text:
loss of job due to failed drug test what do you say to a new potential employer in an interview. | Indeed.com
May 20, 2008 Solution
Apr 28, 2010 Solution
mikezor51
Nov 18, 2010 Solution
EastBayFTW
Dec 26, 2010 Solution
Jan 22, 2011 Solution
Feb 1, 2011 Solution
Mar 30, 2011 Solution
Jun 4, 2011 Solution
As I said before, unfortunately, you’re screwed. They are not required to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Nevertheless, you’re out of work and are now looking for a job. Therefore, DO NOT RELEASE THIS INFORMATION TO A PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYER.
The chances of any future employer finding this out is slim. A past employer is limited as to what information they may release and under NO CIRCUMSTANCES are they allow to release medical information about you and a urinalysis is most definitely medical information. Moreover, this would include medical information discussed between you and a previous employer.
Jun 7, 2011 Solution
starletajm1
I am seeng a new pscyhistrast - and she has me on GABA. Seems to be better.
I just am so made that even with the suregery I have to do all of this crap!
Jul 5, 2011 Solution
Nov 10, 2011 Solution
Nov 11, 2011 Solution
jftoday1
In response to IslandStyle
Nov 12, 2011 Solution
Nov 22, 2011 Solution
Dec 7, 2011 Solution
Jan 12, 2012 Solution
justbeingcarefu
Jan 16, 2012 Solution
I was busted for possession of marijauna with intent to distribute 25 years ago in NJ. I pleaded guilty and received 3 years probation. This was a felony conviction. I paid a high price in financial costs and the emotional toll from the guilt and stigma that are associated with a criminal conviction. I have learned a hard lesson from my experience. I am a Professional with a long career.
My professional reputation is excellent. 3 years ago, I was laid off due to the recession. I have interviewed with a number of potential employers with no success. We are sick with worry!
More employers have recently interviewed me. 3 are currently interested. I have lied to one company about my drug conviction. I have not given the other 2 any information yet. I could have my record expunged in NJ, but the time lag is too great. What do I do? I could lie and hope for the best, but I know that public information companies have my records online. So, I don't have any choice but to reveal myself about an event that happened 25 years ago in another state. What do I say? One job is a huge opportunity for me. If I make a mistake now, I could lose the job. The HR person appeared to be open and honest, and even cited a case of a person who lied about a pot conviction to her and was refused a job because he lied.. She said they would have worked with them if he had told the truth. Trust is soo important in the work place. I don't want to start a work relationship having to look over my shoulder all the time, and my integrity is a very important part of my person. Any comments and advice would be helpful!! I don't want to hear bad
Jan 26, 2012 Solution
Terrancewebb
Jan 27, 2012 Solution
Feb 29, 2012 Solution
In response to babygirl3
In response to jay317
Mar 4, 2012 Solution
DeniseInAlabama
Jul 24, 2012 Solution
I've worked for this company for over 2yrs and about a month ago I hurt my back lifting something the wrong way. When I told a manager they said to go home and see how I feel the next day, didn't fill out an incident report or anything. Came back 3 days later and went to put something on the bottom of a cart and couldn't stand back up. Asked my manager if I could still file a claim so I could go see a doctor, said she had to check with the other manager. Waited a week with no response so towards end of my shift (2 weeks after injury) I found my immediate manager and told her everything that had happened, went to ER that day, took a urine test, and now on light duty and physical therapy. My problem is that the results just now came back, test was taken Nov 3, today Nov 15 and said I tested positive for meth, which I don't use, and marijuana. Told the MRO doc I used pot bout week before test because pain from injury was really bad, doc hardly let me say anything in defense of the results. Called my HR lady at work, she said to call and talk to them again.
So my question is how do I keep my job with a positive test? I take a number of prescriptions and OTC meds everyday, some of which I think contributed to the meth positive, will that help save my job?
Nov 15, 2012 Solution
In response to Californiaguy
In response to FroggyWolf
UnixBrat
Nov 16, 2012 Solution
In response to UnixBrat
Dec 1, 2012 Solution
Nov 27, 2013 Solution
There are ways to pass urine tests for females. I know of a woman on parole who did this, had someone urinate into a prescription pill bottle then cover the top with foil and a rubber band. She inserted that into herself and while sitting she used a fingernail to pop the foil to produce a stream. The insertion keeps the product warm.
Look, if you are failing drug tests, your larger problem is that you are doing drugs. Get off of drugs and all this will go away 🙂
Nov 30, 2013 Solution
Dec 30, 2013 Solution
Nov 7, 2015 Solution
In response to DoubtingThomas
This is where you get your congressman and senators involved. Also this is where voting and voting intelligently during elections comes into play. Firstly even if you are using illicit drugs during your own time you are still technically doing something illegal. Now to one of our political parties illicit drugs especially marijuana is to there core unacceptable and they can, will, and are doing everything in their power to make possession of punishable to the extreme. I mean really, arresting someone for tiny mouth of pot, come on.
Now if we all worked together to push our elected representatives maybe things would change a bit. How about lessening simple possession laws, going after the distribution centers and manufacturing instead.
Feb 5, 2016 Solution
Apr 19, 2016 Solution
I got injured a week ago but my boss didn't sent me to dr he gave me two days off to rest after two days of rest didn't help I told him I need to see a dr insurance asked for drug test and I smoke mj at times but not during work will it still affect me
Jun 30, 2016 Solution
NoThanks3
Oh come on. Just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong, and just because something is legal doesn't make it right. If you knew any of the history as to why certain drugs are illegal, maybe you wouldn't take such a stickler black and white approach. A lot of it is simply based on politics and the unwillingness for people in the government to admit mistakes. Bringing healthcare costs into the discussion really shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. Alcohol is perfectly legal, is addictive, and is the cause of many diseases and deaths. The same for nicotine in cigarettes. I could be a raging alcoholic, get blind stinking drunk on a Friday night and drive drunk all over town and put a lot of lives in danger yet show up on Monday morning and test clean for your stupid drug test.
Personally, I'd rather invest my time in an employer who has a little bit of understanding and humanity to them rather than someone who is a cold, merciless robot concerned only with hiring people that blindly obey. Honestly, it sounds like you're the selfish one who doesn't care about anything other than yourself.


text:
11:09 EDT, 21 February 2016
17:03 EDT, 21 February 2016
Most watched News videos Guests arrive for Pippa Middleton's wedding to James Matthews Pippa and new husband James Matthews ready to jet off on honeymoon Pippa Middleton and James Matthews leave church after wedding Police arrive outside chaotic Manchester Arena after 'loud bangs' Crowds panic after 'loud bang' at Ariana Grande show, Manchester Horrifying moment sea lion drags young girl into water Moment Melania appears to swat away President Trump's hand Trump arrives in Israel hoping to revive peace process Chaotic scenes following 'explosion' at Manchester Arena Guests arrive at Pippa Middleton's wedding in variety of outfits Crowds run through Manchester station in panic after 'explosion' Ariana Grande performs at Manchester arena before big 'explosion' BREAKING NEWS: Reports of up to 20 dead and many injured... The dream dress (and fashion nightmares) at Pippa's... EXCLUSIVE: All partied out, Pippa? Sleepy-looking bride... Truth behind Harry's '100-mile dash': Prince didn't leave... Revealed, the best man's VERY lewd speech: Toe-curling... Shalom! Trump lands in Israel in pursuit of elusive peace... Dutch Olympic gold medallist, 43, goes completely NAKED... Swat team: Melania slaps at President Trump when he tries... 'The sexiest thing in the world is being really smart':... Did Pippa's wedding bill hit £1million? Guests reveal the... JAN MOIR: Yes, Kate bagged a Prince. But with a... British actress is arrested after drunken rampage in... Trump becomes the first sitting American president to... Theresa May pledges an 'absolute limit' on social care... Dirty Harry could not be produced today thanks to... Toddler who had just learned to walk suffers horrific... The no-go zone for women... in PARIS: Locals say they are... The atrocities of war: New book explores why soldiers... MOST READ NEWS Previous Next ● ● ● ● Comments 1620

type: global

value: This website is the website of the Daily Mail, a newspaper in the United Kingdom, and of its sister paper The Mail on Sunday. MailOnline is a division of dmg media, which is owned by Daily Mail and General Trust plc.


