about saving babies that would otherwise be aborted?

so for the saltwater conversion system, have you created one that makes economic sense? that or a water bottle filter system that can filter out freshwater sources to make them drinkable? i do think the water filter idea is still one of the most important. features that increase survivability can make such a huge difference in the health and survivability of people. sometime with as little maintenance as possible, and something that can be maintained without high expense or a need to take it to a specific place. just a few brainstorming ideas that might be interesting to pursur toys that children could play with that would teach them engineering concepts and applications 4 wheel vehicle that does not run on fuel but through a persons use of their body a towel that could stay wet for longer, and control how it releases water and control the water temperature. something that converts water from water drain systems to energy or drinking water. product that turns animal waste into other products, such as energy, housing, roads, soil. what size of idea are we talking about here, maybe something that could be printed out by 3d printers?

why would the parent not make sure the dude sucking their babies penis was std free ( weird sentence)?

why did she settle instead of going to the jury?

neither side is pro capitalism, so neither side has a legit moral high ground, if free market capitalism is to be considered a moral high ground.

killing Palestinians because of Hamas is like killing Americans because of obama.

that sounds statists that because there is no "state" another "state" can just go in and take the land and have a socialist state where the state owns the land? if people want the land, they can buy it in capitalism, rather that some statist takeover like a UN created state.

in a free market wise, there is no costs for a male if the male just wants to leave for the most part. costs there might be social, but there aren't courts forcing child support or something like that. people against abortion, at least one group, call abortion murder, so i don't think there is a financial price they have to be ok with murder. so what financials do you think would happen as far as numbers of people in each pool, costs to be in the pools, and profitability for any insurance company that provides any of these plans?

So what assets do you have? who can you find to stay with?

i thought a communist would get rid of the concept of rent?

how did a 16 year old work without government stopping her and shutting down the business?

so if congress comes up with x billion/trillion dollar a year bills for government to update technology, would you want them to pass it? now if money is being stolen, certainly i would think it can be put into new technology investment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders looking at this article, some judges have quotes such as “An individual must be involved at the policy-making level to be culpable for a crime against peace ... the ordinary foot soldier is not expected to make his or her own personal assessment as to the legality of a conflict. Similarly, such an individual cannot be held criminally responsible for fighting in support of an illegal war, assuming that his or her personal war-time conduct is otherwise proper.” if a person is lied to, and then put in a life or death or surrender sitution, it's still tough to call it murder rather than say a different form of homicide this is a voluntary army they say, though it's not voluntarily funded, so that put's more responsibility than say soviet solders that were told by the ussr to fight or be killed by the ussr. nap wise, saddam was not a person who followed nap, so it's hard to say a war with saddam was committing a act of agression against saddam and his military.

work as a private school teacher/educator

well who did he kill? did he go on speacial missions to kill people who have killed other americans first, and/or have declared a mission to kill americans? the nap is universal declaring a intention to kill americans is breaking the NAP, so if the guy killed people that broke NAP, he was not the one that broke NAP. sassam broke the nap, and i would not call his army keepers of NAP. so a video of stefan talking about dead children, what did this particular guy do as far as who he killed, and how did he kill them?

what is the context for why the person was told to grab a gun? is this the entire transaction? then it's not self defence if the neighbor writes that he wants to kill you, and has taken steps to kill others he wants to kill, then it would be self defense if killing that person who will not decease in the threat to kill you.

so in a free market there would not be this housing in the first place. so why do people that could not otherwise afford a location need to move into a location they could not afford on their own, or did not create on their own?

if he denies that he was a murderer, then he is not a self proclaimed murderer as the thread title suggests. so we would have to evaluate who he killed, and if they were enemies of his property or not, or if the people killed were threatening the property of others. if someone has declared a war against you, killing that person is part of war, rather than murder, so it needs to be evaluated on who he killed and what their declared intentions were against him. the military does have it's own laws and court system that will try members for murder when those laws are broken.

where does he say he was a murderer? he said he killed people as part of military operations, but does he think that was murder? military operations are considered lawful killings and not murder by the government when the killings follow the operation.

so what we need for innovation is the nazi party or a america that acted like the nazi party?

record a scedule of your activity for a week, then it can be reviewed.

some people want to make all their money from tips some want to make all their money from wages if the restaurant wants to hire people that want to make money from tips, why should the restaurant not hire people that want tips instead of a wage? if they were not paying competitively , the people would not work there. a competitive wage is a wage that goes down with more supply or less demand. so if one person takes more risk, and goes off commission, and another takes less risk, and goes off a wage, then both have decided what they want to work for, and can get compensated accordingly.

tip what you want, if you want. so it's alright if you don't want to tip. it's not like you are going to keep going to a place where you chose not to tip, when you choose to tip other place right?