Slashdot Mirror
Data Miners Moving to Offshore Data Havens
schwit1 writes "Washington Post has an article about former TIA personnel moving their data mining operations offshore (Bahamas) to escape
U.S. privacy rules, and to make a buck. I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
Aw, hell. While we are at it, why not privatize all of government? You might be surprised at how much is already privatized. We are well on our way to outsourcing our military to companies such as Haliburton and Computer Sciences Corporation (nee Dyncorp) as well as having our current POTUS wanting to privatize social security, the Dept. of the Interior, the Dept. of Eduation, the Department of Energy, our system of election to corporations like Diebold etc...etc...etc.... So, why are you now complaining about TIA and privacy?
Individuals and organizations that will do anything necessary to accomplish their goals, even if that means skirting the law by going outside the country should not be tolerated. In essence, this approach would violate the law, thus this effort at relocation, so why is he supported by members in the current government?
So, taking this further: Let's say that this company screws up in their data collection......what recourse will you have if the company is an offshore company? By what mechanisms will they be held responsible for errors or violations of the law?
All of this is exactly why you need to vote in this coming election. Get out and vote!
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
okay the poster here is saying that if a foreign country hosts information that violates US laws, we are going to enact more laws???
I think if they did something like that, we'd be more likely to invade, though I'd prefer the stronger laws...
Reminds me of a publicity stunt a newspaper in portland pulled after the local government ruled that trash on the curbside was fair game for the police to seize without a warrant. They went dumpster diving at several high profile government officials curbsides and posted the results of their findings in the paper. I thought it was a very effective piece of journalism.
The US could do the same as the EU, and prohibit export of personal data to jurisdictions which do not have equal or better privacy protections as ours. That would stop a lot of outsourcing in general, and probably be a vote-winner among unemployed geeks.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
Washington Post has an article about former TIA personnel moving their data mining operations offshore (Bahamas) to escape U.S. privacy rules, and to make a buck. I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?
Does this make any sense to anyone?
These companies are moving offshore to escape US privacy laws. So the solution is for the US to enact tougher privacy laws? Wouldn't that just encourage even more companies to move offshore?
I would think the solution would be one of those worldwide initiatives that people around here seem so fond of. (That's sarcasm, if you couldn't detect it.) If a company's moving offshore to escape one country's laws, the only real solution is for that other country and all the other countries around it to enact the same laws. Right?
Enact stringent privacy rules? For the US? On Bahamas? Offshore? With the global jurisdiction and universal scope of US law, I presume? How would you want the "federal officials" to do that? Maybe US should "liberate" Bahamas?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
So, basically, what you're saying is, the ends justift the means? That's a logical fallacy, and is inadmissable as rationale. Try again.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
How about invade the Bahamas?
But seriously, I think the scenero in the original post is probably the only way it's gonna work.
---- You have been programmed by the Illuminati to not see the word ""!
No, what is needed are laws that prevent the collection of such info in the first place. By the time it's published abroad, it's already been collected here.
No, what we need is for someone to show people the kind of information that's been collected on them already, whether by the government or private companies. Say, collect all the info on the staff of the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, Faux News, and members of Congress, then send it to them. Sure, some systems might have to be hacked in the process, which I'd ordinarily be opposed to, but things have gotten so bad that maybe people need a wake-up call.
Trust me, if something originated here and somehow was tranferred somewhere else and the US wasn't pleased with that, it'd quickly be taken care of.
Regards,
Steve
http://www.willametteweek.com/story.php?story=3507
At this point, companies enforce the idea that anything that they can get their hands on is theirs.
Until we recognize that just because I gave you my information it does not mean that it is no longer mine, privacy will always take a second place to corporate interests. And, since corporate interests run America, it follows that it will not change.
What is more important is not what corporate America is doing, but how to get the Federal government back into the hands of and for its citizens; although, I really do not think that is possible. Whether you agree with the politics or not, it is suggestive to say that about 50% of the populace believes that Bush's policies are acceptable, which basically includes allowing businesses to ignore any ethical concerns (Halliburton, Microsoft, etc). You can't change corporate America with only 50% of the vote.