text:
Re: [VuFind-General] File that checks if you are using a mobile
From: Stephen Hovey <hoveys@bu...> - 2013-10-03 13:02:02
Nevermind I found it (that happens too often just after an email - sorry)
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 9:00 AM
Subject: [VuFind-General] File that checks if you are using a mobile device
Anyone know off hand in 1.3 which/where the file is with the code that determines if you are using a mobile browser or not?
[VuFind-General] File that checks if you are using a mobile device
From: Stephen Hovey <hoveys@bu...> - 2013-10-03 13:00:19
hoveys@...

value: This website is a web service that offers software consumers a centralized online location to control and manage open-source software projects and research business software. It provides source code repository hosting, bug tracking, mirroring of downloads for load balancing, a wiki for documentation, developer and user mailing lists, user-support forums, user-written reviews and ratings, a news bulletin, micro-blog for publishing project updates, and other features.


text:
David Slosberg
Sign Guest Book SLOSBERG, David DAVID SLOSBERG David Slosberg passed away on Sunday morning, August 31, 2014. He was preceded in death by his beloved wife of 51 years, Myrna Hofferman Slosberg, of blessed memory. David will always be remembered for his kind and...
Read Full Obituary for David Slosberg
Published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Sept. 1, 2014
Anita T. GEIST
Sign Guest Book GEIST, Anita T. Anita T. Geist, age 89, of Atlanta, died on August 20, 2014. She was preceded in death by her husband Sidney and 2 sons, Steven and Richard. Survivors include her daughter Carol Geist, Atlanta: daughters-in-law, Rosa Benitez and...
Read Full Obituary for Anita T. GEIST
Published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Aug. 31, 2014
Geist, Anita age 89, of Atlanta, died on August 20, 2014. She was preceded in death by her husband Sidney and 2 sons, Steven and Richard. Survivors include her daughter Carol Geist, Atlanta: daughters-in-law, Rosa Benitez and Melinda Brew;...
Read Full Obituary for Anita Geist
GEIST Anita T. Geist, age 89, of Atlanta, died on August 20, 2014. She was preceded in death by her husband Sidney and 2 sons, Steven and Richard. Survivors include her daughter Carol Geist, Atlanta: daughters-in-law, Rosa Benitez and Melinda Brew;...
Milton KAFOGLIS
Sign Guest Book KAFOGLIS, Milton Milton Z Kafoglis, 89, was born May 2, 1925 in Lexington, Kentucky to Kalliopi and Zacharias Kafoglis, immigrants from Asia Minor (Turkey). He attended Henry Clay High School in Lexington and went to Fort Benning, Georgia in his...
Read Full Obituary for Milton KAFOGLIS
Published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Aug. 30, 2014
Sign Guest Book WEINER, Seymour Seymour "Tot" Weiner passed away late Thursday morning, August 28th, at the age of 90. Seymour was a veteran of the United States Army and served his country in World War II. He will be remembered for his love of family and candid...
Read Full Obituary for Seymour WEINER
Charlotte Clein
Sign Guest Book CLEIN, Charlotte Charlotte Clein, 97, of Atlanta, died peacefully Monday, August 25, 2014. The youngest of three girls, she was born in Chicago, IL to Samuel and Hannah Bistroff, both of blessed memory, on February 8, 1917. She married Solomon...
Read Full Obituary for Charlotte Clein
Sign Guest Book BECKER, Saul Saul Becker died peacefully Aug. 23, 2014. At home, in his own bed, surrounded by his treasures -- his family, as he had wished. Using the words of Frank Sinatra, we can certainly say that Saul Becker did it "his way." Born in 1927, to...
Read Full Obituary for Saul BECKER
Published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Aug. 24, 2014
Hilda F. SMITH
Sign Guest Book SMITH, Hilda F. Hilda F. Smith, 89, of Atlanta, passed away peacefully Tuesday, August 19, 2014. Born in Frankfurt, Germany to Lena and Jacob Fox, both of blessed memory, she came to the United States at the age of 13. Hilda managed the dental...
Read Full Obituary for Hilda F. SMITH
Published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Aug. 20, 2014
William Deloach Knight
Sign Guest Book KNIGHT, William William Deloach Knight left this world too early the morning of August 16, 2014. He leaves behind a wife of 49 years, Linda and 4 children, Mark, Amy, Christopher, and Jeremy. He was a devoted family man who served his country for 26...
Read Full Obituary for William Deloach Knight
William Deloach Knight Atlanta William Deloach Knight left this world too early the morning of August 16, 2014. He leaves behind a wife of 49 years, Linda; and 4 children, Mark, Amy, Christopher, and Jeremy. He was a devoted family man who served...
Shirley L. Halpern
Sign Guest Book HALPERN, Shirley L. SHIRLEY L. HALPERN Shirley L. Halpern, age 89, of Atlanta, died August 16, 2014. She was preceded in death by her husband, Bernard Halpern, of blessed memory, a prominent Atlanta real estate developer and philanthropist. Shirley...
Read Full Obituary for Shirley L. Halpern
Barnett Jacobskind
Sign Guest Book JACOBSKIND, Barnett Barnett (Barney) Jacobskind died peacefully Saturday, August 16, 2014 at Hospice Atlanta Center. Mr. Jacobskind was born in Miami, Florida to Gussie (nee Rappaport) and Max Jacobskind. He graduated from the University of Miami...
Read Full Obituary for Barnett Jacobskind
View More Recent Obituaries from Dressler's Jewish Funeral Care Most Popular Atlanta Flowers and Gifts
Send Flowers View more popular Atlanta flowers and gifts Search Dressler's Jewish Funeral Care Obituaries
Tiles Courtesy of MapQuest Upcoming Funeral Services for Dressler's Jewish Funeral Care:
Funeral service - Friday September 12, 2014
Inurnment - Friday September 12, 2014

value: This website is a United States-based website founded in 1998, the world's largest commercial provider of online memorials. The Web site hosts obituaries and memorials for more than 70 percent of all U.S. deaths.


text:
MIDEAST STOCKS-Saudi market rises before 2017 budget, Egypt extends bull run | Daily Mail Online
MIDEAST STOCKS-Saudi market rises before 2017 budget, Egypt extends bull run
DUBAI, Dec 21 (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia's stock market rose on Wednesday on the eve of the government's release of its 2017 budget, and Egypt's extended a bull run fuelled by foreign money and last month's float of the Egyptian pound.
* The index climbed 0.4 percent to 7,057 points.
* The index rose 0.4 percent to 3,520 points.
* The index fell 0.3 percent to 4,467 points.
* The index edged down 0.02 percent to 10,392 points.
* The index gained 1.8 percent to 12,367 points.
* The index edged up 0.1 percent to 5,672 points.
* The index rose 0.2 percent to 5,728 points.
* The index edged up 0.1 percent to 1,193 points.


