Well, if they ever build that water park they've been going on about for years, that would be open year round.

Also, the hotels attached to EP are open year round.

What about when the temp is below zero? Could still work for the water slides, but i wouldn't fancy hitting the pool at the bottom!

Dunno...pretty sure it would be heated, a la Alpamare. Im not sure the whole park would be outdoor either, im certain there would be a significant indoor bit too.

Source

Trump re-announced yesterday his campaign promises about tax cuts. But without any firm details about how he would fund the cuts or any firm implementation dates so there was no positive reaction in the markets.

Trump also announced he would not implement his campaign promise to cancel NAFTA; instead he will "re-negotiate".

While a lie in the absolute sense it's not that far from the truth - I would rate this as a half-truth.

Here's an analysis by the American Bar Association (americanbar.org) on 1999-2008. I find the grading on the first and the charts on the last page the most informative.

What I find striking:
i) 9th is by far the largest circuit
ii) 9th has the 3rd highest review rate
iii) 9th has the 2nd highest reversal rate
iv) only the Federal Circuit has worse review and reversal rates (ranks 2nd and 1st, respectively)

Perhaps i-iii are correlated? Perhaps funding can't keep up with rising number of cases so quality deteriorates? Current trends in politics (budget cuts and and leaving positions empty aren't exactly new) may well be instrumental in what Trump complains about but of course he doesn't say.

From the Federal Bar Assiciation (fedbar.org):
"The FBA has urged Congressional appropriations leaders to approve the Federal Judiciary's emergency request for $73 million in current year funding to mitigate the impact of automatic budget cuts."
"The Federal Judiciary publicly announced the transmittal of its request to OMB for a $72.9 million emergency supplemental appropriation. Read the letter of transmittal."
"FBA Leaders Urge Congress to Act on Court Funding, Judicial Vacancies"

You can cut spending only so far without facing the consequences.

To expand on my previous post:

A quick comparison of growth 1999-2008 for the districts shows that the 9th had 2nd largest growth in cases by 47%, close behind the 2nd with 52%. 1st circuit had 34% growth and the 3rd 25%.

Conversely eight districts had growth of less than 10%, thereof 6 with actually reduced number of cases.

BBC Hard Talk is repeating old programmes at the moment to celebrate its 20-year anniversary, and I caught the last few minutes of this 1998 interview with Donald Trump the other day. He actually seemed rather sane and reasonable.

It will be a tremendous diplomatic achievement for Trump if he does eventually get this legislation through the House.
The issue is there are two opposing groups of Republicans; Conservatives and moderates, if Trump makes a concession to one side then he just makes it harder for the other side to agree.
Needs a very clever diplomat to negotiate this one.

Anyway if it passes in the House there is no guarantee it will pass in the Senate

Great, Trump thinks he's about to start a major, major conflict.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39741671

And the US government is about to shut down.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39742792

Great way to run a war.

Not quite. He "fears" a major conflict and the congress is trying to avert a shut down. I'm no fan of Trump or Congress, but I just find this interpretation to be a wee bit sensationalist.

Trump's "low taxes" plan is doomed before it's even been born. Or does he think an "accelerated national debt" plan would be a good idea too?

All I'm seeing so far is very short-term thinking with no means of implementing his "ideas" anyway... border wall, repeal Obamacare, lower taxes, etc. ad infinitum.

Dude has the attention span of a flea.

Complaining now that he 'misses his old life, and it is much harder than he tought' doh toodle doh

Someone take him out of there before he pushes the bl****y button, or pushes some other moron to do so...

A little bit of devil's advocacy. An interesting opinion piece here:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/willing-l...090022380.html

I think he has the ability to evolve, but for me I wonder how much the Republicans can evolve as a party to get things done. It seems the conservative and moderate factions are hindering their own party and president more effectively than the Democrats could dream of doing.

Shutdown averted.

...for a week, at least.

I'll be in Florida for business (thankfully, nowhere near Palm Beach!) almost all of May and will hopefully miss the ensuing sh*t show.

"Trump rallies supporters in Pennsylvania " He still seems to be in election mode, repeating campaign promises, bashing Democrats and fake news.

There was an Emerson poll back in February that claimed more people believed the White House than main stream media.

If that is still so then it will be good for Trump's mid term election hopes.

Where that leaves the US in the greater scheme of things I do not know; where will people find the "truth" after Trump has gone?

Many people cannot evaluate which internet sources are reputable and most of the sources are "straw men" with few financial assets.
At least the main stream media can be sued if they step too far out of line; look at the $3 million it is claimed the Daily Mail paid Melanie Trump.

__________________
It is naive to assume my posts are my own work

From the rumours published it seems the US budget is agreed until September and contains reasonable content; now just has to be voted on!

Some points
Source

Looks like a comprehensive "lose" for Trump if these stories are true.

Demonstrates how little real power the President has; he needs to woo and win over both parties in the House and Senate to pass any legislation.

I just hope he keeps off Twitter and does not bash the Democrats this week so they stay on song!

Except for the increase in military spending. According to Medea's 2nd link 30bln had been proposed.

As I posted in another thread they agreed an extra 12.5Bn for defense versus 30Bn proposed, if you want to label that as a win I will not fight it

That's some 5% annualized increase, isn't it? On top of an already increased budget. So yes, in fairness I think it counts as a win.