Slashdot Mirror

Fiat currency ... you were making sense until you mentioned that.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/pa...

Historically only a small portion of the labor force has been well educated. The vast majority of the workforce was farm workers, laborers, factory workers, etc. Today most of those jobs are gone - partly because of mechanization, partly because manufacturing is too expensive in the US. Plus millions of people are out of the workforce because the government has made it so easy to qualify for disability.

consumer goods can "come back": Febreeze, for example. http://www.forbes.com/sites/pe...

Not marketing,

Apple don't actually spend as much on advertising as people seem to believe. From here Apple spend half as much as microsoft. And judging by the huge Samsung stands that have started to appear at the local hardware stores, I'd guess that they spend less than Samsung too. I've only seen a couple of Apple TV ads over the years, but I haven't watched broadcast television for quite a long time so I don't really know.

So this never happened? -

http://www.forbes.com/2000/01/...

Chairmen have no executive power.

You might want to learn at least a little bit about the thing you're talking about before you jump in, top off with a snyde remark and deeply embarrass yourself as a result in future.

That's a ridiculous assertion. Most of us understand quite well that states get their taxes in a variety of ways.

Oregon's northern neighbor Washington State, for instance, collects sales tax but has no income tax, whereas California has both an income AND a sales tax. Nearly all states also impose property taxes, and of course they tax businesses. Ultimately, everything gets paid for by individual consumers, either directly (as with sales, income, or property taxes), or indirectly though increased prices of goods and services (as with business taxes and fees).

Ultimately, you can boil it down to an estimated percentage of individual income. According to Forbes, state tax ranking is as follows for someone earning $50K:

* New York ranks at #50 at 12.6%
* California is #47 at 10.4%
* Illinois is #38 at 10.2%
* Oregon is #35 at 10.10%
* Washington is #24 at 9.4%
* Wyoming is #1 at 6.9%

• $30 Billion per year to would end world hunger
• $17 Billion per year currently spent by the US on the Nasa space program
• $4.8 Billion per year currently spent by the US on cancer research

• And the US spends $1000 Billion+ on a plane, designed to kill. Imagine, if you can, a world without war, it's easy if you try.

Yeah...fascinating world really. But it's not how things works.

You don't have to look far in history to see that. before the US became the clear world leader, it was a time of war and conflict almost everywhere in the world. In fact, just in the last decade, with less than 5% of the world population in conflict, we are living during the most peaceful time in history (counter-intuitive, I know).

Maybe, one time, the humanity will change enough so all armies will be dismantled. But, for now, we need hat the US stay the clear leader for a little more longer.

Besides, we'll still have enough change to cover the loss, with some left over.

• $30 Billion per year to would end world hunger
• $17 Billion per year currently spent by the US on the Nasa space program
• $4.8 Billion per year currently spent by the US on cancer research

• And the US spends $1000 Billion+ on a plane, designed to kill. Imagine, if you can, a world without war, it's easy if you try.

Granted the BBB has used the same AL business model for a century and is still un-sued. I expect they get away with it by never having any money, that can't be AL's method.

The BBB has been sued plenty of times. My understanding is that Angie's List has never turned a profit. They're both scams in my opinion.

I didn't just cite one source, half wit.

I cited a lot of things. And mostly recently I cited a peer reviewed paper.

Choke on it.

Did you say check on it? OK! Here's a complete list (as of this writing) of your citations in this thread in chronological order:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvfAtIJbatg (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.populartechnology.n... (Site is a one man operation that doesn't identify the operator or his alleged "staff". Attempts to debunk Cook paper by cherry-picking results from a nebulous survey.)
http://www.nature.com/news/pub... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://articles.mercola.com/si... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://arstechnica.com/science... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.the-scientist.com/?... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04... (no mention of the Cook paper)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja... (opinion piece written by a lawyer (who doesn't appear to have ever practiced law) who claims to be a "trained scientist". The article relies exclusively on research done by unnamed "investigative journalists" at populartechnology.com - a blog that by all appearances is operated by a single unidentified individual.)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/201... (first mention of a legitimate source rebutting the Cook paper)
http://link.springer.com/artic... (legitimate source debunking Cook)

So what have we got here...looks like a bunch of citations that have nothing to do with the Cook paper, one citation from a clearly bogus website, One citation written by a hack lawyer relying exclusively on the aforementioned bogus website, one citation from a pop-sci website alluding to an authoritative source, and (finally) a citation pointing to a legitimate source. And guess what? I've recognized your final source's potential legitimacy multiple times. You should probably take that as a win and call it a day.