text:
Wimbledon chiefs angered by former champion Angela Buxton after anti-Semitic claim | Daily Mail Online
Wimbledon chief have been left angered by former champion Angela Buxton
Buxton suggested they have not handed her membership because she is Jewish
Serena Williams finished Wimbledon as leader of the aces in the women’s singles
According to YouGov one in eight men reckon they could win a point against her
Wimbledon are angered by former champion Angela Buxton’s suggestion that they have not handed her a membership because she is Jewish.
Buxton, now 84, became the first British Jewish player to win a SW19 title in 1956, partnering American Althea Gibson in the doubles.
‘While the decision-making process for membership of the All England Club is a private matter, we strongly refute any suggestion that race or religion plays a factor,’ a statement read.
Angela Buxton (right) suggested she did not receive a membership because she is Jewish
The tale of tragedy behind new Brit hope: Wimbledon wildcard... Wimbledon in a £1bn race to be the top dog as the All... Simona Halep's explosive movement was key to final victory... Ruthless Halep DISMANTLES Serena Williams to claim her first...
Querrey the king of aces
Serena Williams finished Wimbledon as the leader of the aces in the women’s singles.
The 37-year-old hit 47 in total, though it took her 49 minutes to manage her first against the athletic Simona Halep.
In the men’s event, Sam Querrey leads the way with 122, followed by Milos Raonic on 92.
Sam Querrey leads the way on aces with 122, followed by Milos Raonic on 92
Think again, gents
According to YouGov, one in eight men reckon they could win a point against Serena Williams.
Unless they only asked eight blokes and one of them was named Roger Federer, methinks there are a few deluded chaps out there.
Williams would wipe the floor with us mere mortals.
Reid flies the Saltire
Andy Murray missed out on a Wimbledon doubles final but at least one Scot didn’t.
Wheelchair star Gordon Reid partnered Alfie Hewett on Saturday, aiming for fourth straight title, but lost 6-4, 6-2 to Belgium’s Joachim Gerard and Sweden’s Stefan Olsson.
Gordon Reid partnered Alfie Hewett but lost to Joachim Gerard and Stefan Olsson
Wimbledon chiefs angered by former champion Angela Buxton after anti-Semitic claim


text:
Acoustoelastic effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The acoustoelastic effect describes how the sound velocities (both longitudinal and shear wave velocities) of an elastic material change if subjected to an initial static stress field. This is a non-linear effect of the constitutive relation between mechanical stress and finite strain in a material of continuous mass. In classical linear elasticity theory small deformations of most elastic materials can be described by a linear relation between the applied stress and the resulting strain. This relationship is commonly known as the generalised Hooke's law. The linear elastic theory involves second order elastic constants (e.g. and ) and yields constant longitudinal and shear sound velocities in an elastic material, not affected by an applied stress. The acoustoelastic effect on the other hand include higher order expansion of the constitutive relation (non-linear elasticity theory[1]) between the applied stress and resulting strain, which yields longitudinal and shear sound velocities dependent of the stress state of the material. In the limit of an unstressed material the sound velocities of the linear elastic theory are reproduced.
The acoustoelastic effect was investigated as early as 1925 by Brillouin.[2] He found that the propagation velocity of acoustic waves would decrease proportional to an applied hydrostatic pressure. However, a consequence of his theory was that sound waves would stop propagating at a sufficiently large pressure. This paradoxial effect was later shown to be caused by the incorrect assumptions that the elastic parameters where not affected by the pressure.[3] In 1937 Murnaghan [4] presented a mathematical theory extending the linear elastic theory to also include finite deformation in elastic isotropic materials. This theory included three third-order elastic constants , , and . In 1953 Huges and Kelly [5] used the theory of Murnaghan in their experimental work to establish numerical values for higher order elastic constants for several elastic materials including Polystyrene, Armco iron, and Pyrex, subjected to hydrostatic pressure and uniaxial compression.
1 Non-linear elastic theory for hyperelastic materials
1.1 Constitutive relation - hyperelastic materials (Stress-strain relation)
1.2 Sound velocity
2.1 Elastic moduli for isotropic materials
2.1.1 Example values for steel
3 Acoustoelasticity for uniaxial tension of isotropic hyperelastic materials
3.1 Expansion of sound velocities
4.1 Example of ultrasonic testing techniques
4.2 Longitudinal and polarized shear waves
5.1 Engineering material - stress estimation
5.2 Granular and porous materials - geophysics
5.3 Soft tissue - medical ultrasonics
Non-linear elastic theory for hyperelastic materials[edit]
Constitutive relation - hyperelastic materials (Stress-strain relation)[edit]
A hyperelastic material is a special case of a Cauchy elastic material in which the stress at any point is objective and determined only by the current state of deformation with respect to an arbitrary reference configuration (for more details on deformation see also the pages Deformation (mechanics) and Finite strain). However, the work done by the stresses may depend on the path the deformation takes. Therefore a Cauchy elastic material has a non-conservative structure, and the stress cannot be derived from a scalar elastic potential function. The special case of Cauchy elastic materials where the work done by the stresses is independent of the path of deformation is referred to as a Green elastic or hyperelastic material. Such materials are conservative and the stresses in the material can be derived by a scalar elastic potential, more commonly known as the Strain energy density function.
The constitutive relation between the stress and strain can be expressed in different forms based on the chosen stress and strain forms. Selecting the 1st Piola-Kirchhoff stress tensor (which is the transpose of the nominal stress tensor ), the constitutive equation for a compressible hyper elastic material can be expressed in terms of the Lagrangian Green strain () as:
where is the deformation gradient tensor, and where the second expression utilises the Einstein summation convention for index notation of tensors. is the strain energy density function for a hyperelastic material and have been defined per unit volume rather than per unit mass since this avoids the need of multiplying the right hand side with the mass density of the reference configuration.[1]
Assuming that the scalar strain energy density function can be approximated by a Taylor series expansion in the current strain , it can be expressed (in index notation) as:
Imposing the restrictions that the strain energy function should be zero and have a minimum when the material is in the un-deformed state (i.e. ) it is clear that there are no constant or linear term in the strain energy function, and thus:
where is a fourth-order tensor of second-order elastic moduli, while is a sixth-order tensor of third-order elastic moduli. The symmetry of together with the scalar strain energy density function implies that the second order moduli have the following symmetry:
which further reduce the number of independent elastic constants to 21. The same arguments can be used for the third order elastic moduli . These symmetries also allows the elastic moduli to be expressed by the Voigt notation (i.e. and ).
where is the displacement of a material point from coordinate in the reference configuration to coordinate in the deformed configuration (see Figure 2 in the finite strain theory page). Including the power expansion of strain energy function in the constitutive relation and replacing the Lagrangian strain tensor with the expansion given on the finite strain tensor page yields (note that lower case have been used in this section compared to the upper case on the finite strain page) the constitutive equation
and higher order terms have been neglected [7] [8] (see

value: This website is the English-language edition of the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia. It was founded on 15 January 2001 as Wikipedia's first edition and, as of October 2021, has the most articles of any edition, at 6,412,521.


text:
Purple crocodile - Wikipedia
A purple crocodile similar to the one in the ad
The term purple crocodile (Dutch: Paarse krokodil) originates from a 2005 television advertisement by the Dutch insurance company OHRA promoting their lack of red tape. The purple crocodile has since become a metaphor for bureaucracy in the Netherlands.[1]
Description of the advertisement[edit]
The advertisement consists of a single sketch in which a mother and her daughter appear at the reception desk of a public swimming pool. The mother explains to the receptionist that the previous day her daughter left her inflatable purple crocodile at the swimming pool.
The receptionist hands the mother a form which must be filled out on both sides and handed in the following day between 9 and 10 AM, while the purple crocodile which her daughter had lost is seen standing in a corner of the reception desk. The mother then points at the purple crocodile and says that "it's right there." The receptionist says in a sneering tone "yes, it is right there" but takes no action.[2]
Appearance in Dutch law[edit]
A 2006 law Wijzigingswet belastingwetten ter vermindering van administratieve lasten aimed at reducing red tape has the official shortened name Wijzigingsplan «Paarse krokodil» (purple crocodile)[3][4]
^ Dutch Idioms and Expressions
^ Original advertisement in YouTube
^ Law on Wetten.overheid.nl
^ Cutting red tape: administrative simplification in the Netherland
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Purple_crocodile&oldid=752265246"	Categories: Advertising charactersDutch words and phrasesAdvertising stubsHidden categories: All stub articles	Navigation menu
Nederlands	Edit links	This page was last modified on 30 November 2016, at 10:10.


