Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Birdog9999
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20 next>>
Nov 13, 2013 15:37:44   #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Yes- you'll get a "Save Options" screen with a bunch more choices.


Thanks you saved me a lot of time.
Go to
Nov 12, 2013 14:24:38   #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
You don't need an action for this!
Too much work.
Do it through ACR as preachy & I laid out.
I do this all the time.
It even works if you start with a jpeg, as long as you save the edits to a different folder.


I'm ready to save the photo's but I have one more question. When I hit the save button will I be able to tell it where to save them to?
Go to
Nov 12, 2013 14:19:12   #
GoofyNewfie wrote:
You don't need an action for this!
Too much work.
Do it through ACR as preachy & I laid out.
I do this all the time.
It even works if you start with a jpeg, as long as you save the edits to a different folder.

Thanks that looks like it will work.
Go to
Nov 12, 2013 14:16:32   #
They are my son's.
Go to
Nov 12, 2013 14:14:48   #
Well your suggestion seemed like a good idea so I tried creating an action but I ran into many problems. First there's no way to change the photo numbers from the last action, then I tried stopping a the point where I select the photo numbers. No go you can't stop when you have a window open. If I can't change the number of the photo the action is no good to me. Unless you know something I don't that doesn't seem to be the answer. If you have any other ideas I'd like to heard them. Thanks for taking the time to answer.
Go to
Nov 12, 2013 12:59:03   #
I have thousands of photos that were taken in Alaska. My problem is they are not mine and at this point I don't want to add them to my catalog. They are in raw format and I want to convert them to jpegs for printing(I'm using CS6). I haven't found a way to do this without pain snakingly opening a bunch at one time and then saving them one at a time. There has to be a better way. Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
Go to
Oct 11, 2013 15:19:19   #
I guess you must be on the dole. Sorry but I agree with Benjamin Franklin. I see the food stamp ladies in my supermarket buying nothing but the finest while my family looks for bargains. I have no problem helping the truly needy but there are too many taking advantage of the system.
Go to
Oct 11, 2013 12:50:01   #
Money spent on welfare recipients exceeds average U.S. income

December 8, 2012 by Michael Dorstewitz


There’s an old saying: If you’re not going to get out of the car to help push, at least take your damn foot off the brake.

In this upside-down economy, the American taxpayer is pushing a car with its brakes fully engaged by welfare recipients.

The 2011 median household income was $50,054, or $137.13 per each day of the year. Assuming the breadwinner of this average household is an hourly employee working 40 hours a week and 50 weeks a year, that would put his pay scale at a shade over $25 an hour. Subtract withholding taxes and that wage-earner takes home about $22 for each hour worked.

As taxpayers, these are the ones pushing the car. Now, what about the riders?

According to a recently released Senate Budget Committee report, the total in benefits received — money, food stamps, housing, child care and the administrative costs to implement these programs — comes to a whopping $168 per day. If they were earning this sum, just like our average household breadwinner above — 40 hours a week for 50 weeks a year — their hourly wage would amount to almost $31 per hour.

Part of the problem is program redundancy.

Katie Pavlich, writing for Townhall, reported that the Congressional Research Service “identified roughly 80 overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011 — more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these federal programs, when taken together with approximately $280 billion in state contributions, amounted to roughly $1 trillion.”

Not only can we expect things to get worse, the president is providing for it.

“Under the President’s FY13 budget proposal, means-tested spending would increase an additional 30 percent over the next four years,” Pavlich wrote.

In a recent article, liberal New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof made the following concession: “This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

Again, I don’t mind pushing. I just want people to take their damn foot off the brake.
Read more at Townhall.

Welfare vs. working
Go to
Oct 11, 2013 12:11:14   #
I have a HP 8500 deskjet pro for around 2 years it's one of the best printers I have ever had ink is expensive but third party ink helps keep the price down. Most important it is easy to use and works well.
Go to
Oct 7, 2013 14:59:43   #
Buffett: Scrap Obamacare and Start All Over
By Money Morning Staff Reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Updated 11:08am EDT 10/01/2013
When asked, "Are you in favor of scrapping [Obamacare] and going back to start over?", famed investor Warren Buffett said on CNBC March 1, 2010, "I would be — if I were President Obama.”

Buffett insisted that without changes to America's health system average citizens will suffer.

"We have a health system that, in terms of costs, is really out of control," he added. "And if you take this line and you project what has been happening into the future, we will get less and less competitive. So we need something else."

Three debate-ridden years later, millions of Americans still agree.

But now that the exchanges are open, Obamacare has finally kicked off.

The government program, which some economists call the biggest tax increase ever in the United States, is also one of the most hated bills in history.

Ask millions of Americans what they think about the new law, and chances are they're ready to pop a jugular.

Critics heavily oppose the mandate requiring them to purchase health insurance. They're also furious at all the new taxes, fees, and higher premiums they'll be stuck paying, thanks to Obamacare.

Yet, while millions of Americans loathe every facet of The Affordable Care Act, as it's officially titled, another group of Americans see it as a once-in-a lifetime opportunity to get rich: Investors.

Obamacare may cost Americans 25% of their paycheck or more on January 1st. Are you at risk? Find out here.