In any event, don't you think you could've saved yourself a lot of time, effort, aggravation and ridicule if you'd have just kept your mouth shut until you actually come across a legitimate source? Instead, your process (if you can call it that) of supporting your arguments is to link to sources that you haven't subjected to any scrutiny whatsoever. It's a textbook example of a lack of critical thinking skills.

As to your claim that there is only one peer reviewed paper refuting your peer reviewed paper...

You're making things up again. I made no such claim. And for the last time, Cook's paper isn't MY paper. The only time I addressed it's validity I expressed skepticism of it's conclusions. Since you're having trouble remembering, here, let me help you:

"To be honest, I

>> he rich and the smart money left Greek a few months ago, and it is Joe Sixpack that is trapped and going to get shafted

Pretty much this, and there's been plenty of coverage for anyone who would listen, but I'll bet it wasn't on the evening TV news (or whatever "Joe Sixpack" consumes in Greece).

"New Greek bank run begins" (Feb 25)
http://www.naturalnews.com/048...

"'Slow motion' bank run continues" (June 17)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ti...

"Banks impose a 3,000 Euro withdrawal cap" (June 22)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/...

And yet it happened:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja...

You either didn't read the Forbes article you linked to, or you didn't comprehend it.

The article's author, James Taylor, claims that the survey conducted by the paper's researchers didn't ask the right question:

As is the case with other ‘surveys’ alleging an overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming, the question surveyed had absolutely nothing to do with the issues of contention between global warming alarmists and global warming skeptics.

Taylor does also claim that the papers composing the data of phase I of the study were misclassified - but he relies solely on the analysis of "investigative journalists" at the crank site Popular Technology to support his position. Further, both Taylor and Popular Technology conveniently ignore the fact that phase II of the study had the authors of the papers self-classify.

As an aside, pointing to an opinion piece on Forbes written by James Taylor, a lawyer at the Heartland Institute, hardly lends weight to ANY argument. Mr. Taylor claims to be a "scientist by training" because "I successfully completed Ivy League atmospheric science courses". His employer, Heartland Institute, has likened climate scientists to Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, murderer Charles Manson and Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

Also this notion that peer review catches all frauds is laughable:

snip

NOBODY said the peer review process is perfect. But as GP correctly states, it's the best we've got. You seem to think that just because some academic fraud exists, that it's therefore having a substantial impact on climate science. That's a pretty extraordinary claim...got anything to back it up?

As to your point about reading the abstracts. That's not enough. You need to actually have the study itself vetted. And peer review does not do that.

That's not what GP was saying. Jesus. Namarrgon is saying that before YOU or some other guy on the internet starts pontificating about this or that scientific research, YOU should at least read the abstract of said research. But since you're happy to rely on opinion pieces and pop science articles that are chock full of hyperbole and distortion, I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Namarrgon's wise advice is falling on deaf ears. At least in your case.

And that is frequently what is going on.

According to who? You? On what credible data do you base that extraordinary claim? Another James Taylor opinion piece in Forbes?

And yet it happened:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja...

Also this notion that peer review catches all frauds is laughable:
http://www.nature.com/news/pub...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://articles.mercola.com/si...

http://arstechnica.com/science...

http://www.the-scientist.com/?...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04...

As to your point about reading the abstracts. That's not enough. You need to actually have the study itself vetted. And peer review does not do that.

These studies are getting busted all the time for making things up or using really sloppy methodology that could be "interpreted" to mean anything... often transparently the author had a conclusion they wanted before even starting the study.

That isn't real science. That's what creationists do. You have to do your study with an open mind and accept whatever the study might say. No forming your theory before the data comes in and no shaping the data to fit your theory. It is FINE to have a hypothesis before you start the study. But it can't go beyond that until you've actually got the data in... and then you base the theory on the data... you do not shape the data to equal your hypothesis.

And that is frequently what is going on.

I liked this analysis http://www.forbes.com/sites/ta...

Tl; dr: it might work for some STDs but it would make the condom quite a bit thicker, and take too long for the result. For others, it's just not going to happen. Then, assuming the magic work, there's lots of reasons it's a bad idea, mostly having to do with the fact that there are people involved.

I wouldn't say they are failing in deploying robots, it's probably just not as easy as they thought but it is definitely having an impact. And you have to remember Chinese workers have been getting more expensive with 12% year over year for a number of years. So they aren't the cheapest workforce in the world any more. A lot of manufacturing of clothes moved to Bangladesh to name one country.

Here is an example of an article from 2007 which mentions the wage growth:

"Wages in China have nearly doubled over the past four years"
http://www.forbes.com/2007/07/...