Bel, the mostly sane.. "Of course I can't see anything! I'm standing on the shoulders of idiots." -- Me
I agree with your premise, I just don't think it would work. everyone needs to keep some private information about a person, its combining it that makes it dangerous and annoying. Credit agencies for example have SO MUCH information about you, and the amount of info on Lexus-Nexus is amazing, I found out there are professionals out there who work for rich people and try to keep their assets out of these databases... I wonder what would happen if lexus-nexus was taken down
Trust me, if something originated here and somehow was tranferred somewhere else and the US wasn't pleased with that, it'd quickly be taken care of.
I wish I could agree with your optimism. We have enough troubles with our physical borders let alone digital ones... I doubt we would have much success in curtailing information transfers...
I don't see how posting so called private medical data really matters. For example, how can it matter if you know that I am a diabetic? For insurance purposes? I imagine that I have to declare this anyhow.. What else? Legal? This is already public knowledge? Financial? Largely public as well. I really don't see the reason for all the uproar.. of course.. my mind is open as to why I should care...
No, thats what it will take to have the site covertly shut down and its creators shot down.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
The guy who designed the system is going offshore, because the government couldn't get the greenlight and hoping to find private backers.
Bell said he did not become involved with Global until after he left government in March.
"Is this what it will take...?"
:-o
Is that a challenge?
Any takers?
We control the property that leaves and enters these shores. Shouldn't we also do this with personal data? I'm not talking about a big firewall like China has, but I am required to give out personal information all the time in the course of living my daily life. I would like assurances that when I entrust personal info with, say, my insurance company that the data will stay where the laws protect me. What good are privacy laws otherwise?
...Unless enough of them are 'outed' in this fashion -- then there will be decisive action on this matter.
The average citizen doesn't matter in the scheme of things unless enough of us band together to do something about this.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
Um, no because the federal officials don't write the rules. Congress does.
i'd rather have spyware (including, but not limited to, dataminers) than a totalitarian gov't. spyware is easy to remove. more laws = less freedom.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
Can anyone say Data Protection Act? Heres a clue, its not next to the PATRIOT isle or the CAN-SPAM section.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
The really idiotic part was that the class action lawsuite was dismissed because "the class had suffered no damages." One law firm's reaction was the potential value of this ruling as a defense for future privacy theft instances.
There's already a precedence. I don't remember that exact circumstances, but it went something like this: A local newpaper got hold of a list of people who were renting porn from the adult video store. Come to find out, the list included the names of some prominent policitians and judges in washington. The newspaper published the list which caused great embarassment to said politicians. Congress immediately passed an emergency measure which made publishing such embarassing info about politicians illegal.
If these offshore companies try to do the same, you can bet your bottom dollar that Congress will take immediate action to cover their asses. Of course, Joe Citizen will not enjoy the same protection because it's not in the national/corporate interest that his privacy be respected.
When all else fails, run.
Address:
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
202-456-1111
president@whitehouse.gov
Salary: $400,000
Health Data
And here's his attourney
Translation: For those living "in the public life," there is no expectation of privacy, so to expect those in public life to understand the motivation of those of us who appreciate privacy to keep it is like talking about being poor to someone who has been rich all their life: They just can't understand. Heck, the news media mentiones when the President has a physical. Some congressional districts probably do this for their representatives too. This is probably only one of the reasons privacy advocates have a hard time pleading their cause in the US.
I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by
While I don't agree with subversive data collection, I actually do feel that data mining is integral to the development of tomorrow's products and services. It lets researchers figure out various informations without dragging in focus groups (okay, so you dragged in who you /think/ will buy your product... how'd you get them in? with pizza? did the 12-year-old eat all the pizza?) and in any case, focus groups tend to be horribly inaccurate since human beings have a penchant for saying what they think you want them to. Data mining allows researchers to follow and understand shifts in demographics, marketers to identify specific trends, and designers to fulfill or even create needs... all in a way that is completely anonymous, hands-off, and far more reliably accurate than a number of other methods that could be employed.
Uh, anyhow. I don't feel that data mining in itself is a problem; people already use grocery cards in stores with full knowledge that the store will track their purchases. Rather, I feel the problem is more with the fact that companies sometimes (often? i don't know) collect personally identifiable information without explicit permission, information that people can't track down or easily have removed from company databases. I've found far too many companies require people to send snailmail before any requests are fulfilled, or don't even suggest any method in which to have information removed.