text:
From childhood, Laura James knew she was different. She struggled to cope in a world that often made no sense to her, as though her brain had its own operating system. It wasn't until she reached her 40s that she found out why: Suddenly and surprisingly, she was diagnosed with autism.
With a touching and searing honesty, Laura challenges everything we think we know about what it means to be autistic. Married with four children and a successful journalist, Laura examines the ways in which autism has shaped her career, her approach to motherhood, and her closest relationships. Laura's upbeat, witty writing offers new insight into the day-to-day struggles of living with autism, as her extreme attention to sensory detail - a common aspect of her autism - is fascinating to observe through her eyes.
As Laura grapples with defining her own identity, she also looks at the unique benefits neurodiversity can bring. Lyrical and lush, Odd Girl Out shows how being different doesn't mean being less, and proves that it is never too late for any of us to find our rightful place in the world.
©2018 Laura James (P)2018 Hachette Audio
"Too often a woman's success is pegged to the 'posse' with whom she surrounds herself. Laura James, relying on her independent spirit and the differences that set her apart, becomes an accomplished writer and starts a communications agency while raising four children. Odd Girl Out offers a choice of freedom over conformity through the understanding and embracing of one's disabilities." (Eileen Cronin, author of Mermaid: A Memoir of Resilience)
"James's story, told in an affecting, honest way, is at once intensely personal and extremely relatable... [it] reminds us to have compassion for those who defy our definition of normal, whether or not they have a label." (New York Journal of Books)
"There are so many myths about what it means to be autistic and Laura tells her story beautifully and truthfully. You will live every moment with her, feel her pain and want to right the wrongs. Some books make a big difference, this is one of them. It should be read by everyone." (Natasha Harding, The Sun)
"Honest and revealing...James demonstrates the complexity of autism, with its strengths as well as weaknesses." (Library Journal)

value: This website is an American online audiobook and podcast service that allows users to purchase and stream audiobooks and other forms of spoken word content. This content can be purchased individually or under a subscription model where the user receives "credits" that can be redeemed for content monthly and receive access to a curated on-demand library of content.