___

An article on where Foxconn is with building lights-off factories:

On Wednesday, the company’s CEO revealed Foxconn has a fully automated factory in operation in the Chinese city of Chengdu. “We haven’t talked much about the factory, but it’s manufacturing a product from a very famous company,” Gou said, without elaborating.

The factory can run for 24-hours with the lights off, he added. In addition, Foxconn has been adding 30,000 of its own industrial robots to its factories each year. “We don’t sell them, because we don’t have enough for our own use yet,” he added.

http://www.pcworld.com/article...

___

And an article on the loss of jobs in factories in China:

Automation has already had a substantial impact on Chinese factory employment: Between 1995 and 2002 about 16 million factory jobs disappeared, roughly 15 percent of total Chinese manufacturing employment. This trend is poised to accelerate.

That might not be a problem if the Chinese economy were generating plenty of higher-skill jobs for more educated workers. The solution, then, would simply be to offer more training and education to displaced blue-collar workers.

The reality, however, is that China has struggled to create enough white-collar jobs for its soaring population of college graduates. In mid-2013, the Chinese government revealed that only about half of the country’s current crop of college graduates had been able to find jobs, while more than 20 percent of the previous year’s graduates remained unemployed.

According to one analysis, fully 43 percent of Chinese workers already consider themselves to be overeducated for their current positions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06...

I appreciate cynicism as much as the next person but in this case given present demand, Elon Musk, as well as China's willingness to undercut others that's actually highly unlikely. Within the next few years I think it very likely that we'll see a considerable expansion of manufacturing capacity for batteries.

Elon is managing to change the climate within the auto industry by a sufficient degree that EVs are going to enter the mainstream in the west. China's polution problems mean it has no other choice but to adopt EVs. If the establishment doesn't supply them, then they'll make them themselves--which they're already doing.

Maybe not old as in really old, but at least since 2012/2013/2014.

Even artists know about it.

2012
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
"Researchers have moved one step closer to facial reconstruction with DNA by discovering the genes that help control the width of the human face. A recent study of almost 10,000 individuals revealed five genes associated with different facial shapes – known as PRDM16, PAX3, TP63, C5orf50, and COL17A1. Manfred Kayser and his team of the Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, used Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of people’s heads to map facial landmarks and estimate facial distances."

2013
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09... "We leave genetic traces of ourselves wherever we go -- in a strand of hair left on the subway or in saliva on the side of a glass at a cafe. So you may want to think twice the next time you spit out your gum or drop a cigarette butt in public. New York artist Heather Dewey-Hagborg might pick it up, extract the DNA and create a 3-D face that could look like you. Her project, "Stranger Visions," fashions portrait sculptures from bits of genetic material collected in public places."

2014
http://www.forbes.com/sites/al...
"Sometime in the future, technicians will go over the scene of the crime. They’ll uncover some DNA evidence and take it to the lab. And when the cops need to get a picture of the suspect, they won’t have to ask eyewitnesses to give descriptions to a sketch artist – they’ll just ask the technicians to get a mugshot from the DNA. That, at least, is the potential of new research being published today in PLOS Genetics. In that paper, a team of scientists describe how they were able to produce crude 3D models of faces extrapolated from a person’s DNA."

http://www.kuleuven.be/english...
"Scientists are getting closer to constructing a likeness of a person's face using nothing but a DNA sample. Postdoctoral researcher Peter Claes and his colleagues describe the technique in a recent publication in PLOS Genetics. Their work opens a horizon of potential future applications in forensics, anthropology and medicine."

Now its 2015.

And for when you say "Links or it never happened":

http://www.forbes.com/sites/an...

Or just Google OBD hacks.

I'm not sure where you are from, but culturally the work ethic in the US can be quite different than elsewhere.

That's a fairy tale they tell people to get them to work harder for less. It has nothing to do with an "ethic" and everything to do with exploitation.

Even Greeks work longer hours than Americans. Mexicans work the longest hours of any developed country.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ni...

"Total number of hours actually worked divided by the average number of people in employment".

I'm not sure what you mean by "even Greeks" but, with Greece's unemployment rate over 25% for the past three years, I'm not too surprised that those who are still working are putting in long hours. Mexico is more equitable to the US in that regard.

Related but slightly off topic, another interesting way to look at it is the number of hours worked against GDP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I'm not sure where you are from, but culturally the work ethic in the US can be quite different than elsewhere.

That's a fairy tale they tell people to get them to work harder for less. It has nothing to do with an "ethic" and everything to do with exploitation.

Even Greeks work longer hours than Americans. Mexicans work the longest hours of any developed country.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ni...