----- Wtcher Dragon, UDIC
Data for all federal employees:i tics/fedpage/workers&query=qdb_Results1_Srch_Page/ Search
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?node=pol
Yes... and just about every agreement on every free service which I've read includes your giving the right to the company in question to share your personal information with any other corporate entity who comes along.
----- Wtcher Dragon, UDIC
Uhh, exactly how much of this information is private? Usually these systems are merely pulling together public data in an accessible database. Lets keep the strawmen in cornfields.
Also if you were to RTFA (I know, too much to expect from /. story submitters), you would find that there are legitimate reasons for the company to move offshores other than to escape US laws.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
...what would be kind of neat is some way to store publicly viewable information of your own will somewhere that people can get at it easily... or perhaps something where you're guaranteed anonymity for sharing this information. Imagine walking into a store and instead of having to browse through several minutes of stuff you don't want to get to what you do, the stuff you'd be interested would be at immediate access. Imagine listening to the radio but instead of having to pick a station and live with it, or having to compile your own music, the station'll dynamically pick out the sorts of music you enjoy and play them for you. I guess something like that would be a pay service though.
:)
There are multitudes of ways the idea could be abused, but everything starts out as a dream... right?
----- Wtcher Dragon, UDIC
Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?
I think it's likely to get the country added to the Axis of Evil and atomic-bombed.
I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
...they're USian, but the reality is that the US' privacy rules are nothing compared to the EU's.
But, of course, it'll go over big with the Fortune 1000 types. Now it'll be even harder to get a job.
"I'm sorry. We don't hire jaywalkers."
An important fact that's seldom discussed is that any information about me that might be available via the Internet has already been made public. The act of digitizing that information and making it available in a database increases its potential access, but it does not impact my privacy. The data were already in the public domain.
If some piece of information about me is not legally available to the public, and still appears on the Internet, then someone has broken the law.
So, those who argue for new privacy legislation to curb what they see as violations of their privacy on the Internet are really asking to reclassify as private many types of personal information that have long been accessible to the public.
Suppose, then, that former employees could not verify or deny that we used to work for them. Suppose a bank was not allowed to access the credit history of the guy who wants to buy your house. Suppose your daycare center could not check the criminal record of the kid who wants to be their new driver.
Technology and the Internet certainly ease access to information -- that was the point, after all -- but it is almost always info that was already available to the public.
Legislation that broadens government access to private information is, of course, a different issue.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Actually, you forgot Poland.
It seems to me that the data these people are using is/was acquired partly in the United States and about US residents/companies. That would make everything they do with that part of the data subject to US laws, IMHO. Same applies to data they acquired from European Union countries and residents.
Or am I wrong? Sounds like a monumental loophole that should've been blocked.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
I mean honestly... Hasn't the PATRIOT ACT cause us to be bent down and rammed up the ass with an anal probecam already?
*Knock Knock*... Hey there is somebody at the door. Let me go see who it is.
What category of fallacy is it?
Pile of socks + washing machine = prime number generator.
Kerry must agree with data being moved offshore as he, being 1 of only 100 US Senators, has not introduced any bills to combat this problem.
If you want to know why look at who funded the DEMS and GOPs national conventions and you will find your answer.
Actually, this could work out to be kind of an equalizer. Here in this country looking information on public officials could get you an "Ashcrofting." But let some company in another country do the dirty work for you. Hey, what's this charge on Bill O'Reilly's credit card to a place called Vibrator Universe?
Actually, that's nothing compared to what foreign governments are going to do with that treasure trove of information. More likely what will happen is Congress will make it a crime to export data on Congress, and the let the rest of us take up the pooper. Business as usual.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
My father is a physician who has greatly opposed government run health-care. The real problems have been government using unfair attempts to charge doctors with medicare fraud in the 1980's under Pres. Reagan, and here in the State of Washington, using statistical measures to determine who has overbilled medicaid without actually doing any line-item auditing (and violating any sort of due process rights of the doctors involved) under Gov. Locke. If Americans are not going to be willing to pay for the government health care that is currently offered and so they resort to unconstitutional cost-cutting measures, then what would happen in a single-payer system?
I also don't see this as a partisan issue.
However, I think that a number of things could be done to reduce the cost of health care.
1) Provide a shared malpractice insurance system. The doctor's plan would cover a portion of the payout, and the patient would be able to buy coverage as well-- sort of like disability insurance. The state would keep records of claims both by individuals and against doctors. The idea here is to remove court costs as much as possible therefore reducing the malpractice surcharge.