text:
User:Famspear - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This user has a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting.
This user remembers when telephone numbers began with exchange names, such as Lincoln.
This user has been on Wikipedia for 9 years, 1 month and 4 days.
I am an American in Texas. I have worked in the following areas: practice of law; practice as a certified public accountant (including but not limited to bank auditing); broadcast news reporter; talk show host; a gardener; a stock boy in a warehouse; and a clerk in a convenience store (among other things, and not necessarily in that order). My public performance exploits have included playing basketball against these guys, comic relief in a rodeo, and interviewing this gentleman. I was fortunate enough to be in the audience at the Great American Music Hall in San Francisco on Friday, June 18, 1976, to see this guy during the live recording of some of this album. I've attended performances by these guys (August 1970), these guys (September 1970), these guys (November 1972), these guys (early 1970s), this guy (early 1970s) and this guy (again, early 1970s) and these guys (1984). According to unverified family tree records, this lady might be my tenth cousin. According to the family records, this guy may be my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather. Also according to my family records, this guy apparently was my "half-fifth-great-grand-uncle."
In the real world, among other things, I currently represent taxpayers in their dealings with the Internal Revenue Service.
1 Cool things I have seen
3 Cluestick for Famspear!
4 Veteran Editor (or Tutnum)
5 Barnstar from Legis
6 Wikipedia official policies, guidelines, etc.
6.2 Verifiability
6.3 No Original Research
6.4 Vandalism
6.5 Behavior
6.6 More on Verifiability
6.7 Manual of style
6.9 Notice boards
7 Wikipedia related concepts
7.1 Biographies of living persons
7.3 Criteria for deletion of articles, etc.
7.4 Neutral point of view does not mean that the source cannot be biased
7.5 Bias of a particular source compared to neutral point of view of the article
7.6 Undue weight
7.7 NPOV and notability
7.8 Minority views
7.9 A bit about fringe theories
7.10 Reliability and self-published materials
7.11 On false authority
7.12 Exceptional claims require exceptional evidence
7.13 How to determine whether a view is established
7.14 Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought
7.15 Kinds of sources
7.16 Drive-by tagging
7.17 Expertise
7.18 Vandalism: persistent insertions of non-neutral point of view material after having been warned
7.19 Links normally to be avoided
7.20 Deletion of one spam link is not an endorsement of those that remain
7.21 Systemic bias
8 Essay on bias and neutral POV, from an article talk page
8.1 Wikipedia instructions, user boxes, etc.
9 Opportunity cost theory of value
10 Semantic silly stuff
11 Ideological purity in politics
12 From the Bible
13 Tax and other law stuff too
13.1 Some key links
13.2 What is law?
13.3 The terms "democracy" and "republic", etc.
13.4 Tax provisions in the United States Constitution
13.5 Tenth Amendment and federal taxes; regulatory effect of taxes
13.6 The Seventh Amendment
13.7 Direct taxes, indirect taxes, and the Sixteenth Amendment
13.8 Pollock overruled
13.9 Certain other cases involving U.S. Federal income tax
13.10 Certain cases involving U.S. federal taxes other than the income tax
13.11 From Miranda
13.12 Fifth Amendment, self-incrimination, the right to have legal counsel, and the role of the criminal defense lawyer
13.12.1 An innocent person who makes true statements can incriminate himself or herself
13.12.2 Coercion, denying access to legal counsel during interrogation, and denying access to a hearing
13.13 Freedom of speech
13.14 Origination Clause
13.15 Key points in U.S. Supreme Court decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
13.16 Examples of rights and privileges of national citizenship in the United States
13.17 Definitions
13.17.1 Definitions relating to "income"
13.17.2 Gross income other than the receipt of money
13.18 Precedent
13.19 Burden of proof
13.20 Real party in interest, capacity and standing
13.21 Usufruct
13.22 Psychology stuff
13.22.1 Tax Protesters and Transference
13.23 Evidence
13.24 Quotes about taxes
13.25 Court rulings versus Green Cheese arguments
13.26 Kruger and Dunning
13.27 The U.S. Constitution provides general descriptions of powers, not detailed, precise descriptions of subdivisions of those powers
13.28 Interpreting statutes according to their purpose or objective
13.29 Frivolous tax protester arguments as a burden on the courts
13.30 Natural rights and privileges are subject to taxation
13.31 A theme song for tax protesters
13.32 Quotes about writing, genius, etc.
13.33 From Absence of Malice
13.34 Social Security benefits
13.35 Bias and prejudice in court
13.36 Fair market value
13.37 Legal logic
13.37.1 Argumentum ad Verecundiam
13.37.2 Argumentum ad Hominem - Abusive
13.37.3 Argumentum ad Hominem - Circumstantial
13.38 Where is the law that makes me "liable" for the tax?
13.39 When does a U.S. federal income tax liability arise? (tax liability is created without assessment)
13.39.1 For bankruptcy law purposes
13.39.2 For Federal criminal tax law and other purposes
13.40 From Bull v. United States: Tax assessment has the force of a judgment
13.41 The "voluntary" U.S. federal income tax
13.42 The Beard test: A legally valid federal tax return
13.43 Material on the term "frivolous" and related terms
13.43.1 Frivolous tax returns
13.43.2 Frivolous arguments in the United States Tax Court
13.43.3 Frivolous arguments in a United States District Court
13.43.4 Frivolous arguments in a United States Bankruptcy Court
13.43.5 Frivolous appeals: in general
13.43.6 Frivolous appeals of decisions of the United States Tax Court
13.43.7 From the Coleman decision
13.43.8 From a prominent attorney
13.44 Some lessons about statutory law
13.45 Jury nullification
13.46 History of changes in status of the United States Tax Court
13.46.1 The Kuretski case
13.47 Title 18 of the United States Code
13.48 Retroactive changes in tax law; tax law is not a contract
13.49 U.S. Federal tax law complexity
13.49.1 Criminal law provisions of the Internal Revenue Code
13.50 Public Salary Tax Act of 1939 and Internal Revenue Code section 6331: IRS levy and the "federal worker" argument
13.51 More on section 6331: Administrative levy by Internal Revenue Service
13.52 Authority to execute 6020(b) returns
13.53 Interesting Quatloos forum threads
13.54 The Cheek doctrine
13.54.1 The Willie case
13.54.2 My commentary on the Cheek doctrine
13.54.3 The Arceneaux case
13.55 The Funk case: Income tax on compensation for labor
13.56 The Hendrickson Cracking the Code tax evasion scam and other cases on the frivolous "government privilege" argument
13.56.1 "Privilege" or "activity" court cases prior to Hendrickson's scam; the meaning of the term "excise"
13.56.2 Tax on inactivity
13.56.3 Illegal income is taxable
13.56.4 Hendrickson's conviction for the Cracking the Code scam
13.56.5 Followers of Hendrickson
13.56.6 Convictions of Hendrickson's followers
13.56.7 The Waltner case
13.56.8 Conclusion
13.57 Federal Reserve System
13.57.1 Basic information
13.57.2 How banks make loans
13.57.3 The Lewis case
13.57.4 Lawful money
13.57.5 A brief lecture on creation of money by the Federal Reserve System
13.57.6 The Horne case
13.57.7 The Anderson case
13.57.8 Commentary on terminology
13.57.9 The Federal Reserve System, Federal Reserve notes, and tax protesters
13.58 Subject matter jurisdiction & personal jurisdiction in a federal criminal case
13.59 The role of a federal prosecutor
13.60 Retaliating against judge or law enforcement officer
13.61 Representation of a collective entity in court
13.62 Defamation
13.63 Miscellaneous reference materials
14 Some articles of interest
15 The euphemism treadmill
18 Voice acting, announcing, narration, etc.
19 Other miscellaneous links
20 Places I've Been
Cool things I have seen[edit]
Some of the most impressive things I have ever seen include: the birth of my son, the Musée d'Orsay, the Musée du Louvre, L'Arc de Triomphe, la Tour Eiffel and la Gare Montparnasse in Paris, the Palace of Versailles near Paris, the London Underground, St. Paul's Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, Liverpool Street Station, Paddington Station, and Abbey Road Studios (just the outside of the building) in London, the Art Institute of Chicago and the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, the United States Capitol, the White House, the court house of the Supreme Court of the United States, Arlington National Cemetery, the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC, the Monterey Bay Aquarium, the Golden Gate Bridge, breathtaking sunrise through the fog in the Atchafalaya swamp, Mount St. Helens, the cockpit of a Grumman F-14 Tomcat fighter plane, the Bavarian Alps, Yosemite National Park in California, and Willie Mays hitting a home run at the Astrodome in Houston when I was a boy.
Danke schön! Yours, Famspear 20:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
This is for all of the hard work, effort, and research you have put into Ed and Elaine Brown article. Sidatio 22:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Cluestick for Famspear![edit]
This editor is a Veteran Editor, and is entitled to display this Iron Editor Star
{{subst:SA-veteran}}
This editor is a Tutnum, and is entitled to display this Book of Knowledge
{{subst:SA-tutnum}}
Ribbon equivalent
Great work! Morphh (talk) 13:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Wow, thanks! Famspear 14:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar from Legis[edit]
I seem to constantly come across your hard work and diligence in editing articles; I wish we had many more professional editors like you keeping the less glamorous articles accurate and tidy. --Legis (talk - contribs) 00:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! Wait a minute, I edit primarily in legal articles, especially tax law articles. Isn't tax law the most glamorous topic in all of Wikipedia?
Oh, wait. Maybe I need to get out more! Yours, Famspear 00:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia official policies, guidelines, etc.[edit]
WP:Five pillars
WP:POL (official policy)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_policies (list of policies)
"Neutral Point of View": WP:Neutral point of view (official policy)
WP:Neutral_point of view/FAQ (official policy)
WP:NPOV dispute (maintenance process, including the rule prohibiting drive-by tagging)
"Verifiability": WP:Verifiability (official policy)
"No Original Research": WP:No original research (official policy)
WP:No original research#Primary.2C secondary.2C and tertiary sources (primary, secondary and tertiary sources)
WP:Attribution (summary of Verifiability and No Original Research)
WP:Consensus (official policy)
WP:ATT/FAQ (proposed policy, guideline or process)
WP:Civility (official policy)
WP:Assume good faith (official policy)
WP:No Personal Attacks (official policy)
WP:OWN Ownership of articles
WP:NLT (no legal threats)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_overlook_legal_threats (essay)
WP:Dispute resolution (official policy)
WP:Etiquette (behavioral guideline)
WP:What Wikipedia is not (official policy)
WP:Fringe theories (content guideline)
WP:Talk page guidelines (guideline)
WP:Reverting (help page)
WP:Three-revert rule (official policy)
WP:Edit war (editing guideline)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Uw-3rr (warning template)
