Granted, food prices have increased since then, but my goal in college was $25/week for food, and I regularly met that by focusing on the 4 food groups: veggies, pasta, Mexican, and kimchi. This budget was simple for me to keep, despite living in the middle of a "food desert" in a poor section of a major US City. I lived off campus and didn't eat at the food court.  Oddly, I was in rude health. I am certain I could take the "SNAP challenge" and never go hungry. 

Whoa, go easy on these guys. At least they know what checkout scanners are...

But is there really a way to get in and out remotely with no sign of entry or exit?

Richard Windsor did it.

I followed the link, and in the potential juror's fb giveaway quote on the Zimmerman case he puts ironic quote marks around both the "justice" he hopes to see in the case and the "Neighborhood Watch" and "Police Force" he despises. Of course, it's not any more momentous than your average fb post, but his overuse of ironic quote marks suggests he takes nothing so seriously as his bright, shining ideals. It's the feeling that counts.

Agreed, Jim. As soon as I heard him talking about alleged NSA actions in China, I began to doubt his credibility (though I still think he raised some good points). The nicest thing one could say about him now is that he is staggeringly foolish.

I like it!

Um, yes!

After reading her comments, I'm afraid Whig history is about to be replaced by EU history.

Actually Fred, when it comes to land, you seem to be under the misconception that anyone besides the government owns the land. Now, I'm not a land rights expert, but I read somewhere that almost if not all land in the USA is not under allodial title. In other words, if they can tax it and take it through eminent domain, it's not really yours in truest legal sense.

I would most likely not make the guy take it down, and I don't know if the local authorities actually have the right under current law to do so, but to my (admittedly rather limited) knowledge, there's no absolute right that would prevent the local authorities from enacting such a law.  You're going to have to work on changing some much deeper legal concepts to entrench your principles. Apologies to the legal theories I just butchered.

These stories really get my goat. I assume that the EPA officials didn't leak any info regarding the Rockefeller and Seagram family farms. Just these little, politically unconnected farms are the ones to be targeted. Puts grits in my shredded wheat, it does.

I have no idea why anyone would be watching me...

Do you remember Stewart and Colbert's Rally to Restore Sanity several years ago? I think this happened during that "rally." Yes, people who go to such lengths in order to be ironic are probably not the brightest.

I'm probably trying too hard, but after watching this video what came to my mind was If an economist fell in the Mall, would anyone notice? 

Suicide due to embarrassment?

I think Google Glass is a very interesting concept, but they are also a tad creepy. Yes, it's true we are all potentially on someone's Facebook page in a click or two, but the thing with Google Glass is that you know (scary italics time) you are on camera. I think the glasses/computer may become a societal norm (Apple has talked about wearable devices as well), therefore the real argument may be about the behavior that is recorded by them. I recall that in Claire's recent article a disembodied voice (presumably that of a guy looking at the screens from a bunch of security cameras) warned a couple on an Istanbul  subway platform to stop kissing. In a less official way, Google Glass might start debate about putting strangers on social media.

The debate is a good thing. More laws are probably not.