2) Require all pharmaceutical manufacturers to publish recommended retail prices, allowing doctors and consumers to look at the comparitive cost easily. This would halp restore some market pressure to the pharmaceutical drug market
3) Allow insurance agencies to collectively bargain for pharmaceuticals.
4) Take a close look at patent policy and pharmaceutical drugs.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Nice idea, but we all know in the US as soon as the government gets involved in the health care there are going to be lawsuits.
You just wait until a white guy and a black guy are in need of the same liver transplant. The doctors decide the white guy is a better candidate. Solution, the black guy will sue under the Equal Protection Clause and demand that giving the liver to the white guy isn't fair. Ideally they would get an injunction preventing the liver from being transplanted until the judge can hold a trial on the fairness of whether or not the liver is being allocated based on medical need or racial bias.
Then you have the politics of what morally should be covered. Contraception? Abortions? Sex changes? Where does an elective survey end and a "human right" begin? I can make a case for damn near anything being a "human right," (especially in Canada but that is another story).
Also, just wait till I sue the government because of the wrongful death of my loved one. You thought the lawyers were hungry when we had easy malpractice cases from insurance companies? Ain't nobody got deep pockets like the government! "Because you mean to tell me with all the resources of the Federal Government, we aren't able to beat death?" To quote The Onion "World Death Rate Holding Steady At 100 Percent" despite doctors efforts and centuries of trying.
We are all going to want to live forever, and anytime we don't the government is going to be sued.
And shouldn't I be able to pay just a little bit more and get better health care than the basic government service? How much longer till the "little bit more" is deemed something that should be in the general health care, and we're back to the same belly aching over coverage we have now? Or, how quickly until everyone has that "extra" coverage that we can't do without plus the tax paid coverage and we're paying twice.
Lets take that a bit further. Right now we have a horribly F'ed up public school system. (I know "your" school is great but the people in the next county are F'ed.) What do you think a government run health care is going to look like? They can't even keep teachers, reasonable class sizes, and a full school year. How long till you think the government is going to run health care into the ground too? Our "elite" are currently paying BOTH public school taxes and tuition to send their kids to private school. That is exactly what will happen with government health care. You'll have the upper level (or those willing to sacrifice other things) paying to go to a private system where they get better coverage and lower lines.
Also, right now companies pay MOST of the health care, and they get a business deduction for it. If the government runs health care, it'll be the average citizen who pays. Want to guess if the companies are suddenly going to up your salary now that they don't have to pay health care? While The Left is usually a big champion of public health care, it only works to enrich the companies and screw the little guy. Something The Left claims it doesn't want. You never hear them suggest a Corporate tax to pay for government health care, do you? Nope, always the working middle class that The Left wants to pay for the social program of the week.
Universal health care sounds nice, but I just don't think it'll work here in the US.
Who's the sucker, then? Who's stuck with an extremely expensive foreign policy? The US DELIBERATELY CHOSE to have a foreign policy that needs a very big military...
But do not get fooled. If Canada ever gets invaded (who the fuck would be stupid enough to want that barren cold land???) and the US has to kick-out the invader, the price Canada will have to pay to the US will be so high that the original invasion will look much better.>> An anonymous coward, so sure about the strength of his opinions that he did not dare sign said:
or it could be that he forgot his password... or didn't care to log in... or was on someone else's machine and did't care to post usder their name.
Please don't damn the poor guy for not having a UID.
>>The biggest obstacle to this is the stupid belief americans have that everything that the government does is bad.
Good Point! We must never forget the Louisiana Purchase.
What in the fuck are you talking about? Most importantly, Canada is a former British colony. The United States is also a former British colony. The subs in question are diesel subs. Nuclear subs have never been a (reasonable) option, Canada has no nuclear arms at all. In reality, the British subs happened to be for sale about the same time as the existing subs were due for either major refits or replacement. The initial cost for the British was 800,000pounds, and Canada purchesed them for CAD$750,000, less then 1/2 price, ignoring 10 years of inflation. Even spending twice as much on refits and "Canadianization" of the boats then has been spent, they would still be a good deal.
Submarines are inherently dangerous things. It is entirely possible that there was no design flaw, no flaw in workmanship, and no crew error that caused the fires.