{{subst:uw-3rr|Article}} (warning template)
WP:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR (to report edit war)
WP:Vandalism (official policy)
WP:Disruptive editing (behavioral guideline)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SPA
WP:TE (essay on tendentious editing)
WP:Conflict_of_interest (behavioral guideline)
WP:External links (guideline)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_conduct
More on Verifiability[edit]
WP:Reliable sources (guideline)
WP:Reliable sources#Using online and self-published sources (guideline)
WP:Citing sources (style guide)
WP:Citing sources/example style (example)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluebook (Harvard Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALWD_Citation_Manual (ALWD Citation Manual)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_citation (Case citation)
WP:MOS (guideline)
WP:MOSBIO (guideline)
Wikipedia related concepts[edit]
See WP:Biographies of living persons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28academics%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28books%29
Criteria for deletion of articles, etc.[edit]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy (official policy)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion (description of nominating process, etc.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion (policy: uncontroversial deletions)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CSD (policy: criteria for speedy deletion)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:AfD_debates (categories for AfD debates)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_process (guideline: description of the actual deletion process)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction_to_deletion_process (essay)
Neutral point of view does not mean that the source cannot be biased[edit]
From the rule on Neutral Point of View:
As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. The neutral point of view policy is often misunderstood. The acronym NPOV does not mean "no points of view". The elimination of article content cannot be justified under this policy by simply labeling it "POV". The neutral point of view is a point of view that is neutral, that is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject. Debates within topics are described, represented and characterized, but not engaged in. Background is provided on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular. Detailed articles might also contain the mutual evaluations of each viewpoint, but studiously refrain from asserting which is better. One can think of unbiased writing as the fair, analytical description of all relevant sides of a debate, including the mutual perspectives and the published evidence. When editorial bias toward one particular point of view can be detected, the article needs to be fixed.
See: [1] (copied on 4 January 2008; bolding added).
If, for example, a liberal think tank supports a particular position about whether the Alternative Minimum Tax is good or bad, it is OK to document that in Wikipedia with an adequate description that it is the liberal think tank that is taking that position. You cannot delete "points of view" in Wikipedia merely because they are liberal, conservative, leftist, rightist, etc. Neutral point of view does not mean the absence of bias in the SOURCE MATERIAL. In essence, it is OK for the source material to be biased, and it is OK for the source itself to be biased, as odd as that may sound. Neutral point of view means that Wikipedia itself does not take a position that this source's viewpoint is correct, or that some other source's viewpoint is incorrect.
Bias of a particular source compared to neutral point of view of the article[edit]
"Bias" generally does relate to the Wikipedia policy on Neutral Point of View [ . . . ]. Bias of a particular source is not the same as neutral point of view (or lack of same) of the article as a whole. Although it may seem odd to a newcomer at first, there is no "neutral point of view" requirement in Wikipedia that sources used in Wikipedia be unbiased. If you think about it after a while, you may realize why this is so.
As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. The neutral point of view policy is often misunderstood. The acronym NPOV does not mean "no points of view". The elimination of article content cannot be justified under this policy by simply labeling it "POV". The neutral point of view is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject: it neither endorses nor discourages viewpoints. Debates within topics are clearly described, represented and characterized, but not engaged in. Background is provided on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular. Detailed articles might also contain the mutual evaluations of each viewpoint, but must studiously refrain from asserting which is better.
-- from WP:NPOV (bolding added).
You cannot present opposing viewpoints in an article without those viewpoints being biased. By definition, the viewpoints must be biased in order for those viewpoints to be opposed to each other. "Neutral point of view" means the neutrality of the article as a whole -- not the absence of points of view (biased or unbiased) within the article.
It is not Wikipedia itself that is saying the words in the quotation. It is the source that is making the statement. And it is OK to show that quotation (or an accurate paraphrase of that statement) in the Wikipedia article, even if the statement is biased and even if the source making that statement is biased.
What would be impermissible, however, would be for Wikipedia to then say "Oh, by the way, this source is correct" or "that source is wrong".
Neutral point of view is a complicated concept in Wikipedia, and we would agree that there are certainly some ways that an article might fail the NPOV standard, even without the article expressly saying "this source is right" or "that source is wrong." Deleting an accurate, in-context quotation from a reliable, previously published third party source merely because that quotation is biased, however, is generally not appropriate -- for the simple reason that the mere use of a "biased quotation" does not, in and of itself, violate the NPOV rule.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sovereign_Citizen_Movement
(by Famspear, on 18 April 2008).
Regarding undue weight:
NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each. Now an important qualification: Articles that compare views need not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and may not include tiny-minority views at all. For example, the article on the Earth only very briefly refers to the Flat Earth theory, a view of a distinct minority.
We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view, and views that are held by a tiny minority should not be represented except in articles devoted to those views. To give undue weight to a significant-minority view, or to include a tiny-minority view, might be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. Wikipedia aims to present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties. This applies not only to article text, but to images, external links, categories, and all other material as well.
Minority views can receive attention on pages specifically devoted to them — Wikipedia is not paper. But on such pages, though a view may be spelled out in great detail, it must make appropriate reference to the majority viewpoint, and must not reflect an attempt to rewrite majority-view content strictly from the perspective of the minority view.
If you are able to prove something that no one or few currently believe, Wikipedia is not the place to premiere such a proof. Once a proof has been presented and discussed elsewhere, however, it may be referenced.
Copied from [2] on 30 March 2007 (US central daylight time)
NPOV and notability[edit]
From the discussion of NPOV:
Notability is especially important because while NPOV encourages editors to add alternate and multiple points of view to an article, it does not claim that all views are equal. Although NPOV does not claim that some views are more truthful than others, it does acknowledge that some views are held by more people than others. Accurately representing a view therefore also means explaining who holds the view and whether it is a majority or minority view.
Soon it became evident that editors who rejected a majority view would often marshall sources to argue that a minority view was superior to a majority view - or would even add sources in order to promote the editor's own view. Therefore, the NOR policy was established in 2003 to address problematic uses of sources. The original motivation for NOR was to prevent editors from introducing fringe views in science, especially physics - or from excluding verifiable views that, in the judgement of editors, were wrong. [ . . ]
" [ . . . ] the Wikipedia neutrality policy certainly does not state, or imply, that we must "give equal validity" to minority views. It does state that we must not take a stand on them as encyclopedia writers; but that does not stop us from describing the majority views as such; from fairly explaining the strong arguments against the pseudoscientific theory; from describing the strong moral repugnance that many people feel toward some morally repugnant views; and so forth." Copied from [3] on 30 March 2007 (US Central daylight time)
On "fairness of tone":
If we are going to characterize disputes neutrally, we should present competing views with a consistently fair and sensitive tone. Many articles end up as partisan commentary even while presenting both points of view. Even when a topic is presented in terms of facts rather than opinion, an article can still radiate an implied stance through either selection of which facts to present, or more subtly their organization.
We should write articles with the tone that all positions presented are at least worthy of unbiased representation, bearing in mind that views which are in the extreme minority do not belong in Wikipedia at all. We should present all significant, competing views impartially.
(bolding added). From [4], on 7 February 2008.
A bit about fringe theories[edit]
Articles which cover hypotheses in detail should document (with reliable sources) the current level of acceptance among the relevant academic community of the hypothesis. If proper attribution cannot be found among reliable sources of a hypothesis's standing, it should be assumed that the hypothesis has not received consideration or acceptance. However, a lack of consideration or acceptance does not necessarily imply rejection; hypotheses should not be portrayed as rejected [ . . . ] unless such claims can be documented in reliable sources.
Hypotheses which have been rejected, which are widely considered to be absurd [ . . . ] should be documented as such. Copied from [5] on 8 January 2007.
Reliability and self-published materials[edit]
“Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.
“Exceptions may be when a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field, or a well-known professional journalist has produced self-published material. In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by reliable third-party publications. However, exercise caution: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.” Copied from [6] on 3 October 2006
"A self-published source is a published source that has not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking, or where no one stands between the writer and the act of publication. It includes personal websites, and books published by vanity presses. Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources." Copied from [7] on 5 October 2006.
