I am not concerned about it. I am however concerned about how people on this site will react to this question. Notice that I am saying "how people on this site will react to this question", not how they will reason about the issue.
A little research on your part will demonstrate why you should not be concerned either.
Less than 3 percent Earn at or below the minimum wage. Data is from Bureau of Labor Statistics. Less than 28 out of 1000 workers earn at or below the minimum wage. One has to question why this issue is even on the evening news when fully 972 of every 1000 workers is not affected.
No he should not run Romney should not run in a national election again because he was part of such an inept campaign in 2012. He would not "go for the juggler vein" in the debates. He could have said "Bain Capital at its worst created less unemployment than Obama at his best. And Obama at his best created fewer jobs than Bain at its worst" However he was to reserved, and it cost him. A person needs to be both suited and experienced to be President. Romney had only one of those qualities.
On this site? Definitely. George Carlin was at times a linguistic genius. He took words to have meanings, and questions to be required to have all info needed for adjudication to be contained within the question. Many people on this site assume way to much from their own bias into a question and then answer another question entirely. A question like "what is better foreign car or domestic?" without setting forth a framework for translation of a qualitative value cannot be seriously answered. Yet many people on this site defended their view in a manner befitting a Chauvinist.
Anyway a quick answer would be about 17 percent of the population could be considered stupid meaning two Std Dev below the mean. People on this site might exceed this number.
Ratings are based on poor factors. The current ratings system measures factors such as sex, violence, language and thematic level. It is really only intended as an aid for parents to determine whether a movie is appropriate for a particular audience. The movie industry has played with the ratings in such a way as to make them more of a marketing tool that an audience decision tool. When I go to a movie, I want to see a good movie, and the ratings system does not help me at all. There should be a rating that lets me know that a movie is so bad it should not be seen by anyone.
Generally it is a white curtain. The voting booths in my area have a white curtain for a background. Sometimes it might have a red, white and blue border on it. I cannot remember ever seeing a religious background on the voting booth. Do some areas use a curtain with a cross on it? Or a Yin/Yang?
Yes, but the question is flawed. Should people bear arms? Yes if they desire and are not under disability. The question should be "Should people have the right to bear arms?" and that answer, per the Supreme Court of the United States is YES. However persons with prior convictions, mental impairment, drug or other substance abuse issues should be limited. But a US Citizen in good standing who is armed is only a threat to those who wish evil.
WE already have been nuked. There have been more nuclear detonations within the national borders of the USA than anywhere else. At least 1021 devices were detonated in Nevada alone. Granted these were "controlled" tests with minimal danger to humans, But the reality is that we have in fact been "nuked" more than any other country in the world.
Read all about it! Source : Richardrhodes.Com "RICHARD RHODES is the author or editor of twenty-four books including The Making of the Atomic Bomb, which won a Pulitzer Prize in Nonfiction, a National Book Award and a National Book Critics Circle Award"
In this book Mr. Rhodes documents interviews taken after the war. One of the interviews was with Japan's leading physicist who also headed up Japan's atomic bomb research program ( yes, Japan was working on the atomic bomb as were several other countries in the 1930's). He was called to Hiroshima to advise Japan on what to do. Seeing that the USA had used a uranium based bomb, this physicist advised his government to CONTINUE THE WAR, as it would take months to prep another uranium bomb. After Nagasaki, however, he found evidence of a plutonium based bomb and advised his government to SURRENDER or face total destruction. So you see, even the first bomb was not enough to end the war. And the rest, as they say, is history.
The Red Sox will win I have applied a fool proof simulation that calculates the chances of each team winning the World Series. Using data such as RBI, pitch stats, and looking at personnel, the simulation shows that the cardinals have less than a 1 percent chance of winning. The Red Sox have better than a 98 percent chance of winning.