"Canada" hasent purchased any trains. CN is a publicly traded comapny, and has significant investements in US rail systems. Via Rail, a crown coporation , which has some new cars, purchased them from Alstrom, which is headquarters in France.
Canada has purchased military hardware from lots of countries, including France. I cant off hand think of any major system from France... But I also cant think of any major French military system at all. Well, thats not true, I know France is part of various european conglomorates building military hardware.
The United States is obligated to assist Canada if it is ever invaded. As is Belgium, Denmark, France, the UK, Italy, Iceland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal... All the NATO nations - amongst others. Even if not so obligated, removing a hostile force from a bordering counrty would actually be a good reason for the US to go to war -- and we are all aware of the flimsy excuses they need to do that.
Why not? Poindexter's crew ran their Iran/Contra operation offshore, in both Iran and Central America (Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador), as well as around the Caribbean for drug/gun transport, Columbia/Bolivia/Peru for getting the drugs, and in America only to get money and weapons for their modern triangular trade. This kind of stuff is business as usual for them, with the Internet replacing CIA-covered small planes for their brand of global "trade".
--
make install -not war
The new cars I am referring to are the Renaissance (dubbed Déplaisance - displeasure by employees) cars, which were to be the Nightstar trains that were to run between England and the continent. They might have been built by Alsthom, but they have been built by the old Metro-Cammel works in England, which were bought by Alsthom. Now, what else a colonial attitude would make one buy unsuitable stuff from the mother-land???
Britshit loading-gauge (the size of the trains themselves) is the smallest in the world, so those trains are cramped inside (there is no way they can fit four seats abreast in there) and were designed to run on european manucured tracks. They are a disaster on the poorly-maintained tracks we have here.Their company may be incorporated in the Bahamas, but their servers are in the London Docklands area. They're a customer of "core-isp.net".
The idea of Canada as a seperate country from the U.S. is outddated nonsense. Economically and security-wise the two are inextricably symbiotic.
I think the stumbling blocks until now have been Canadians tendancy for socialised health care, education and the accompanying higher tax rates. Also there is probably some fear in urban areas of the 2nd Amendment, never mind that there are more guns per capita in Canada then the US.
The best solution would be to make Canada a commonwealth of the U.S., like Puerto Rico. That way Canadians could retain their own independant goverment and reduce the red tape that is creating market inefficiencies between the two countries.
...when you can vote multiple times a day?
But, only consumers would stop being "sheeple".
Everyone talks about vote this and vote that. You know something? Every day we are voting when we spend money. But the sad thing is most people don't see it that way, so they end up casting their vote and not even realizing it.
I hate to have this view point, but a plutocracy seems like nothing more then another layer in democracy. But it doesn't have to stay that way as long as people wake up and smell dollar bills on a positive note (pun not intended).
Life is not for the lazy.
Why is it that Liberals love to throw the term Fascist at anyone that doesn't support a huge government beaurocracy controlling every aspect of your life, cradle to grave? If you want that kind of government (socialism), there are plenty of countries out there that offer it. Pick one. Go.
The United States was was founded specifically to allow for and to promote self-determination. That means if you want it, you get out there and work for it. If you don't, no one is making you stay. Higher education, medical insurance, and everything else in this life come by hard work. The world doesn't owe you anything, get over it and stop whining.
In a truly Fascist government, negative comments would very quickly land you in a gulag, or much worse. This is also true of your supposedly enlightened Socialist and Communist "workers paradise" nations, for that matter. You seem to still be alive and free to do and say as you please - so drop the transparent rhetoric. No one who does not already share your worldview will take you seriously until you are intellectually honest in the way you communicate. Ditch the emotion-laden buzzwords.
Though none can be perfect, we have the most humane, dignified, and empowering government that the world has ever seen--but with our citizens trying to trade their every freedom for a dependence on feel-good programs and the thinly veiled motivations of foreigners who only stood to profit from human suffering, we are going to lose more than our self-determination. We will lose everything that made this country special and great.
If Canada ever gets invaded (who the fuck would be stupid enough to want that barren cold land???)
I'd keep my eye on Iceland. To those guys, your country would look like some sort of tropical paradise.
Gibson anyone?
You cant fight in here, its a war room!