On false authority[edit]
“Look out for false claims of authority. Advanced degrees give authority in the topic of the degree. Web sites that have numerous footnotes may be entirely unreliable. The first question to ask yourself is, "What are the credentials and expertise of the people taking responsibility for a website?" Anyone can post anything on the web.
“Use sources who have postgraduate degrees or demonstrable published expertise in the field they are discussing. The more reputable ones are affiliated with academic institutions. The most reputable have written textbooks in their field: these authors can be expected to have a broad, authoritative grasp of their subject. In general, higher education textbooks are frequently revised and try to be authoritative. Textbooks aimed at secondary-school students, however, do not try to be authoritative and are subject to political approval.” Copied from [8] on 3 October 2006.
"Certain red flags should prompt editors to closely and skeptically examine the sources for a given claim. [ . . . . ] Claims not supported[,] or claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view in the relevant academic community. Be particularly careful when proponents say there is a conspiracy to silence them." Copied from [9] on 5 October 2006.
How to determine whether a view is established[edit]
The inclusion of a view that is held only by a tiny minority may constitute original research because there may be a lack of sufficiently credible, third-party, published sources to back it up.
From a mailing list post by Jimbo Wales, Wikipedia's founder:
If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it's true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or not. Copied from [10] on 9 October 2006.
Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published. Please do not use Wikipedia for [ . . . ]:
Personal essays or Blogs that state your particular opinions about a topic. Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge. It is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of human knowledge. In the unusual situation where the opinions of a single individual are important enough to discuss, it is preferable to let other people write about them. Personal essays on topics relating to Wikipedia are welcome in your user namespace or on the Meta-wiki. There is a Wikipedia fork at Wikinfo that encourages personal opinions in articles.
Copied from [11] on 6 December 2006.
Kinds of sources[edit]
Although most articles should rely predominantly on secondary sources, there are rare occasions when they may rely entirely on primary sources (for example, current events or legal cases). An article or section of an article that relies on a primary source should (1) only make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and (2) make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims. Contributors drawing on entirely primary sources should be careful to comply with both conditions.
Copied from [12] on 22 March 2007.
Drive-by tagging is not permitted. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort. Copied from [13] on 15 August 2007.
For an example of drive-by tagging by an anonymous editor -- who, without actually making a substantive change in the applicable article and without discussing in the related talk page, inserted the hurried comment "don't have time to nitpick everything in the article, the general message is biased against the film, this needs to be neturalised [sic]" -- see [14]
"Points of view held as having little credibility by experts, but with wide popular appeal (e.g.: the belief in astrology, considered as irrational and incorrect by the vast majority of scientists and astronomers), should be reported, but as such: that is, we should expose the point of view and its popular appeal, but also the opinion held by the vast majority of experts." Copied from [15] on 30 March 2007 (US central daylight time).
Vandalism: persistent insertions of non-neutral point of view material after having been warned[edit]
NPOV violations: The neutral point of view is a difficult policy for many of us to understand, and even Wikipedia veterans occasionally accidentally introduce material which is non-ideal from an NPOV perspective. Indeed, we are all affected by our beliefs to a greater or lesser extent. Though inappropriate, this is not vandalism in itself unless persisted in after being warned.
Copied from [16] on 15 February 2007 (bolding added).
Links normally to be avoided[edit]
"In addition to the restrictions on linking, and except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or is an official page of the subject of the article, one should avoid:
Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority.
Copied on 12 December 2006 from[17]
Deletion of one spam link is not an endorsement of those that remain[edit]
To quote from a guideline:
See [18] and [19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BIAS (countering systemic bias)
Essay on bias and neutral POV, from an article talk page[edit]
A new user deleted a quotation from the Anti-Defamation League, objecting to the verbiage because the verbiage is biased. I reinstated the verbiage.
"Bias" generally does relate to the Wikipedia policy on Neutral Point of View -- but not in the way that the new user may have thought. Bias of a particular source is not the same as neutral point of view (or lack of same) of the article as a whole. Although it may seem odd to a newcomer at first, there is no "neutral point of view" requirement in Wikipedia that sources used in Wikipedia be unbiased. If you think about it after a while, you may realize why this is so.
--by Famspear, from talk page for Sovereign Citizen Movement
Wikipedia instructions, user boxes, etc.[edit]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_archive_a_talk_page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Single_purpose_account (essay)
"Wikipedia articles are supposed to represent all views (more at NPOV), instead of supporting one over another, even if you believe something strongly. The Talk ("discussion") pages are not a place to debate value judgments about which of those views are right or wrong or better. If you want to do that, there are venues such as Usenet, public weblogs and other wikis. Use the Talk pages to discuss the accuracy/inaccuracy, POV bias, or other problems in the article, not as a soapbox for advocacy." Copied from [20] on 20 October 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Request_comment_on_users (information on requests for comments on users)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Law_citation_templates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:TX_Govt_Code
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_administrator_attention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_Adminship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_reading_list
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_how-to_guide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_requests_for_adminship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:SOUP (essay)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Userbox
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Userbox_Maker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Userboxes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:AfD_debates
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers/sysop&limit=1500
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rollback_feature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rollback_policy
Opportunity cost theory of value[edit]
The opportunity cost theory of value:
The cost of any action or forebearance is the value of the best alternative in the set of mutually exclusive alternatives applicable thereto.
Semantic silly stuff[edit]
From time to time I've heard people rant about the use of the word "raise" in connection with the bringing up of children. The story I hear is that we "rear" children but we "raise" corn, and that saying that we "raise" children is somehow incorrect.
In terms of bringing up children, the terms "rear" and "raise" are properly interchangeable in American English:
raise [verb, transitive].... to bring up or rear (children).....
--from Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, p. 1174, World Publishing Co., Inc. (2nd Coll. Ed. 1978) (parenthetical in the original).
raise [verb, transitive].... to bring up (a child).....
--from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 954, G. & C. Merriam Co. (8th ed. 1976) (parenthetical in the original).
Ideological purity in politics[edit]
"....the price of ideological purity is electoral irrelevance..."
--Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, Law Professor, Washington and Lee University (Nov. 8, 2012).
From the Bible[edit]
Be not rash with your mouth, nor let your heart be hasty to utter a word before God, for God is in heaven, and you upon the earth; therefore let your words be few.
--Ecclesiastes 5:2 (Rev. Stand. Vers.) (5:1 in Hebrew)
-- Proverbs 25:2 (Rev. Stand. Vers.)
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. [....] Not every one who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.' Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell; and great was the fall of it.
--Matthew 7:15-27 (Rev. Stand. Vers.)
And when he entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came up to him as he was teaching, and said, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" Jesus answered them, "I also will ask you a question; and if you tell me the answer, then I also will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven or from men?" And they argued with one another, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will say to us, 'Why then did you not believe him?' But if we say, 'From men,' we are afraid of the multitude; for all hold that John was a prophet." So they answered Jesus, "We do not know." And he said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things."
--Matthew 21:23-27 (Rev. Stand. Vers.)
"There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death." --Proverbs 16:25 (Rev. Stand. Vers.)
"Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy." --Proverbs 27:6 (Rev. Stand. Vers.)
--Hebrews 11:1-3 (Rev. Stand. Vers.)
Tax and other law stuff too[edit]
Some key links[edit]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Taxation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_government_navigational_boxes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:UStaxation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:US_tax_acts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_Taxation_articles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_federal_taxation_legislation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard/Archive_25 (includes a discussion about the Wikipedia tax protester articles)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tax_protester/Archive_05
Talk:Income tax/Removed text (link to an old talk page on income tax)
Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment (23 January - 9 February 2008)
Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment - examples
User:BD2412/Tax protesters - the role of courts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Taxation_articles_by_quality_log
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_December_10#Category:American_tax_evaders