Or as you are making a backup. A friend of mine thought it would be a good idea to backup their entire laptop drive, reinstall the OS, and then restore their data from the backup. They bought a new external drive to carry out the plan. They backed up the data, and re-installed the OS. The backup data was only going to be the sole copy for a short while, so one drive with the backup aught to be enough for the couple of hours it would take before restoring it, right? No, the brand-new backup drive failed mid-way through the process. It took weeks to recover maybe 3/4 of the files using testdisk.

I think most experienced users know that if a drive is going to fail it will probably do so very early after purchase or years later, but I'd never seen such a horrible demonstration of that expectation for myself. It failed mere hours after putting it to use. Needless to say, they now make sure there are always 2 backup copies during a wipe-and-restore procedure, and I follow that practice too. I would have thought it was paranoid, but it's not.

Two Is One, And One Is None

Since C++ is the language of choice when you need performance (along with C and - sometimes - assembly), to write good code it's essential to understand what each line of code does to the machine (memory, registers, ...) and if/how instructions can be optimized by the compiler.

This level of awareness is generally not required to be proficient in other languages, but in my experience it's what makes the difference between newbies and pros, at least in the areas where C++ is used for a good reason.

Said that, it can be useful to understand as much as possible of any language and C++ can provide strong foundations in that sense, as this short article points out: http://www.forbes.com/sites/qu....

One effect of "upgrading" to Windows 10: Windows Media Center will be deleted.

Another loss in Windows 10: Windows Updates will be forced, in some versions. What other sneaky methods will Microsoft use? Will there be other lost features? Will Microsoft extend its control over Windows in other hidden or complicated ways? At present, the best way to update Windows 7 is to use Autopatcher, because Microsoft's anti-customer "updates" are avoided.

Firefox: Embraced, "Extended", soon to be Extinguished? Mozilla Foundation now gets most of its money from Microsoft. How? Microsoft pays Yahoo. Yahoo pays Mozilla Foundation to make "Yahoo search" (actually Microsoft Bing search) the default search engine in Firefox. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to know how they've been manipulated, or how to restore the default search engine to Google search.

Thunderbird and SeaMonkey Composer GUIs: Damaged, apparently deliberately. Every time you do a file save, the newer versions of both ask for a new file name, and don't suggest the last one chosen. The damage was reported several months ago, but has not been fixed. Is that another example of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish? People who feel forced away from Thunderbird may choose Microsoft software to replace it. Is that what Microsoft is trying to accomplish?

Microsoft is amazingly badly managed. The company apparently survives only because of having an unregulated virtual monopoly that allows it to charge full price for each new version, and to alternate good and bad versions, so customers pay twice for new versions. (Windows XP, good. Windows Vista, bad. Windows 7, good. Windows 8, so bad the next version, Windows 10 is "free".)

"Monkey Boy" The cover of the January 16, 2013 issue of BusinessWeek magazine has a large photo of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer (now replaced) with the headline calling him "Monkey Boy". See the BusinessWeek cover in this article: Steve Ballmer Is No Longer A Monkey Boy, Says Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The BusinessWeek cover says "No More" and "Mr.", but that doesn't take much away from the fact that the magazine called Ballmer Monkey Boy -- on its cover.

Worst CEO: Quote from an article in Forbes Magazine about Steve Ballmer: "Without a doubt, Mr. Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today."

Another quote: "The reach of his bad leadership has extended far beyond Microsoft when it comes to destroying shareholder value -- and jobs." (May 12, 2012)

Meanwhile, piracy is still on the decline, which causes the temperatures to raise. Do you part fellows, the Somallian anti-GW initiative needs you!

"... actual incompetence plays a large factor..."

You are not the only one who thinks that.

The cover of the January 16, 2013 issue of BusinessWeek magazine has a large photo of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer with the headline calling him "Monkey Boy". See the BusinessWeek cover in this article: Steve Ballmer Is No Longer A Monkey Boy, Says Bloomberg BusinessWeek. The BusinessWeek cover says "No More" and "Mr.", but that doesn't take much away from the fact that the magazine called him Monkey Boy -- on its cover.

Worst CEO: Quote from an article in Forbes Magazine about Steve Ballmer: "Without a doubt, Mr. Ballmer is the worst CEO of a large publicly traded American company today."

Another quote: "The reach of his bad leadership has extended far beyond Microsoft when it comes to destroying shareholder value -- and jobs." (May 12, 2012)

FexEx drivers are not independent contractors.

As to mature adults... History is actually full of great men that would call morons... "morons" to their faces.

Issac Newton is a good example.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ro...

Am I mad because I call someone saying stupid shit a fucktard? Nope. I just think they're fucktards.

As to there being no proper definition of the word... apparently you don't know how definitions work. Words are defined by their USE. That is why dictionary definitions get updated or they include terms like "lolz" or definitions drift over time.