I'm Canadian and while I love the fact that a visit to the clinic doesn't become a financial liability, and having a birthing doesn't cost you 3 months wages... you must also consider some other factors:
Many good doctors have left to the US because being paid for private service is more $$$. We're quite shortstaffed on both doctors and at times qualified nurses. While immediate dangers are quickly dealt with and covered, staff are often less competent due to being worked over hours (severely overworked) due to shortages. A new heart/lungs may be free, but surgery may involve very long waits, whilst private involves more $$$ but possibly better care, less wait, and not being discharged prematurely because of a space shortage for new patients.
I'm on a waitlist myself, soon to find out when I might expect to have day surgery for removing metal screws from my ankle. I'm definately glad that it's covered, but I'd hate the wait were it something more severe. I am looking at unpleasant discomfort with winter coming though, cold weather and metal are not the best combination.
I know I speak for all Slashdotters when I say, "Eat a dick."
Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
I'm not saying that this guy is right, but "the ends justify the means" is NOT a logical fallacy by any stretch of the imagination.
It's not even a moral fallacy because sometimes the ends DO justify the means.
You were lucky. Some people, given an act of intimidation against their families like that, would have made sure your friend, and a few of his comrades, too, died while "resisting arrest."
"I'm waiting for somebody to publish the private data (financial, medical, legal) of federal officials and their families on an open internet web server out of the Bahamas. Is this what it will take for the US to enact stringent privacy rules?"
Although doing unto politicians what they do unto citizens has proven to be a very effective way to get new law passed time and again (although sometimes that new law just says that politicians are exempt), you would have to post the private data where it is already illegal to post it, because your off-shore friends will refuse to host it.
After all, these off-shore companies are in it for the money; hosting data that endangers their business makes no sense.
"Universal health care sounds nice, but I just don't think it'll work here in the US."
Well-reasoned, but I don't think it is necessary that a government provide for all health care, just for the bare minimum. Doesn't that already happen in the US?
Why is it that Liberals love to throw the term Fascist at anyone that doesn't support a huge government beaurocracy controlling every aspect of your life, cradle to grave?
They don't. This country is very quickly approaching Fascism.
In a truly Fascist government, negative comments would very quickly land you in a gulag, or much worse.
Look, just because you don't even know what fascism is doesn't mean you should make shit up in a public forum. You just make yourself look ignorant.
Fascism is the merger of state and corporate power.
When the energy industry meets with the VP secretly to set energy policy, no non-industry voices are heard and the details are kept secret from the citizens that is a perfect example of fascism.
When our military is privatized leading to illegal actions by people outside the chain of command, that is another example of fascism.
When the media is allowed to conglomerate to the point it has leading them to sell us a war rather than ask valid questions, that is fascism.
When Major weapons manufacturers own huge chunks of the media and sell wars to make billions, that is fascism.
No one who does not already share your worldview will take you seriously until you are intellectually honest in the way you communicate. Ditch the emotion-laden buzzwords.
Anybody who actually knows what the words mean and has been paying attention takes it very seriously.
Those aren't buzzwords. Those are the words being used correctly in their proper context.
Though none can be perfect, we have the most humane, dignified, and empowering government that the world has ever seen--but with our citizens trying to trade their every freedom for a dependence on feel-good programs and the thinly veiled motivations of foreigners who only stood to profit from human suffering, we are going to lose more than our self-determination. We will lose everything that made this country special and great.
What a crock of shit.
Our citizens are trading their freedom for cowardice. Oh no, we were attacked. Lets's let the government take away our liberties. You are so far off base here it's insane.
We are losng everything that made this country great, and we're losing it to the fascists in power (dems and repubs).
Please try to actually learn a little bit about the subject before spouting off your ignorant rhetoric.
- It should be for EVERYONE. (even in Canada, not all citizens are eligible. The military are not covered, for instance).
- The government (yes, I know government is bad).
- It is funded by (gasp! shudder!) TAXES paid by EVERYONE.
- It will cover all reasonable procedures and treatment needed to insure the quality of life of beneficiaries, as determined by doctors and actuaries.
By making seat-belts mandatory? By super-duper taxing tobacco? By taxing fa(s)t foods? By taxing sugar? By prohibiting driving less than 2 km to go to the corner store? By having the big bad government(tm) stick it's nose in everybody's business to insure they don't ruin their health.Actually, up here, only the first two things are implemented. Otherwise, you're free to ruin your health as you wish. And since you like to argue and debate, please tell us how there can be no medicine for everyone, and, more importantly, why someone who is supposedly intelligent and educated would believe that such a thing would br right.