According to Wall Street expert and Money Map Press Chief Investment Strategist, Keith Fitz-Gerald, Obamacare will create unheard of riches for investors who tap into the right companies.

"Obamacare is one of the single biggest wealth creation opportunities to hit the markets in decades," says Fitz-Gerald. "That's because huge amounts of money - trillions - will be spent as Obamacare gets rolling."

"And trillions more will be reallocated," he adds.

Not all companies will benefit - but a select few are primed for higher returns on a scale that was simply unimaginable before this legislation was passed.

These companies, and their investors, are set to make a fortune in the next several months - and years - as the full Obamacare plan gets underway.

Fitz-Gerald says main street investors will have a chance to reap big paydays - provided they know which sectors stand to benefit most.

Publisher's Note: Fitz-Gerald reveals the two sections of Obamacare that will create a new generation of millionaires.

With the implementation of Obamacare quickly approaching, Americans are asking what they can do to prepare for all the new costs and rules.

One expert, Betsy McCaughey, former Lieutenant Governor of New York and constitutional scholar with a Ph.D. from Columbia University, recently wrote a best-selling book showing Americans how they can survive Obamacare.

McCaughey is one of the only people in the country -- including members of Congress - who has actually read the entire 2,572 page law.

Her book, titled Beating Obamacare: Your Handbook for Surviving the New Health Care Law breaks down the complicated bill into 168 pages of actionable advice.

The book, written in an easy going, easy to read style, shows some startling facts about Obamacare not seen in the mainstream press.

For example, she points to a little known passage in the bill that shows how you could get slapped with a $2,000 fine for not having health insurance - even if you do actually have it.

She also goes into detail explaining how one third of all U.S. employers could stop offering health insurance to their workers.

In one chapter, she shows how ordinary Americans will get stuck paying for substance abuse coverage even if they never touched a drink or drug in their life.

According to McCaughey's research, senior citizens will get hit the hardest. "If you're a senior or a baby boomer, expect less care than in the past," she says. "Hip and knee replacements and cataract surgery will be especially hard to get from Medicare in the months ahead." Details here...

She warns seniors to get some of those types of procedures done now before Obamacare goes into full effect.

In addition, many will find it difficult to keep their medical records private, according to McCaughey.

"The law will compel Americans to share with millions of strangers who are not physicians confidential private and personal medical history information they do not wish to share."

.....
Go to
Oct 4, 2013 17:41:56   #
Here's how honest the Dem's are, now I know that you liberals will never believe this but check the facts if you dare. http://conservativevideos.com/2013/10/youre-full-crap-fired-sean-hannity-rips-democrat-rep-obamacare-subsidy/
Go to
Oct 4, 2013 17:08:20   #
silver wrote:
For the first time this country has access to health care in a reasonable way. Its not perfect and a lot of issues have to be resolved but it is a start. There were no bold face lies told, only interpretations and distorted ones at that. There is so much mis information about this subject but that does not surprise me when there is so much vitriolic hate of the person in the oval office. This is simply a result of people not wanting to accept that our country is changing and I hope for the better. I cant imagine what the response will be when there is a jewish president or a woman president or, I almost cant say it, a gay president. We as a nation must continue moving forward and showing the world a nation with compassion. There is no other way. Keep personal religious ideals and desires out of the government and we will be better off.
For the first time this country has access to heal... (show quote)


Ok here we go with the if you don't agree with the POTUS then you are a raciest.
Go to
Oct 4, 2013 16:59:19   #
Twardlow wrote:
Pardon me for saying you are incorrect. Please look it up.

There are half a dozen on-line dictionaries that are unanimous in their definitions--almost to the very wording.

Your second paragraph, if you will excuse me, explains nothing.

In a democracy everyone has an equal vote, as you say--especially in a pure democracy, such as ancient Greece.

In a representative democracy, everyone has an equal vote in picking representatives to govern for them.

In either use of the word, "Those representatives then participate in the decision-making processes on behalf of their electors."

I'm not debating your last paragraph, which may or may not be true, but among educated people who use words in common with each other so that they can understand each other, and formulate the meanings of these words formally (in a dictionary), the words "democracy" and "republic" mean almost perfectly the same thing.

I ask you again, don't take my word for it, look it up.

You always look more intelligent when you use words to mean the same thing as other people mean.

(Not trying to be insulting, just making a suggestion.)
Pardon me for saying you are incorrect. Please lo... (show quote)


The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications on minority rights. Both forms of government tend to use a representational system where citizens vote to elect politicians to represent their interests and form the government. However, in a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure" democracy, the majority is not restrained and can impose its will on the minority. There is a big difference there believe it or not.
Go to
Oct 4, 2013 13:25:41   #
First off there are many very intelligent people who can't spell second it is very common when using a computer to fat finger the keyboard. If every person who misspelled a work on the internet were stupid we all would be stupid. Your insistence that a misspelled word makes someone stupid just shows you lack of manners. And yes I would accuse the government of taking over GM, Chrysler, and others not to mention turning them over to the unions and disregarding the stockholders who were the rightful owners. Try reading the facts.
Go to
Oct 4, 2013 12:55:44   #
Does the democratic process include bribing congressman to vote for your bill as the POTUS did. It's amazing how you can look the other way while he continually brakes and ignores our laws and you see nothing wrong whit that.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.