The official definition is literally a consensus. There is no official definition of words that supersedes consensus.

Therefore, you know what fucktard means because you know how it is used.

The term is quite obvious in its meaning. It is obviously the combination of two words. "fuck" and "retard". The term is obviously an explicative joined to an evaluation of someone's intelligence.

This is something that even a child of 10 would get.

The fact that you're struggling with it merely validates my position that you are in fact a fucktard. ;)

As to the quote tag. Why? Your reading comprehension is so poor that you couldn't expect me to believe it would make any difference.

As to whether I was judged... You're just contradicting reality now. Fine. 2+2=22. Believe what you want. You're too stupid to have an opinion worth anything in the first place. I've seen animals with more self awareness than you.

As to speaking when spoken to... ehmmm... exactly who spoke to whom first... idiot? Was it he that spoke to me first?

You say I fail logic but you're quite clearly incapable of working out even the simplest of rational statements.

Don't worry, there's about a 100% chance that the EULA will prohibit class action lawsuits. We can thank Sony for starting that ball rolling!

Hasn't that been invalidated yet? I thought that there was a decision on that. There was JUST a Federal decision that basically marks ALL "Administrative 'Law' " "Courts", for example, as unconstitutional.

The fix is for people to deal with it, like grown-ups. Office romances happen across the entire working population. If people are idiots there's fallout. So far the world has survived, and nothing needs to be done to fix this.

Significant enough numbers of grown-ups are sufficiently unable to act like grownups that yeah, the rest of us really do need to fix it.

More importantly, this is not new. Interpersonal struggles and conflict are as old as humanity itself, and we've discovered, as a species, that we really do benefit from having rules, laws, guidelines, and social norms to help us navigate these choppy waters.

"Just deal with it like grownups" is a cop-out philosophy of managers not wanting to do their jobs and employees not wanting to grow beyond what they already are. "Just deal with it like grownups" means nothing more than "I don't like dealing with the strife and drama that is the human condition, therefore I'll pretend that MY employees/co-workers are somehow magically above all that."

Lastly, if you think that the world has survived without people having done anything to fix this, well, you haven't been paying any attention at all.

First, the letter just said that any agreement Obama struck with Iran would either have to be ratified by congress or it wouldn't be enforceable past Obama's presidency. That's just a fact. There is no negotiation there. That is just reminding the Iranians how US law works.

Second, several democrats have done similar things throughout the years. This is my personal favorite:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/...

Third, I don't think you understand what "treason" means:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...

""
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.
""

THAT is treason. Penning a letter to Iran which is something anyone in the US can do by the way... we do have freedom of speech which extends to sending letters to other countries. US senators and congressman can absolutely send letters to other countries and they do so all the time.

It is not treason unless you do so with the intent of undermining the United States.

Undermining a particular treaty you don't agree with is not treason. And if it were, a lot of democrats would have died in jail or been executed.

They weren't because it isn't treason. Its annoying when it happens but that's US politics for you. This isn't against our laws and the people that suggest otherwise are ignorant. Again, if it were against the law, then people would have gone to jail.

No one went to jail because it isn't illegal much less fucking treason.

As to the logan act, it isn't enforced if they did violate it. Again, senators and congress people make contact with foreign governments without authorization all the time. Both parties. Do you honestly think the democrats didn't try to undermine any Bush Jr's foreign policy by contacting other governments? Don't be naive.

Six digit accounts are from a time when people still knew the history of that fat backstabbing bastard. There's more information in German, because he earned his reputation in Germany, but here is a short glimpse in English.

Take the average age of a car in North America

11.4 years

Now, ask yourself who is going to replace all of the cars on the planet with your super awesome technology?

Well, assuming the last 50% go off the road as fast as the first 50% then 23 years from now "all" cars will be replaced, except for a few collector's items. Maybe faster if people see this as a big incentive to replace their old one.

At the end of the day, these are products someone wants to sell us. And if the world doesn't feel like it has billions or trillions of dollars to rebuild everything for your shiny new technology, then either it will never happen, or it will be rolled out in a few limited places for the wealthy.

And sometimes you have to ask, if it were possible what would you pay for it. I know many elderly who have a solid economy but due to failing health can't drive a car. And since their health is failing they aren't travelling by bus, tram, subway, foot or bike. And you can't visit a cabin by taxi without paying a fortune. I think there's a huge potential market here that will make people redirect money from other things in order to have a self-driving car.

That first wave of "need-to-have" will be followed by a lot of nice-to-have that just want to be able to browse the web or watch TV on their way to work while the car bumper-rides their commute to work. Or that enjoy cabin trips or visiting distant friends and family but hate the drive or just find it tiring after more than a few hours as it comes down in price. And I swear many families with kids would love a car that could drop off the kids at practice, events, friends and whatnot.