Oh, now I start to understand why you're an anonymous coward...
This reminds me of a recent article I saw about an ad campaign in foreign countries warning U.S. citizens (and others) that if they have sex with a child there, they may be prosecuted in their home country. So if the U.S. can prosecute citizens for having sex with children in other countries, why can't the U.S. prosecute citizens for other criminal acts, such as breaking privacy laws? While the former crime is a far more heinous act, the later has the potential to hurt the civil rights of a great many more people.
While I have a problem with this whole concept, if the government is committed to prosecuting U.S. crimes committed overseas, let's see it act in other areas of the law.
Actually, on a number of occasions through the year, I run into a porter(?) who works on Via Rail. And he says the same thing differently: modern but uncomfortable.
But I dont think the conspiricy theory fits here. If the government of Canada was intersted in getting VIA to purchase rail cars based on some non-business reasons, then they would direct them to Bombardier, or to lesser known domestic rail car manufacturers, such as Trenton Works(?), in Nova Scotia.
The purchase of the cars in question seems a good parallell to the subs. Some reasonable hardware was more-or-less lying around, unused, at the same time a agency was interested in purchasing similar hardware. That does not mean the hardware was unsuitable for the origional owners perspective: The Royal Navy was getting out of the diesel sub business. That doesnt mean that the diesel subs are bad, just that they are diesel. The Alstrom cars have some unusual specs, partially dictated by the safety requirments of the Chunnel. The modifications required to integrate them into a existing fleet is different then the requirments to replace an entire fleet. Passanger rail in Europe and in North America simply have different requirements.
Alstrom is a private company, and the vast majority, if not all, of the cars were alredy produced when Via anounced the purchase of them. The advantage to the UK had already happened: the jobs alredy done and paid for. The advantage was to Alstrom, a multinational, not to the UK.
There are several top-notch Minnesota hospitals for you to choose from, and if you need an excellent orthapedist, I'd be happy to recommend the one that I used when I lived there and was actually active. Now I sit behind a desk all day. :-\
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
Lots of wealthy Canadians go to Mpls hospitals (and Mayo, of course) to get heart surgery because they don't feel like dying in Canada. I have total sympathy for them, as well. I mean, could you imagine being under Socialized health care and just be left to die while waiting for treatment? Such a sad state of affairs.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
So fascists with flamethrowers are enraged by their mask getting ripped off. That makes my detailed, informational, rational and wholly accurate post "Flamebait"? Then how come there are no flames in reply?
--
make install -not war
Fascism has NOTHING to do with corporations and everything to do with autocratic abuse of authority and power.
Mussolini coined the term which derives from a group of sticks originally used by the Roman emperors to symbolize their power.
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
Some time ago, there was a site called JusticeFiles with information about police officers, including Social Security numbers. Not surprisingly, the site got into trouble as a result.
In 2003, a financial privacy bill came up in California. Several lawmakers voted against the bill. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights obtained the SSNs for 8 of these 9 lawmakers (the information was not available for one individual.) The first four digits of each SSN were posted on the Internet with the name of each individual. They also released the first three digits of the SSN for Governor Davis. The affected lawmakers were rather upset as a result.
In another incident, Citigroup supported a bill that would have overturned financial privacy protections in California. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights acted by publicly releasing the first five digits of the Citigroup CEO's SSN. The digits were written in the sky by a professional skywriter.
A hospital in the U.S. cannot legally turn away someone who requires urgent medical attention. If you are in an accident and unconscious, they TRY to find someone who can show them insurance, but they will operate anyway.
The big problem with healthcare is not catastrophic problems (which we do all pay for because hospitals cannot turn away someone without insurance), it's partly long term health problems (diseases of the liver, heart, etc., that require a transplant). But the worst are the minor issues...
Yes, preventative care is important, but under "free" plan you will promptly see doctors swamped with everything from headaches to sneezing and all sorts of psychosomatic problems inbetween.
The problem with Canada is that I WANT private practices that if my son has the flu TODAY, I want to see a doctor TODAY.
Stupid sexy Flanders.