law (noun) -- "body of principles, standards and rules promulgated by government" - Black's Law Dictionary, p. 796 (5th ed. 1979).
Legal commentator Daniel B. Evans has stated:
[ . . . ]when the courts, the legislatures, and the voters all agree on what the law is, then that is what the law is. The fact that some people believe that the law should be different that what courts have said it is doesn’t mean that the law is different from what the courts have said, but only that they should argue their positions within the political system and attempt to change the results.
In the case of the income tax, there is no conflict. The judicial, executive, and legislative branches of our government, and a majority of the voters, have all agreed for more than 90 years that (1) an income tax is constitutional, (2) it applies to wages, and (3) every citizen and resident of every state is required to file a tax return and pay the tax [ . . . ]
--Daniel B. Evans, The Tax Protester FAQ, retrieved on 5 Sept. 2007 from [21]
Daniel B. Evans has also stated:
Most tax protesters really don't understand what goes on in courts, or court opinions. They don't understand "due process" or "jurisdiction" or "burden of proof." To them, what goes on in court is just moving words around. It's incomprehensible and nonsensical to them, which makes it the same as magic.
Their response is to try to rearrange the words to find the right incantation, the right spell, to allow them to win. What they write is meaningless gibberish to us because what we write is meaningless gibberish to them. They respond in an imitative but nonsensical way because superficial manipulations of words is all that they can understand.
And when I say they can't understand, I'm not necessarily commenting on their intelligence, because it's really a combination of ignorance and emotional blockage. They don't really want to understand anything that means they're wrong, so they don't really try to understand.
Daniel B. Evans, June 19, 2009.
More from Daniel B. Evans:
"The reason that tax protesters write gibberish is that they don’t understand basic legal concepts like jurisdiction, due process, or common law, and frequently misapply the meanings of even ordinary words like “income” and “includes.” Combine that kind of ignorance with self-righteous anger towards the entire legal system and delusions of literacy, and the result is usually an indecipherable tapestry of legal jargon woven together into an unintelligible mess."
The terms "democracy" and "republic", etc.[edit]
democracy: "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usu. involving periodically held free elections" --Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 302, G & C. Merriam Company (8th ed. 1976).
democracy: "That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy." --Black's Law Dictionary, pp. 388-389 (5th ed. 1979).
republic: "a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usu. a president [ . . . ] a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law" --Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 983, G & C. Merriam Company (8th ed. 1976).
republic: "that form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens." --Black's Law Dictionary, p. 1171 (5th ed. 1979).
republican government: "a government by representatives chosen by the people" --Black's Law Dictionary, p. 1171 (5th ed. 1979).
Tax provisions in the United States Constitution[edit]
Selected provisions of the United States Constitution:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.....
--from Article I, section 8, clause 1.
--from Article I, section 7, clause 1.
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons....
--from Article I, section 2, clause 3.
--from Article I, section 9, clause 4.
--from Article I, section 9, clause 5.
--the Sixteenth Amendment.
--from Article I, section 9, clause 1.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed....
--From the Fourteenth Amendment, section 2.
--From the Twenty-Fourth Amendment, section 1.
Tenth Amendment and federal taxes; regulatory effect of taxes[edit]
--Ratified Dec. 15, 1791.
From the U.S. Supreme Court (a federal estate tax case):
The Tenth Amendment does not operate as a limitation upon the powers, express or implied, delegated to the national government. United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 123-4. The amendment has clearly placed no restriction upon the power delegated to the national government to lay an excise tax qua tax. Undoubtedly every tax which lays its burden on some and not others may have an incidental regulatory effect. But since that is an inseparable concomitant of the power to tax, the incidental regulatory effect of the tax is embraced within the power to lay it. It has long been settled that an Act of Congress which on its face purports to be an exercise of the taxing power, is not any the less so because the tax is burdensome or tends to restrict or suppress the thing taxed. In such a case it is not within the province of courts to inquire into the unexpressed purposes or motives which may have moved Congress to exercise a power constitutionally conferred upon it[....]
---from Fernandez v. Wiener, 326 U.S. 340, 66 S. Ct. 178, 45-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) ¶10,239 (1945) (bolding added).
From the Darby case:
Our conclusion is unaffected by the Tenth Amendment which provides: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The amendment states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered. There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers.
See United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1941), at [22] (not a tax case).
According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, neither the Ninth Amendment nor the Tenth Amendment is "a source of any specific limitation on congressional power to tax and spend..." See Bartley v. United States, 123 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1997), at [23].
The Seventh Amendment[edit]
The Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
...We come now to inquire whether the Court of Claims erred in awarding judgment against the appellant for the amount paid to him out of the treasury of the United States upon the settlement of his accounts.
That section, referring to the trial of causes in which the government may plead against the claimant any set-off, counter-claim, claim for damages, or other demand, provides that the court shall hear and determine such claim and demand both for and against the government and claimant; and if, upon the whole case, the court finds that the claimant is indebted to the government, it "shall render judgment to that effect, and such judgment shall be final, with the right of appeal, as in other cases provided for by law." There is nothing in these provisions which violates either the letter or spirit of the Seventh Amendment. Suits against the government in the Court of Claims, whether reference be had to the claimant's demand, or to the defence, or to any set-off, or counter-claim which the government may assert, are not controlled by the Seventh Amendment. They are not suits at common law within its true meaning. The government cannot be sued, except with its own consent. It can declare in what court it may be sued, and prescribe the forms of pleading and the rules of practice to be observed in such suits. It may restrict the jurisdiction of the court to a consideration of only certain classes of claims against the United States. Congress, by the act in question, informs the claimant that if he avails himself of the privilege of suing the government in the special court organized for that purpose, he may be met with a set-off, counter-claim, or other demand of the government, upon which judgment may go against him, without the intervention of a jury, if the court, upon the whole case, is of opinion that the government is entitled to such judgment. If the claimant avails himself of the privilege thus granted, he must do so subject to the conditions annexed by the government to the exercise of the privilege. Nothing more need be said on this subject.
---from McElrath v. United States, 102 U.S. 426 (1880) (bolding added), at [24].
From the U.S. Tax Court:
Petitioner has not been wrongfully denied a jury trial. "The Seventh Amendment does not apply to suits against the United States, because there was no common law action against the sovereign....
---from Abrams v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 403 (1984), at [25]
From the Funk case:
Finally, Taxpayers' argument that they were entitled to a jury trial because of the seventh amendment is without merit. The seventh amendment preserves the right to a jury trial "in suits at common law." Because there was no right of action at common law against a sovereign, enforceable by jury trial or otherwise, there is no constitutional right to a jury trial in a suit against the United States. [ . . . ] On the contrary, there is a right to a jury trial in actions against the United States only if a statute so provides. [ . . . ] Congress has not provided for a jury trial where the taxpayer elects to contest a deficiency asserted by the Commissioner by petitioning the Tax Court.
--Funk v. Commissioner, 687 F.2d 264 (8th Cir. 1982) (per curiam), at [26].
Direct taxes, indirect taxes, and the Sixteenth Amendment[edit]
--Ratified Feb. 3, 1913 (declared ratified Feb. 25, 1913).
Capitation tax. A poll tax (q.v.). Black's Law Dictionary, p. 191 (5th ed. 1979).
Poll-tax. A capitation tax; a tax of a specific sum levied upon each person within the jurisdiction of the taxing power and within a certain class (as, all males of a certain age, etc.) without reference to his property or lack of it. Black's Law Dictionary, p. 1043 (5th ed. 1979).
From Famspear:
1. The question of whether a particular income tax is direct or indirect is legally irrelevant to the question of whether the Congress has the power, under the U.S. Constitution as amended by the Sixteenth Amendment, to impose that tax. Congress has the power to impose any income tax, regardless of whether that tax is deemed direct or indirect.
2. The question of whether a particular income tax is direct or indirect is also legally irrelevant to the issue of whether that tax must be apportioned. After the Sixteenth Amendment, no income tax of any kind whatsoever, whether direct or indirect, is required to be apportioned.
3. Under the Constitution as amended, the only important legal relevancy to the question of whether a particular income tax is Constitutionally valid (aside from rules such as the one prohibiting taxes on exports, or rules that revenue measures must originate in the House, etc.) is probably whether that income tax is imposed with what the law refers to as geographical uniformity. That is, an income tax cannot be imposed on, say, just the incomes of people who happen to reside in New York and Montana.
--from a Famspear commentary at the talk page for the article on the Sixteenth Amendment (18 March 2007).
More from the United States Tax Court:
---from Johnson v. Commissioner, 37 T.C.M. (CCH) 189, T.C. Memo 1978-32 (1978).
And, from the United States Tax Court in another case:
From the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit:
Dickstein's argument that the sixteenth amendment does not authorize a direct, non-apportioned tax on United States citizens similarly is devoid of any arguable basis in law. Indeed, the Ninth Circuit recently noted "the patent absurdity and frivolity of such a proposition." In re Becraft, 885 F.2d 547, 548 (9th Cir.1989). For seventy-five years, the Supreme Court has recognized that the sixteenth