The question is just can it be done technologically for a reasonable-ish amount of money. And at least in some areas, the answer is clearly yes.

Shipping of the VLP-16 began earlier this year, with the order backlog currently exceeding production capacity - a situation, Juchmann said, that will change by mid-year.

"We have already experienced a tenfold drop in price, from about $80,000 for the initial model HDL-64E - famously displayed on Google's self-driving car - to $8,000 today," he said. "We believe the price can be further reduced by at least another factor of 10, in parallel with an expected increase in market volume to millions of units per year.

That's been the single most expensive part, the rest is many, many, many man-years of software programming. But as long as this is something you need to develop once and can sell millions of for decades to come I'm pretty sure that'll happen.

What I really hate about the media, they never talk about the horrible job market for nurses, electrical engineers and pretty much all new grads. This gives a false impression that the only folks who have to worry are the ones who are "unmarketable" degree programs.

We have structural unemployment in this country. Contrary to the pundits who insist that it's "government polices" (whatever those may be), there are the trends of off-shoring, the Third world catching up with us, automation, and an aging population that are all working together to lower our standards of living. The easy days are over.

Unfortunately, the rich and super rich aren't doing enough to invest in our economy. The only billionaire I can think of doing old school investment is Musk the rest stick money into a hedge fund (zero sum game), buy a sports team from another billionaires, and do reality TV shows - their qualifications for being a business genius being that they won the dot-com lottery 15 years ago.

Then I see the CEOs who offshore jobs, get their $10million bonus - even if they fuck up the economy - and I'm supposed to buy into the fact that we live in a meritocracy and all of my problems are all my fault?

I'd also like to add that the job market is totally screwed up. Being unemployed means you're damaged goods - it doesn't matter that your whole department was offshored, it's all your fault because of "personal responsibility" or some such bullshit that the elite has told us to convince us that all of our problems are our fault. Yeah, it's my fault that there are third world people willing to work for less than half of what I was making. It's my fault the businesses do not hire unemployed people (go ahead, put an end date on your current job on your LinkedIN profile watch all the recruitment emails stop coming.).

Things are much more screwed up than some liberal arts major "loser" who can't get a decent paying job.

Bait and Switch: The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream is spot on - and it was written 10 years ago when things were better.

You may riding high now, but one day, you will be called into a meeting one morning and your entire department will be canned and the jobs sent overseas. You will unemployed and good luck getting another job - especially if you're over 40. If you think you got the "skills" that makes you immune, well keep telling yourself that. This profession has gone to shit. We are all disposable and unless you have some really elite skills, you're headed for the waste heap too.

Rant over. I'm outta here.

I am really getting tired having to verify your figures. You are correct, I guess I was looking at a quarterly figure. Even then comparing a company that sells expensive cars to GM is based on revenue is biased. You still can't equate losing 6,000 direct jobs with losing over 300,000 direct jobs.

You do realize the more you point out how big & powerful GM is, the weaker the case for it getting a subsidy for developing a car that's essentially a modification of what had been done 15 years ago by 2 foreign automakers?

You really don't understand the reason behind tax incentives. The US car makers were just fine selling conventional cars. There was no business reason to invest in the new technology. With the incentives the government can get car companies to invest the way they want. In this case EVs. Then there is the issue of whether or not those foreign automakers were subsidized by their government.

Maybe we'd be better served by having more gnats than ponderous giants that have trouble making a profit selling something that Americans want more than oxygen.

You may be right but there is a certain fact that causes giants to be formed. It is called economy of scale. It will always be cheaper for one company to produce a million items than for a hundred companies to produce 10,000 each.

BTW, the US got most of their money back from the GM bailout.

Here is a summary of the benefits of the GM bailout;

A study released Monday by the Center for Automotive Research concluded that the government bailout of GM spared 1.2 million jobs in 2009 and preserved $39.4 billion in personal and social insurance tax collections in 2009 and 2010. “Any complete cost-benefit assessment of the federal assistance to GM in its restructuring must consider the total net returns to the public investment” researchers Sean McAlinden and Debra Maranger Menk wrote in “The Effect on the U.S. Economy of the Successful Restructuring of General Motors.”

Brilliant riposte. Not.

Sending the navy without funding to come back: Theodore Roosevelt, 1905, Dominican Republic

Federalization of the National Guard to quell civil unrest: Dwight Eisenhower, September 24th 1957, Federalization of the Arkansas National Guard to enforce the integration of Central High School

Federalization of the National Guard to quell civil unrest: Lyndon Johnson, March 20, 1965, Federalization of Alabama National Guard to supervise the march from Selma to Montgomery

Executive orders used by fiat:

1793, George Washington, first executive order regarding U.S. Citizens and the War between England and France
1861, Abraham Lincoln, suspension of John Merryman's right of Habeas Corpus, detainment in Fort McHenry
Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt, 3,522 executive orders modifying everything from tax to works agencies
  ====(first order was on first day in office for a 4 day bank closure ans restructuring of the financial system)
1952, Harry Truman, Siezure of the nations steel mills to prevent a strike (later rejected as unconstitutional, but purpose already served)
Early 2002, George Bush, NSA authorization for domestic wire tapping
Early 2009, Barack Obama, Closure of Gitmo scheduled
2011, Barack Obama, Closure of Gitmo executive order revoked by executive order
2012, Barack Obama, Tougher regulation of Greenhouse gasses
2012, Barack Obama, Changes to deportation policy
2012, Barack Obama, Education and employment for returning troops
(various), Barack Obama, freezing of foreign assets belonging to Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, and Syria
2014, Barack Obama, prohibition on federal contractors discriminating against LGBT, and against discrimination in federal employment as well

Clinton aide Paul Begala told The New York Times: "Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kind of cool.". This was in response to the 1998 Whitewater scandal making it impossible for Clinton to move legislation through the Republican controlled congress. So he didn't; instead, he issued executive orders.

There have also been some rumblings about Obama raising taxes via executive order:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ro...

Since Obama has been lame duck (he is in his second term), there's really nothing, other than the threat of impeachment, from pretty well doing whatever the hell he wants, in terms of executive orders and military orders. And as I noted, that threat has no teeth; it's not like anything he does is going to prevent him getting reelected, so it's not like he has to care about that.

There's also the little fact that he rescinded the Gitmo closure order in 2011 -- in other words, he has no intention of keeping that campaign promise to the American people (nor, really, should he, since extraterritoriality is legally useful to the U.S. in many instances where what the U.S. is doing would be refused to be hosted by another country at one of the black sites).

So now you have examples of everything on my list.

I think it is you who need to "grow the fuck up".

Here you go: http://abcnews.go.com/Technolo...

Excerpt - "Thanks to a generous tax credit, Karl Wizinsky is driving a very large vehicle these days — a 2002 Ford Excursion.

"It doesn't hurt to have a larger vehicle, but I wouldn't say it's a requirement of my business," he said on a cell phone while driving the Excursion. "But I ended up saving $32,000."

This year, the perks of buying a large SUV — if you're a small business owner — got even bigger.

Congress recently passed a tax bill, as proposed in President Bush's economic stimulus plan, that offers a $100,000 tax credit for business owners who purchase any vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds or more when fully loaded.

When Wizinsky's accountant told him about the credit last year, the amount was much less, at $75,000, but it was enough to encourage Wizinsky to trade in his Mercury Marquis for the Excursion.

"It sounded too good to be true," said Wizinsky, a health care consultant in Novi, Mich. "But it was true. So I bought the SUV. For a small company like mine it's a significant credit."

Hybrid Earns Smaller Break

Meanwhile, legislation that offers a much smaller tax break — a $2,000 tax deduction — to those who purchase fuel-efficient hybrid cars is on track to be phased out. Congress is considering legislation that would extend the tax deduction to encourage consumers to buy the hybrid cars, but the status of the bill remains uncertain."

And the fiscally responsible GOP made a similar provision a requirement for Obama to get a deal through in 2011 - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja...

Really? First principle is the data is the data. I mean, this is basic, first day stuff that the proponents keep overlooking, intentionally.

Inconvenient data - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja... .

I know, those stubborn facts again.

Just keep believing and paying trillions for stuff that isn't even our fault. It's a scheme to defraud us. You just have to realize it and get mad.

Because they aren't melting faster and faster. See http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja... It's 2015, Algore was wrong again, as usual. He's just a newspaper reporter that rode into congress on his father's coattails. Otherwise, he's a dud.

Check out the Nasa data. In know, inconvenient data again. They'll have to "adjust" that to follow their gilt trip scheme to make us pay billions.

You can read the whole article (and you should), but here are some nice excerpts.

FTA: On the electric car front, the Chevy Volt is the most significant U.S. competitor to Musk's Tesla Model S...

Meanwhile, Volt was developed during Uncle Sam's bailout of "Government Motors" with $30 billion. That's more than six times the number that got Mr. Hirsch so worked up! Though GM touts that they've "repaid" the government, Treasury reports that the government lost more than $11 billion on that dubious deal.

The Model S is not comparable to the Volt. The Volt is a plug-in hybrid (not an EV) cludge to meet the requirements of a bail out. The Nissan Leaf is a better comparison and it blows the Model S out of the water in its effects on the market. But, the author wants to hamstring a stronger comparison by requiring that the company be American.

Additionally, a bail out deal and subsidy are not comparable. A bail out deal your mom throwing you a few hundred bucks because your business failed, rent needs to be paid, and you have to go visit her to pick up the check. A subsidy is your mom throwing you a few hundred bucks to start up or expand your business. One's there to save your as with some nominal requirements and the other is there to help you profit. Musk has taken both for Tesla.

FTA: The most polite response I can offer to the critics is: Get over it. Find something more productive to do than condemning success. If you insist on continuing to carp, do your research first and hit the right targets. Otherwise you will continue to sound jealous and misinformed.

Wow, internet tough guy, huh?

Oh, and this isn't the only time this guy has white-knighted for Musk. He's actually a bit of a fanboy, so don't let his professorship lull you into a false sense of academic separation:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... "Disclosure: Dr. Autry currently owns Tesla stock."
https://twitter.com/gregwautry
https://www.facebook.com/gregw...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/re...

The best option? Tear down ALL the borders. Everybody has a right to move and live where they want.

here won't be a 'home country'. Home is where you live. Better to make the social programs global. There's plenty of money locked up in the financial industry to do it.

I certainly hope you are trolling, cause otherwise you are an idiot.

Your "solution" that makes a cute sound bite but is obviously unworkable on any number of levels. Who would "tear down the borders? Which social programs would be provided? Which government would be in charge? How would you resolve the vast social, cultural, religious and historical differences among the populace?

Even if we magically managed to resolve the above, there would still be huge issues of disparity between resource rich and resource poor areas. i.e. this would cause all sorts of new problems and not solve any of the existing ones.

BTW, the US financial sector was worth about $6.2 trillion in 2014. The US spends about $3.8 trillion on healthcare annually. There is not "plenty of money locked up in the financial system to pay for it"

Hell, Canada spent $214.9 billion on health care in 2014.

New York Democratic Congressman Steve Israel, two and a half years ago.

http://boingboing.net/2012/12/...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/an...

after they bribe the correct lawmakers to have the laws changed.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2015/05/28/hold-the-phone-fcc-has-a-new-robocall-ruling-and-it-doesnt-look-pretty-for-business/2/ has a consumer-friendly headline, but the actual text says that the FCC intends to bow to business pressure to let them flout the Do Not Call protections and the no-robo calls rules if they use the "oops, my bad" excuse or the "but I was *really* sure they would want to receive this robocall" excuse.

PayPal is counting on this specific change to FCC interpretations of the law to make their new terms legal (oblig: read in best Palpatine voice).

This. Also, SpaceX is now a mistress
  http://www.forbes.com/sites/al...

Greece is running a primary surplus right now. So try again

Um, according to their own figures which are highly dubious they were, but now are not anymore. And whilst a primary surplus is an interesting metric, you can't simply ignore debt. It's not ignorable. What they actually have is a massive deficit they cannot fix.

Spain and Ireland were running large surpluses when the crisis hit.

Bear in mind that there was a lot of lending from bad banks which was then taxed.

Says you. Meanwhile here, in the real world big state countries like Canada, France and Germany seem to sustain their debts without problems. Yes creditors asked for a smaller state. What else is news? Yet their interest rates are extremely low, which shows that at the end of the day said creditors are happy with the status quo.

As I pointed out already Germany is paying off its debts, it has a real budget surplus. Other EU countries have low interest rates because the ECB is more or less outright funding them at this point: it's not a real market when one of the biggest players can create their own money.

Microsoft Has Hijacked Android In A Hostile Takeover

Also, just because something is "your own work" in the sense that you created it doesn't necessarily make you the copyright holder at all.

Citation Needed.

The Beatles

Oops, left out a link in above post. Re: tax costs: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ke...

Obviously they should have seen Einstein's desk.

Here's a pretty good picture of what it typically looked like:

http://blogs-images.forbes.com...

Actually, isn't it something like 2% or $325, whichever is higher? A bit more complicated than that I think.

Didn't SCOTUS say that the individual mandate was a tax? So, doesn't that mean the $325 paid, if applicable that is, would be a poll/head tax?

Also, this. The ACA bars the IRS from bringing a criminal enforcement case against someone who refuses to pay the non-insurance penalty. And it makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for it to enforce a tax lien. Law professors Jordan Barry and Bryan Camp have a nice piece in Tax Notes explaining it all.

I'd rather have a single-payer UHC program done. I'd also like to see a negative income tax, but that's something else.